Slashdot Mirror


Apple Shows Off New iOS 7, Mac OS X At WWDC

Nerval's Lobster writes "Apple CEO Tim Cook kicked off his company's Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) in San Francisco with a short video emphasizing the importance of design, particularly that which evokes some sort of emotional connection such as love or delight. But that sentimental bit aside, this WWDC was all business: huge numbers of developers attend this annual event, packing sessions designed to help give their apps an edge in Apple's crowded online marketplace (some 50 billion apps have been downloaded from the App Store, Cook told the audience during his keynote). Apple also uses its WWDC to unveil new products or services, attracting sizable interest from the tech press.

This time around, the company introduced Mac OS X 'Mavericks,' which includes 'Finder Tabs' (which allow the user to deploy multiple tabs within a Finder window—great for organization, in theory) and document tags (for easier searching). Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs, with the ability to tweak elements between screens; Apple claims the operating system will also interact with the CPU in a more efficient manner.

On top of that, Apple rolled out some new hardware: an upgraded MacBook Air with faster graphics, better battery life (9 hours for the 11-inch edition, while the 13-inch version can draw 12 hours' worth of power). Apple has decided to jump into the cloud-productivity space with iWork for iCloud, which makes the company's iWork portfolio (Pages, Numbers, and Keynote) browser-based; this is a clear response to Office 365 and Google Docs.

And finally, the executives onstage turned back to iOS, which (according to Apple) powers some 600 million devices around the world. This version involves more than a few tweaks: from a redesigned 'Slide to Unlock' at the bottom of the screen, to the bottom-up control panel that slides over the home-screen, to the 'flat' (as predicted) icons and an interface that adjusts as the phone is tilted, this is a total redesign. As a software designer, Ive is clearly a huge fan of basic shapes—circles and squares— and layering translucent elements atop one another."

607 comments

  1. How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jaymz666 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I mean really... why?

    1. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Moses48 · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm going to withhold judgement on this, as I think it looks nice. As long as the parts are all standard and easily replaceable, the shape of the case doesn't make much difference.

    2. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Wingsy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Well, why not? C'mon, you can tell us. It does look nice, and I like the way you can rotate it to get to the i/o on the back. Oh, and that little light that comes on when it's rotated. No need to cuss and go find a flashlight. A little thing, but a nice thing.

      --
      If I didn't have absolutely NOTHING to do, I wouldn't be here.
    3. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by fatalexe · · Score: 2

      The G4 Cube was cool. It certainly will look nice next to a Thunderbolt monitor.

    4. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by adisakp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I mean really... why?

      One thing you should be happy about... putting all the expansion OUTSIDE of the computer using STANDARDIZED interfaces (Thunderbolt was actually developed by Intel and you can get PC adapters) means that any money you put into expanding a computer will be easily portable to other computer or when you upgrade a computer. This isn't necessarily true with internal cards (think ISA / VESA / PCI / PCIe / PCIx). Also, you don't have to worry about upgrading your computer's power supply or cooling when you add expansion.

    5. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      and how likely do you think that is considering the formfactor

    6. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jaymz666 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Which would work much better with a stackable case, no? Like you can do with existing PC hardware.

      So instead there will be a circle that has a stack of stuff near it.

    7. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least it's shaped like the rubbish bin that it is.

    8. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by bkmoore · · Score: 4, Informative

      The Cray-1 was a cylinder.

    9. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 4, Informative

      If Apple's (rather painfully self-satisfied) slideshow thing is anything to go by, there isn't a single standardized part in the entire computer, with the exception of the RAM, and possibly the CPU, depending on whether they went socketed or BGA.

      The two GPU cards are probably PCIe electrically; but the shape certainly isn't compatible, the CPU card is its own animal(one that packs a whole four RAM slots, that's Serious Workstation material right there...), and PCIe-attached SSDs in the mini-PCIe form factor are relatively odd ducks(most that are that size and shape are mSATA, and PCIe direct-attached cards are usually rectangular PCIe 8x cards.

    10. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by tysonedwards · · Score: 5, Informative

      According to the product page, it sure doesn't look like those are standard GPUs, as well as it looks like they go from dual socket Xeons to single socket, mounted centrally so the entire system would need to be disassembled to replace the CPU, if it is even replaceable.

      From the imagery posted on Apple's website, it looks like a Mac Mini++.
      Apple: Mac Pro

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    11. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As long as the parts are all standard and easily replaceable

      Ah ha ha ha ha ha ha ha... ha.... Yeah, probably.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least I can throw garbage in it. It looks like a garbage can!

    13. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      I mean really... why?

      Apple appears to have decided that users just loved the good old days of SCSI-based external enclosure rat's nests accompanying their elegant all-in-ones, and have decided to update the technology accordingly.

      Luckily, since external thunderbolt enclosures are alarmingly expensive and totally out of step with the new look, any attempt at expansion shouldn't be a dreadful mess!

    14. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why not?

      Honestly, it's 2013. Gone are the days when you needed half a dozen pci cards to get anything done. No one shells out for a pro just to play games, so upgradable video cards aren't really an issue, but even if the DID want to play games the built-in graphics are more than plenty. Not many desk users need a machine with a dozen drives in it either. The new pro has thunderbolt2 which blows basically anything else out of the water, so for what few things you do need to connect it's perfectly fine.

      If they can make a machine that's orders of magnitude faster in a smaller physical case, why wouldn't they? Also, label me a hipster if you want, but I'm totally happy having a computer that's not the same chunky block shape as every other machine since the dawn of time. Especially when the old design looked like a Star Wars industrial cheese grater.

    15. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      ...Luckily, since external thunderbolt enclosures are alarmingly expensive and totally out of step with the new look, any attempt at expansion shouldn't be a dreadful mess!

      That's why next year Apple will announce the iSixPack RAID array.

    16. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah and it's a piece of shit. It's not the 70s any more.

    17. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by larry+bagina · · Score: 1

      A: So goatse can shove it up his asshole.

      Speaking of things that hurt my eyes, the iOS 7 springboard looks like a pool of vomit after I ate too much funfetti cake. Icons look like they were made with construction paper for an episode of south park. I don't care if Siri now gives blowjobs, I'm not "upgrading" to something that ugly.

      --
      Do you even lift?

      These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    18. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It looks like the trashcan it is.

    19. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by gmuslera · · Score: 1

      Wonder what icon it will have. That shape looks enough like a trashcan to help misplace some critical files.

    20. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by D1G1T · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The video cards are not standard or (apparently) replaceable. As a Mac Pro user needing an upgrade, this is a deal killer for me. Part of the ROI on a Mac Pro purchase has been the abilty to throw a new card in the box every couple years and keep going. These new machines are going to be obsoleted much faster.

    21. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Looking at the site - this thing is modular as all hell. Looks like a backplane at the bottom that everything plugs into... upgrade bits and pieces as required or tech progresses. It's kind of a bold thing to do.

      They're also banking on PCIe3 being overkill for (current) workstation applications... TB2 being plenty for most use cases. Speaking of cases, expect lots and lots of cylindrical PCI expansion chassis and RAID arrays from third party soon. The old Unix workstation days are back, baby! Daisy-Chain 4 Lyfe! This actually makes sense, as few videographers will want to pop open the case on their editing workstation to add more storage, and special PCI card applications would probably be more at home in its own case with a robust power supply and cooling, anyhow. Sharing a small metal box with a pair of GPUs, high end CPU and some seriously serious RAM can be a little heated.

      On the other hand, the gigabit ethernet is unforgivable. It really needs to be dual 10Gbase-T ports in this day and age.

    22. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Stratus311 · · Score: 1

      Are there no ports for additional internal hard drives? I couldn't see a single place where they would go. Or are you stuck buying into Apples extremely proprietary (and expensive) storage options?

    23. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1

      It looks like they're thoughts are that most everything will be done with breakout boxes using Thunderbolt...there's 6x of the Thunderbolt2 connectors on the back, and you can daisy chain multiple things off each one?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    24. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 4, Informative

      FWIW - have you tried to upgrade a Mac Pro's graphics card in the past? There are unfortunately very very few options even with the standard connector. I'd bet the situation remains about the same with this newer design.

    25. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. It has no wi-fi. It has less space than a Nomad. It is, in a word, lame.

    26. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1

      Somebody had to finally manufacture R2D2. It's only missing the legs.

      Oh, and the jetpack.......

    27. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      According to the product page, it sure doesn't look like those are standard GPUs, as well as it looks like they go from dual socket Xeons to single socket, mounted centrally so the entire system would need to be disassembled to replace the CPU, if it is even replaceable.
      From the imagery posted on Apple's website, it looks like a Mac Mini++.
      Apple: Mac Pro

      it looks like a joke. seriously.
      nothing pro about it.

      anyhow.. still waiting on the buyable tb outside of the box practical gpu's. maybe intel promised them that their next gen integrated gpu would "kick ass". they make that promise every year though.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    28. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by quarterbuck · · Score: 1

      Looks like a cigarette disposal unit you would find at a European airport (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ash_Trash_Receptacle.tif).
      Maybe they are hoping that a subliminal addiction would kick in, now that the reality distortion field does not work as well?

      --
      http://slashdot.org/submission/1062723/Cheap-mobile-data-plan?art_pos=2
    29. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      There's never been a decent market for Mac PCI expansion cards, so Apple has realized the futility of building them into the desktop. Instead you've got very high speed expansion ports in Thunderbolt 2 that will amply serve the purpose. BTW, Thunderbolt has been re-registered as an Intel, not Apple trademark as it's Intel that has full rights to the interface. So there is nothing preventing it from being included on standard Intel mobos.

    30. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 2

      Other than the single internal SSD, there appear to be no internal storage upgrades(Apple or otherwise).

      Luckily, only ~$1,000 will get you a nice, shiny 4-bay thunderbolt disk enclosure, so you'll be back where last year's model started!

    31. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by gl4ss · · Score: 1

      I mean really... why?

      One thing you should be happy about... putting all the expansion OUTSIDE of the computer using STANDARDIZED interfaces (Thunderbolt was actually developed by Intel and you can get PC adapters) means that any money you put into expanding a computer will be easily portable to other computer or when you upgrade a computer. This isn't necessarily true with internal cards (think ISA / VESA / PCI / PCIe / PCIx). Also, you don't have to worry about upgrading your computer's power supply or cooling when you add expansion.

      yeah.. so are those boxes now going to _actually_ come to market? that would be interesting if they were.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    32. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The implication is that they expect all expansion to be done externally. I guess you can hook up PCIe SSDs via Thunderbolt, maybe? There's no eSATA, unless you can do that effectively via Thunderbolt, too.

    33. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Really?

      HD speed - 1.25 GBps
      Wireless speed - 6.7 Gbps

      But a graphics card replacement is holding you back?

      I'll sell you my quad core Mac Pro - 4 cores, 4 GB ram, 3.25 TB of disks, boot drive is SSD. Running OSXS.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    34. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by iamgnat · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The rotation is nice in theory, but notice that the power cable port is right there as well and also rotates with the unit. So this rotation is great when nothing is plugged in. As soon as you start plugging stuff in then either it doesn't rotate or you've got so much extra cabling on your desk that it's a spaghetti nightmare.

    35. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Shape does matter when it comes to cost of manufacturing and so forth. Round is just tricky. It means you either get curved or round boards, or you waste a lot of internal space. It means your older boards aren't reusable. This is basically treating form as more important than function.

      Apple knows this and doesn't shy away from it. That's why they continually tweak and change things that are already working just so that people have to buy new accessories. Ie, new laptop last month which also meant that my old mac power supply and chargers were obsolete despite being only 3 years old.

    36. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by omnichad · · Score: 2

      Nothing pro about it

      Just look at what they did with Final Cut Pro. It's just an excuse to charge a higher price for what's essentially an "app" - very inflexible and stripped down.

    37. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Where do you see that? All I see is a shiny black cylinder that looks like a high tech ashtray.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    38. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Did you look at the specs or just one photo? 12 Xeon cores, up to 128GB RAM, 2 GPUs w/ 6GB RAM, PCIe SSD, etc - with a single near silent fan in a 10" x 6 1/2" form factor?

      I'd never buy one and I'm sure it's going to be absurdly expensive and proprietary - but "nothing pro about it"? Right. Macs have never been made for the home enthusiast upgrader market, and clearly they aren't starting now...

    39. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Holi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Actually it looks like with this design there will be NO upgrading video cards. Do you really think any third party is going to design a card for the small section of the market that is the mac pro. At least with the old mac pro they used standard designs, the only difference being the bios.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    40. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Either a thunderbolt drive or adapt thunderbolt to USB 3 and take your pick of USB 3 drive.

    41. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      Luckily, since external thunderbolt enclosures are alarmingly expensive and totally out of step with the new look, any attempt at expansion shouldn't be a dreadful mess!

      no worries, mfrs will come out with external bits that are stylistically consistent with the mac pro... remember all those bondi blue printers etc?

    42. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by mlts · · Score: 1

      At best, one can use a Thunderbolt external RAID drive. Of course, good luck using this with a SAN, not many Thunderbolt 4-8 GB fiber channel HBAs, or 10gigE cards with CNAs on them.

      At the minimum, it should have come with space for a SSD, and bays for 2-3 2.5" drives. At least with that, there could be some software (or hardware) RAID. As it stands, it appears that replacing the HDD may be a task. I'm hoping the RAM is upgradable and not a permanent fixture of the motherboard as well.

    43. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Shadowmist · · Score: 2

      You can buy plenty of third party options for firewire storage, as well as Thunderbolt. and USB3. In fact you can have a single Thunderbolt box that will have tons of I/O on it. So it's not going to be the "rats nest" for most people.

    44. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Im willing to bet that thunderbolt 2.0 will support external video cards. Which could lead to more choice since they shouldn't have the same bios issues that express cards have had for the old mac pro.

    45. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      You laugh. But close inspection reveals that it really is the spawn of an unholy pairing of Darth Vader with R2D2. Funny how the Star Wars reboot is coming up.

      Just sayin.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    46. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by uniquename72 · · Score: 1

      This a thousand times. Thunderbolt-connected expansion would be a fine solution in a rack, or a stack, or even side-by-side like books on a shelf. But a cylinder? No.

      Form over function.

    47. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by nblender · · Score: 3, Funny

      That thing needs a handle on top that you can rotate 1/4 turn, hear a hissing noise, and then pull out a long cylindrical CPU core that is all lit up with blue LEDs from a super-cap... On the side of it should be a double digit 7 segment display slowly counting down to 0.

    48. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by omnichad · · Score: 3, Funny

      Well, then I expect Apple to sue them shortly. They do love those time travel lawsuits.

    49. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 1

      There are Thunderbolt to SATA/eSATA adaptors that can be had for $99-$199 today, and then you can use any cheap drive or disk enclosure you like. By the time this Mac Pro is actually out one might expect that this announcement will push the accessory makers so that even more options to be available. And I'd be shocked if Apple didn't release an enclosure of their own. We don't know the pricing on anything yet either, so for all we know the new Pro + enclosure will be the same price as the old Pro with built-in drive bays was.

    50. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Stratus311 · · Score: 2

      Well, they do make the coolest adapters.

    51. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I once bought a bog-standard Voodoo3 3000 from CompUSA, flashed the firmware with the MESA (Mac Entertainment Software Alliance) firmware, and successfully ran it for years in a beige G3. With that card and 224MB of RAM, it ran Unreal Tournament at a respectable framerate (75-ish) in 2000, despite being a Mac running MacOS 9.

      Your "very very few options" is hardly a roadblock to someone with a little know-how. It's more like "very very few supported options", which means both jack and squat unless you're a corporate user or a clueless twit (or both).

      The main way to destroy a casual hobbyist's ability to hack something like that together is to change to a non-standard form factor. A PCIe slot is a PCIe slot. If you're not fighting physical limitations, it's all just a firmware hack away from working.

      So all-in-all, this is probably the most effective way to prevent people from buying non-standard parts for a Mac.

    52. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by makomk · · Score: 1

      Yeah, and depending on how much expansion you need to do you'll end up using the same amount of space as last year's model - except that you'll have replaced a single unit with a bunch of boxes chained together with cables running off external power supplies. Very neat and elegant.

    53. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Synerg1y · · Score: 2

      The single silent fan will ensure the longevity of the machine for many years to come... right folks? :)

    54. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 2

      Yes, I think one or two companies will put in the effort to do it. Even back when Power Mac CPU's required all sorts of custom designs, there were a few companies offering upgrades. The market isn't huge, but it isn't negligible, either.

    55. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by 0xdeadbeef · · Score: 0

      The Cray-1 was a cylinder.

      It was great.... FOR ME TO SIT ON.

      You know, because it had seats.

      Though I suspect many an Apple fanboy will attempt the same with the Mac Cylinder, despite it being so small, or perhaps because of it.

    56. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      But not many do you mean only 10 or so today?

    57. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 5, Informative

      None of these boards are curved. The CPU and two GPU's are attached in a triangular arrangement around a triangular aluminum heat-sink. Much of the "wasted space" in the curved areas contains the SSD, RAM, and Thunderbolt/USB/other ports.

    58. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by HCase · · Score: 1

      I believe the expectation is that pro users prefer to stack external bays on their desk? This design doesn't look to be very well thought out in terms of upgrading and repairing.

    59. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everything is lame if you can't read: "Access your network over three-stream 802.11ac Wi-Fi for the latest in high-speed wireless connectivity. ", source: http://www.apple.com/mac-pro/

    60. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 1

      At the link he gave you. Click the "continue" arrow at the bottom of the page. It shows a number of views of the internals.

    61. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 5, Informative

      If designed right (and it sounds like a custom-designed 6" impeller fan) 1 big high-quality fan would be a lot more reliable than 4-5 small, crappy OEM fans found in most PCs. It's not like Apple has any reason to cut costs here, this thing is going to cost a mint and have an absurd profit margin, anyway.

    62. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Megane · · Score: 1

      The right-angle PCIe slot for the flash is enough of a standard that I have a genuine Intel mini-ITX Atom motherboard with one. I believe it is called PCI Express Mini Card, although it looks like this has room for a card that's about 50% longer.

      And they better put a break on the price for not including proper slots (and the power supply wattage for them) inside it! I'm not sure what the PCIe equivalent bandwidth for TB2 is (quick math shows they might be 16x each!), but I'm sure the cable alone will cost you at least fifty bucks. Do I really see six TB plugs on the back? It's also got USB3, which is usable for external disk storage too.

      As for looks, the first thing I thought was Edison wax phonograph cylinder. Then it reminded me a bit of the Cray 1, only with a U2/SR71 matte black paint job, and minus the upholstery (which would be Barbie size at that scale anyhow.)

      Oh yeah, and no optical drive of course.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    63. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Megane · · Score: 5, Funny

      But a cylinder? No.

      Apple's next product will be donut-shaped expansion cases that fit around it.

      --
      #naabhaprzrag, #sverubfr-000, #agi-fcbafberq, negvpyr[pynff*=' negvpyr-ary-'] { qvfcynl: abar !vzcbegnag; }
    64. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      And it will be called The Homer.

    65. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Altus · · Score: 1

      To be fair the current Mac Pro requires a more or less complete disassembly to get to the CPU.

      --

      "In America, first you get the sugar, then you get the power, then you get the women..." -H. Simpson

    66. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What gives you the right to act like an ass when you are obviously completely ignorant of the current Mac video card situation?

      The firmware flash tricks haven't worked in a long time. However, over the last year or so, Apple has loosened the restrictions and some PC EFI cards will work in a Mac Pro unmodified.

    67. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      You're right, they write a lot about the fan's "intelligent" design, its one of those things that remains to be seen on implementation. Of course a replacement fan, assuming its replaceable will run at least $50.

    68. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...good luck using this with a SAN, not many Thunderbolt 4-8 GB fiber channel HBAs, or 10gigE cards with CNAs on them.

      Actually, ATTO make 8Gb/s fibre channel HBAs with Thunderbolt as well as 10GbE adapters in SFP and 10GBASE-T. http://www.attotech.com/products/family.php?id=15

      Probably expensive, but most HBAs of that calibre are not cheap in any form factor.

    69. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      or adapt thunderbolt to USB 3 and take your pick of USB 3 drive.

      And that's if you don't want to use one of the 4 build-in USB3 ports ;-)

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    70. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by nxcho · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually, Apple has a lot of fans and they tend to be far from silent.

      --
      When asked why, the answer is almost always: "It's 2014".
    71. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by beltsbear · · Score: 0

      Because the CPU is a component that breaks often.

    72. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by beltsbear · · Score: 1

      On laptops, for the power of the laptop, Apple fans are below average in noise. For large desktops with high end power, only the G5 would have fans louder then average. The Xeon based Mac Pro's are the same noise or less then a standard machine of the same power. Use the processor hard and the fans throttle up. The G5 on the other hand sounded like a jet engine under full load and was not acceptable for office use.

    73. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by beltsbear · · Score: 1

      Actually yes. Unless you are a smoker or moms cat's come down to the basement, the fan should last. Apple uses higher quality components then average especially fans. Some Apple fans do die but this is not common.

    74. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      I'm going to have to disagree. The Mac Pro was the only system that you could upgrade. In my last system, I upgraded the CPUs (2x2 5100 series to 2x4 5300 series xeons), radeon video card, ram, and hard drives. This new model is not upgradable. It has no storage bays. It means it is a glorified mac mini requiring a shit load of external hard drives to actually use time machine + store content.

      Why apple thinks a bunch of external crap is prettier than internal drive bays, I'll never know.

    75. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > I'm going to withhold judgement on this, as I think it looks nice.

      I'm not withholding any judgment... I took one look and said "are you fucking kidding me??"

      Does Apple even understand how pros use their computers anymore??

    76. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      I mean really... why?

      Well, mainly because they're Apple and won't be happy until they've covered all of the Platonic solids... but also it looks like they were trying to maximize cooling efficiency via a "central chimney" with a fan at the top and various heat-producing devices around the perimeter. That way the single fan can cool everything at once.

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    77. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Because boxes are inherently more professional than cylinders?

    78. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that SATA host controllers are PCIe devices, right? You can already buy Thunderbolt disk enclosures which internally consist of an off-the-shelf PCIe SAS/SATA RAID chip and a bunch of SATA disk bays. (Google the Promise Pegasus R6.)

    79. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Seems like a cylinder would lend itself to efficient airflow far better than a box.

    80. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      These new machines are going to be obsoleted much faster.

      That's a good point. Perhaps this design is more like a high-end Mac Mini than an upgraded Mac Pro?

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    81. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      I always loved the Cube design. Would have bought one if it wasn't horribly priced for what you got. Also, the lack of dual monitors killed the deal. I still want to pick up an old Cube case sometime, not even the working box, just to have one on my shelf as a memento.

      The Pro is nifty looking by my tastes, but I drifted back to Windows desktops years ago because of the price. I still like Mac laptops though.

    82. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Quirkz · · Score: 1

      Now you've got me thinking of the weird stacked donut wax creatures from Brin's Sundiver series. What were they called, Jophur?

    83. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Daemonik · · Score: 2

      Considering Thunderbolt cables are $40 a piece, I'm sure that's exactly how it's designed.

    84. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So if you drop a floppy in, it will come back out the side?

    85. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      My first thought was that with its cover off it looks like the Death Star apparatus that Obi Wan shut down to disable the tractor beam. (er, if Obi Wan was 5 inches tall, of course)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    86. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by fredgiblet · · Score: 0

      That whooshing sound was the joke going over your head.

    87. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Daemonik · · Score: 0

      Why apple thinks a bunch of external crap is prettier than internal drive bays, I'll never know.

      Because when you add up the price of the $40 Thunderbird cables and the cut Apple will get for all the external hardware, it's very pretty for Apple's bottom line.

    88. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's a thousand dollars less than the previous version, and a lot better in many respects to boot. Much (though certainly not all) of the functionality that was missing from it at launch is there now.

      Complain about a specific feature loss if you like, but it is most definitely not more expensive. It's 75% cheaper.

    89. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      Immediately reminds me of the Power Mac G4 Cube.

    90. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Moryath · · Score: 2

      It's the G4 Cube all over again. I have to wonder how many joints were smoked during the design process.

      In fact I can imagine the design room meeting now:

      "Duuuuuude... remember that old trashcan shaped one we made? That so rocked... we should do it again but ROUND. Yeah man that'd be awesome... dudes I totally have the munchies right now..."

    91. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given that the largest connector on the outside of the cylinder is the power plug, how long until we see a new cable designed to decrease the space needed for it?

    92. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Moryath · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of my uncle's old mac... the one with the SCSI apparatus that was the Mac, plus the Screen, plus one hard drive, another hard drive, another hard drive, a cd-rom drive, another cd-rom drive, a floppy drive, then the printer, and woe to the idiot who forgot to turn them all on in reverse order.

      Hey wait, that was just as bad an idea then as now.

    93. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      The new Mac Pro packs an unprecedented amount of power in an unthinkable amount of space. A big reason we were able to do that is the ingenious unified thermal core. Rather than using multiple heat sinks and fans to cool the processor and graphics cards, we built everything around a single piece of extruded aluminum designed to maximize airflow as well as thermal capacity. It works by conducting heat away from the CPU and GPUs and distributing that heat uniformly across the core. That way, if one processor isnâ(TM)t working as hard as the others, the extra thermal capacity can be shared efficiently among them. No computer has been built this way before. And yet it makes so much sense, itâ(TM)s now hard to imagine building one any other way.

      Isn't that what laptops do? Are they not computers for the purposes of this conversation?
      The only reason no one else does a "unified thermal core" for desktops is because industry standard motherboard layouts are not compatible with such a design.

      From tabbing back and forth through the interactive swf, it looks like the layout is a triangle, with the 'mainboard' and two graphics cards making up the legs.
      The "unified thermal core" is a hollow triangular heat sink running down the center, with a copper mating point on each face.
      It also looks like the flash drive is mounted directly behind the core of one graphics card, which should do wonders for its lifespan.
      There's also a 'daughter' board in the base of the case, with some undocumented chips on it.

      The CPU can be replaced without complete disassembly.
      You will have to remove the 'mainboard' though.

      Technically impressive. Completely non-standard.
      It's interesting that Apple believes 1 CPU and 2 GPUs is the future of professional computing.

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    94. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      One of these connected to a Drobo will work perfectly for me. Why does all the storage need to be inside one big box?

    95. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I went through a dozen or so until someone clued me in that they weren't edible.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    96. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps its made with the assumption that thunderbolt will be ubiquitous or at least very popular with their userbase.

    97. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      It doesn't, and the thing we've noted is they're using workstation graphics, which is good for workstations but bad for those of us who just wanted a high quality, high end PC. I've been happily using my macbook pro but I really want a machine that I can play games on, and that has apple's high quality.

      Also noted is DDR3 that's ... interesting.

    98. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by samkass · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are not the target audience. They will sell a zillion of these things to Pixar/Disney. A quiet, powerful device you can easily move around and reconfigure by plugging things in and out external devices instead of opening it up. In fact, I'm guessing the fact that they're selling them on the market is probably just to defray the cost of building these for Disney.

      --
      E pluribus unum
    99. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      "Interactive swf" that's funny.

    100. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 3, Funny

      Saying that the G5 would have "fans louder than average" is an understatement. A co-worker's G5 tower once fell on its back and the damn thing started hovering on the ground.

    101. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      "Thunderbird" cables. Thanks for the laugh, mate.

    102. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      But... a Drobo is storage inside one big box!

    103. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the lamest of all is not getting the reference...

    104. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Raistlin77 · · Score: 2

      Whoosh!

      No, that's not the sound of a fan...

    105. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because when you add up the price of the $40 Thunderbird cables and the cut Apple will get for all the external hardware, it's very pretty for Apple's bottom line.

      What cut would that be? Apple doesn't own Thunderbolt, it's an Intel spec.

    106. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To paraphrase Tim Cook, not well thought out for repairs my ass. When this Mac Pro breaks, you unplug it, plug in the Thunderbolt devices to your spare machine (another Mac Pro, or maybe a Mac mini or a Macbook Air if money is tight), and keep on chugging while you wait for the technician to troubleshoot and repair your main machine. Doing that with a conventional workstation is a lot more work, and sometimes not even practical (because modifying the hardware configuration can affect troubleshooting). In exchange for a few extra cables, you end up with a more robust setup.

    107. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by chrismcb · · Score: 1

      Speaking of cases, expect lots and lots of cylindrical PCI expansion chassis and RAID arrays from third party soon.

      The case looks kind of cool. But I've learned that round things aren't very stackable.

    108. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They AREN'T standard GPUs. Those video cards are AMD FirePro, which are their workstation range, not consumer gamer cards. It's fairly clear this design is targeting the kind of user who might already be using workstation cards.

      The reason for the design is to use a single central thermal solution to take the heat from the CPU and the GPUs into a large heat sink, and use one large slow fan to get rid of it - seems like a smart move.

      I own an older Mac Pro, and there was a lot of wasted space inside it. This one looks to be very efficient, space-wise. Yes, I'd have liked to have room for one magnetic drive, but I can live without - I put most of my images (I use Photoshop) and video (I have used a variety of tools, including the older Final Cut) on NAS boxes, anyway. Moving the data from a NAS to a Thunderbolt attached box is not a big step.

      All up, I like this design. Now I just need to see what it will cost...

      BTW: my guess as to why it's not shipping yet is that it will be using an Ivy Bridge E series CPU. That would explain the quad channel RAM. My current Photoshop machine is a Sandy Bridge E Windows 7 box (I swing both ways), with quad-channel RAM, six cores, and 40 PCIe lanes. Using an Ivy Bridge E chip would mean that each GPUs could have 16 PCIe lanes (or maybe they'll have 12 lanes each, and the other lanes will drive ThunderBolt, etc).

    109. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually it looks like with this design there will be NO upgrading video cards.

      From Apple:

      Thunderbolt is the fastest, most versatile I/O technology there is. And with Mac Pro, we’re jumping even further ahead. Thunderbolt 2 delivers twice the throughput, providing up to 20Gb/s of bandwidth to each external device. So you’re more than ready for the next generation of high-performance peripherals. You can connect massive amounts of storage, add a PCI expansion chassis, and work with the latest external displays — including 4K desktop displays and peripheral devices capable of broadcast monitoring in 4K. And since each Thunderbolt 2 port allows you to daisy-chain up to six peripherals, you can go all out by plugging in up to 36 external devices via Thunderbolt alone.

      It most certainly can be upgraded. You may be partly right, however, in that the internal design may be entirely dedicated with the gfx (and cpu).

    110. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      Cooling without noise.

      Next!

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    111. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      If you're spending 5 grand on a machine, 40 bucks on a cable isn't a big deal.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    112. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If Apple's (rather painfully self-satisfied) slideshow thing is anything to go by, there isn't a single standardized part in the entire computer, with the exception of the RAM, and possibly the CPU, depending on whether they went socketed or BGA.

      The two GPU cards are probably PCIe electrically; but the shape certainly isn't compatible, the CPU card is its own animal(one that packs a whole four RAM slots, that's Serious Workstation material right there...), and PCIe-attached SSDs in the mini-PCIe form factor are relatively odd ducks(most that are that size and shape are mSATA, and PCIe direct-attached cards are usually rectangular PCIe 8x cards.

      Dell is doing the PCIe SSD thing in their PowerEdge servers as ExpressFlash instead of using SAS SSDs. Maybe similar tech? Dell had them running at Enterprise Forum, clocking a million and a half IOPS across four of them (4k 100% read obviously)

      http://www.dell.com/Learn/us/en/04/campaigns/poweredge-express-flash?c=us&l=en&s=bsd

    113. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Pro" meant having the ability to upgrade the internal components!! Go watch some old Steve Jobs keynotes and how he emphasized this. Even the G4 Cube could be taken out of its case to get at its components. Apple is no longer even in the "Pro" market.

    114. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      This site doesn't work. It's a black cylinder, the bottom says scroll to continue but the only thing that happens is it gets even blacker.

    115. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      doesn't work ... does nothing.

    116. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by SpectreBlofeld · · Score: 1

      Knowing Apple, I can see the tagline now:

      The Cube, redesigned.

    117. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      It's a cube with rounded corners.... very rounded.

    118. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      So, you know... 120 gigabit of external connectivity, 12 GB of video memory and a 12 core CPU with built in PCIe SSD as standard is "nothing pro about it"?

      Are you on crack? No you won't be able to upgrade it continually for 8 years. People who need this sort of power will replace machines every 3-5 years to get best bang for buck. Expandability via internal busses is over-rated - by the time you go to replace that video card, the PCIe standard will be outdated, the CPU socket will be outdated, the memory slot will be outdated, etc.

      Yes, it is different to the previous Mac Pro. But to claim this isn't a high end machine is just being deliberately retarded about it.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    119. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by JDG1980 · · Score: 2, Informative

      If designed right (and it sounds like a custom-designed 6" impeller fan) 1 big high-quality fan would be a lot more reliable than 4-5 small, crappy OEM fans found in most PCs.

      Sounds like they took some design cues from SilverStone. They have been using their 180mm "Air Penetrator" fans in a wide variety of applications, and it works pretty well. The FT02 has three of them on the bottom, blowing upward, over a motherboard rotated 90 degrees. (The ports stick out the top and there is a secondary cover to hide the wire routing out a hole in the back.) Even when they're turned to low speed, it has some of the best thermals of any case, and quite reasonable noise levels. The SilverStone Temjin TJ08-E uses a single 180mm intake fan and is one of the best Micro-ATX cases currently available. So the design of using one large, good-quality intake fan blowing upward over components certainly sounds like it's viable – similar designs have worked well on the PC side of things.

    120. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right, Pro is about funtion and NOT form, and based on the specs, it's going to function quite well.

    121. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by dugancent · · Score: 1

      It has a SSD, slot style, same as the Macbooks. Ram is standard.

      All you need to do replace either is slide the cover off and they are exposed.

      --
      SJWs are the new boogeyman. -Me
    122. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Can't be too happy about the possibility of Fusion drives since they are required to be inside the chassis. Maybe this will mean Apple lifts that gratuitous restriction. I doubt it.

      Nothing ruins the appearance of a small chassis faster than the external drive chassis beside it. Pretty much an existence proof for inadequacy.

    123. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      You are in the minority. How up to date are your PCI slots, RAM slots, SATA/SAS ports and external buses? Upgrading CPU and video card won't upgrade them, and bandwidth is the major issue to overcome in the PC architecture.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    124. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by JDG1980 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't, and the thing we've noted is they're using workstation graphics, which is good for workstations but bad for those of us who just wanted a high quality, high end PC. I've been happily using my macbook pro but I really want a machine that I can play games on, and that has apple's high quality.

      It's not clear which FirePro graphics card is being used (or even if it's one of AMD's standard offerings at all), but reviews show that the FirePro W7000 and W9000 actually handle games pretty well.

    125. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      Companies don't want to do Thunderbolt because the licensing fees are so high. There are many downsides to integrating PCIe AND DisplayPort into one standard where you can't make video optional and that's why a display-less competitor is being developed. Thunderbolt is questionable.

      Sure, we "don't know pricing on anything yet" but we do know that it will be inherently more expensive for no good reason. With 6 of these connectors available, some could have been dedicated to video at lower cost. Bad decisions for vanity reasons, an Apple tradition.

    126. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by drinkypoo · · Score: 0

      If designed right (and it sounds like a custom-designed 6" impeller fan) 1 big high-quality fan would be a lot more reliable than 4-5 small, crappy OEM fans found in most PCs.

      If you actually care about uptime, then you have redundant fans. An IBM eServer 325 (which is, IIRC, an MSI? Something like that) has something like ten fans in it. Each of them has a tach line and each of them is part of a redundant pair or triplet. You can get speeds for all of them from the IPMI module, without even accessing the operating system on the machine itself. And that was an old-ass machine, by today's standards anyway. They ought to have a fan at each end of the machine.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    127. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "The right-angle PCIe slot for the flash is enough of a standard that I have a genuine Intel mini-ITX Atom motherboard with one."

      No, you don't though you may have a board with a mini-PCIe card slot which is not the same thing.

    128. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Hmm... Works fine in Safari, Opera, IE9, and Chrome; in Firefox it takes about ten seconds for the arrow to appear but it works from there on out. If you're having issues try turning off Javascript; you'll be able to scroll through the various sections rather than wading through the HTML 5 glitz.

    129. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      No, it looks like Captain Goodvibe's snout (AKA the Pig of Steel)

      -- Life's short, death's long, so's my dick, pass the bong...

    130. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by DeathElk · · Score: 1

      No, it looks like Captain Goodvibes' Snout (AKA the Pig of Steel)

      -- Life's short, death's long, so's my dick, pass the bong

    131. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate Apple and Apple products. I would never even turn it on if I owned it. Unless, of course, they did what you describe. Then I would buy one, love it, and spend the rest of my life opening and closing the CPU bay.

    132. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would like to buy a G4 Cube case and stick a Mac Mini inside.

    133. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seems like par of the course with Apple these days.

      Toss out the Xserver, tell customers to replace them with Mac Mini or a Mac Pro stripped of handles.

      Now they are converting the Pro into a Mini on steroids.

      Apple is father, Apple is mother...

      ovo -hoot

    134. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      12 AMD cores, not Xeon.

    135. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by DMJC · · Score: 1

      Or for $2000 you can buy/build a 30TB file server and connect it via a lan port. Seriously you're complaining about internal storage in a computer that is begging for multi-terrabyte file content? This thing is built to do one job: Render 4k Videos. That means RAID arrays and not tiny little hard drives. But large disk volumes Like the 22TB hardware RAID-6 server near my desk.

    136. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jscotta44 · · Score: 1

      Thunderbolt is no SCSI. While SCSI was tremendous for the day, you had terminators (get the right one or you were screwed), issues with where in the chain each device sat, and as you pointed out, powering up/down issues.

      Thunderbolt devices are pretty much like very high-power USB devices. Put them in and pull them out in any order and at any time. Not to mention that Thunderbolt cables are extremely thin and pliable. The old SCSI cables were huge. And don't get me started on the size of the connectors!

    137. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by exomondo · · Score: 1

      When this Mac Pro breaks, you unplug it, plug in the Thunderbolt devices to your spare machine (another Mac Pro, or maybe a Mac mini or a Macbook Air if money is tight), and keep on chugging while you wait for the technician to troubleshoot and repair your main machine. Doing that with a conventional workstation is a lot more work

      A lot more work? To unplug your external devices from the new mac pro is no less work than to do the same with the old one, i don't know where you get that it would be a lot more work.

    138. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by madprof · · Score: 1

      5 grand on a Mac...in what way would that be worth it?

    139. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by madprof · · Score: 1

      Sorry but the facts clearly show that that fan evolved over time.

    140. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, it is funny how the most annoying thing about Apple is its users. Its products are actually not bad from a hardware point of view, but the software is sometimes a bit sub-par.

    141. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      Saved time. If your billable rate is $250/hr and it saves you 4 hours per year, it adds up. Having owned (and built) both PCs and Macs, i'm not going back.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    142. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by madprof · · Score: 1

      That is less than a minute a day. You think this is a worthwhile way to spend money? Why not save cash and have 5 mins less television watching? That is about 30 hours saved a year. At $250 an hour you make seriously more money. And now you can afford to blow money on a Mac. ;-)

    143. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Drakonblayde · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, the gigabit ethernet is unforgivable. It really needs to be dual 10Gbase-T ports in this day and age.

      You are aware that 10GE is not backward compatible with 10/100/1000 ethernet, correct?

      You are aware that 10GE switches are not exactly consumer grade products at the moment, yes? Given that Apple is not a network hardware vendor, and that a decent 10 gig switch is likely to be more expensive than the Mac Pro, not putting in 10GE ports is a sane decision.

    144. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      It has less space than a Nomad.

      Most computers have less space than a Nomad.

      (And, yes, I recognized the reference immediately, but, then again, I can't even remember what year I first signed up here any more, but it was definitely in the 1990's.)

    145. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 3, Insightful

      As I said, if your billable rate is $250/hr (and if you're a professional, you're likely billing that out or even higher) and the machine causes you 4 hours of being unusable when you need it for work per year (during business hours - virus infection, screwing around getting some peripheral to work on a PC, chasing down crashes due to a windows bluetooth driver etc - all of which I've dealt with on PCs in the past 12 months) then after 5 years as far as the company is concerned, it has paid for itself.

      This is why Linux or in some cases Windows (for example) is a non-starter for many people. If you consider your time to be worthless, great. Some people don't.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    146. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you suggesting this could be inserted anally?

    147. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by crutchy · · Score: 1

      might make a nice porta-potty... there's even a hole in the top for you to shit in :)

    148. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Waccoon · · Score: 1

      It also had built-in seating for 12. Not just about aesthetics, but functional, too!

    149. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 0

      Yep. That's what has all the sales-floor drones all jumping around. They make their money jacking up the final price with expensive add-ons.

      "For the investment* you're making, I recommend you buy these $120 cables. It would be a mistake to scrimp on this great system you're getting.,"

      (*not a real investment, of course. In two years there will be stuff in the App store you can't run, because Apple will have discontinued OS updates for this model)

    150. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      You built your Mac? Kudos! I wouldn't want a system that I just lifted out of the box and scanned over the giant quick-start sheet to set up, either. Computers are too hard!

      We don't care how much you make, BTW.

    151. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      How are you making $250 an hour if you're not capable of using a commodity PC running the mainstream OS? Are you in sales? Are there tassels on your shoes?

    152. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Macs have never been made for the Pro market.

      They're marketed like the Maharishi markets a religion. Be honest, that's the deal here.

      When I was a kid there was always one fucker on the street with a Schwinn bike. Nobody liked him. We rode around on cheap Huffys.

    153. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if that were true,dumbass, then it would be in a rugged little commodity case. This machine gains nothing by its odd design..but I realize the creative fanbois will eat it up.

    154. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by laffer1 · · Score: 1

      You're making assumptions about how I use a computer that you shouldn't make. Unlike most people, I am often CPU bound. Upgrading the CPUs was necessary in order to actually read my email. Upgrading the video card allowed me to view flash content again and even play some games.

      While you're correct in that I wouldn't have the latest amazing things, consider that apple didn't do much to Mac Pro systems. The Mac Pro I was using was a hand-me-down from my wife buying a new one at the time. Sure, she got faster RAM and a faster pciE slot and new CPUs, but many other aspects of the Mac Pro were unchanged. The first and second revisions of the Mac Pro were identical except for a CPU bump and an update to EFI.

    155. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Moryath · · Score: 1

      Powering up/down issues seem like it'll be the case if you offload your audio board, video board, etc.

      Not to mention, the whole "hey see my sleek cylinder computer right next to the stack of crap that wouldn't fit inside the case" mental image changes how "cool" that trashbucket-shaped machine looks.

    156. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Petaris · · Score: 1

      Watching the little presentation on Apples site it looks like the RAM is in standard style slots. Only four slots though, so to get their maximum of 128 GB you would need to four 32GB sticks of RAM. Its also interesting that they list "12 xeon cores" but don't list how many actual CPUs. I'm guessing its a single 12 core Xeon processor, though I wonder if you can make use of the dual GPUs for processing. Also, I would hate to have to find a aftermarket replacement for that power supply! :(

      --
      ~Petaris "The world is open. Are you?"
    157. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 1

      You are aware that 10GE is not backward compatible with 10/100/1000 ethernet, correct?

      Incorrect. 10GBase-T is backward compatible with Gigabit and 100Base-T, as it just so happens, I'm looking at the spec sheet of a Netgear switch at the moment. A USB dongle will suffice for those stuck on 10base-T networks.

    158. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      Never, because the size and thickness of the power cable is due to its need to handle X amps of 120/240VAC. The only way to make it smaller is to move the transformer to an external box like laptops use (which obviously is nothing new).

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    159. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      There's plenty of people out there, that make enough money so that Apple products really are that expensive to them.

      Also, if you are heavy into media (editing, videography, color correction, etc) you can bill out a good bit of $$, and write off the hardware/software expenses on your business.

      It makes sense for a lot of people out there in many ways.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    160. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by jscotta44 · · Score: 1

      Not to mention, the whole "hey see my sleek cylinder computer right next to the stack of crap that wouldn't fit inside the case" mental image changes how "cool" that trashbucket-shaped machine looks.

      As opposed to what many here would like to be seen as "Hey look at all the crap I stuff into this box with lights through my clear plexiglass side panel!"?

      And how are powering up/down external devices any different if they are video/audio components than if they are any other device such as storage or connectivity?

    161. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by ah.clem · · Score: 1

      You, Sir or Madam, are clearly a sentient being I would enjoy having a drink with.

      --
      "Life is not magic." Dr. Ron Weiss - "If we don't play God, who will?" Dr. James Watson
    162. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Synerg1y · · Score: 1

      These are desktop models, server schematics don't really apply...

      You're right on that a single fan can go out and cause the system to overheat and then shutdown, but I'll even give credit here to apple to not being stupid enough not to use a smart fan as their only fan. This is also part of the reason why I think a replacement would be expensive for a fan.

    163. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      I have a flashed ATI 4870 (1GB) in my early 2008 Mac Pro.

      Love it, works great, both screens supported perfectly with DVI, get the boot screens and everything. Dual-height card with an exhaust instead of scatter-fan, which is nice.

      I know, flashed card, not exactly a standard option...

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    164. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I make much more than that, and I would never allow proprietary software in my home of office. My time is very valuable, but my data is valuable as well. I cannot trust any proprietary software with my data, it is simply a non-starter. Therefore Linux or BSD is the only option that fits my needs. Learning Linux is easily the most profitable use of my time I've ever undertaken.

      I've had FAR too many colleagues lose their data on both Windows and Mac. That is not a risk I am willing to make.

    165. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ehh, that's a bit close to home for the people of Hiroshima...

    166. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Drakonblayde · · Score: 1

      Well shit, I stand corrected then. I guess Netgear actually put some folk to work figuring out how to autosense which PHY standard is being used on the port plugged in and then work with that.

      However, ~$1000 for 8 ports is not what I would call cost effective, especially given the fact that to make it useful, you'd need to upgrade your entire backbone to support more than 10 gigs of transport, given the possibility of saturation.

    167. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      point. missed. for what its worth, i was billing out 270/hr (as in, company rate) 10 years ago for my services.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    168. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      If you're losing data on any mainstream OS, it is a user failure, not an OS failure. All of them provide easy ways to back up. I haven't lost any data since 1996. The last data I lost was actually on a Linux box.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    169. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by quacking+duck · · Score: 1

      The rotation is nice in theory, but notice that the power cable port is right there as well and also rotates with the unit. So this rotation is great when nothing is plugged in. As soon as you start plugging stuff in then either it doesn't rotate or you've got so much extra cabling on your desk that it's a spaghetti nightmare.

      As opposed to dragging the entire case on its non-slip feet a meter from under the desk, along with all the attached cables, like I have to with my PC gaming tower?

      Even sitting on a desk, you have to pull a PC tower forward or turn it to the side to access the back.

      So, in fact, this rotation is great whether it's plugged in or not. It's certainly no worse than a traditional tower in this respect.

    170. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by SoupIsGood+Food · · Score: 1

      Juniper and Cisco auto-switches on their 10Gbase-T gear, too. You are arguing against an inevitability - a grand for a workgroup switch with that kind of bandwidth is a bargain, and will be a $500 switch next year, and a $250 switch the year after next. People are already deploying 100Gig-E top-of-rack uplinks.

      There are Thunderbolt 10Gb-T adapters out there, but this is one of those things that should be standard on the box: gigabit is crusty and old.

    171. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Yeah, my guess is *well* over $50 - sounds like the Dyson of desktop tower cooling fans ;)

      But my point is if designed well, there is no reason to think it would even be the most likely first point of failure in a system - again that assumption is based on the high failure rate of crappy PC fans. The fan in my furnace has gone 30 years without being replaced, and my Patton circulator fan has a 25 year warranty...

    172. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      Just because it was upgradable doesn't mean they were targeting the DIY upgrade market.

    173. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      You're making assumptions about how I use a computer that you shouldn't make.

      That's basically been Apple's driving philosophy for years... if you don't agree, get a PC!

    174. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      No, Apple's site itself says "...new-generation Intel Xeon E5 chipset. With configurations offering up to 12 cores of processing power..."

    175. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Dahamma · · Score: 1

      What the hell is a "Pro" market anyway when it comes to computers?

      It's like saying a car isn't made for the "Pro" market. Professional WHAT? Racing? Construction? Taxi? Pizza delivery??

      I'd say the Mac Pro is made for a "Pro" market - that being professional graphic designers, who want a computer with a lot of RAM, CPU, and video capability for video and image editing, while still having an unhealthy fascination with the look of the computer almost as much as what's inside ;)

    176. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the price of the thing, I wonder why dual power supplies are not an option.

      The Mac Pro is not meant to be a consumer grade toy. It is meant to be a true workstation, which needs to be enterprise grade on the par with the Proliants and Poweredge boxes, like the retired XServe. However, it just appears as a Mac Mini in a can with some beefier CPU power. No redundant drives, no redundant power supplies.

      What is Apple thinking? They just seem (in my opinion, take it for what you will) to be a toymaker now.

    177. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by kqs · · Score: 1

      The power adapter change is an interesting complaint, given how I've worked with three different Samsung laptops from three consecutive years which all needed different power adapters. Apple hangs on to connectors (like the old iPod/iPhone/iPad connecter) for far far longer than anyone else in the industry, and when they change they generally have a very functional reason (nowadays, usually size).

      Round is tricky, but this is hardly Apple's first round device (remember the iMacs with a round base). Apple has always treated form as an equal to function. It's a refreshing change from the usual rush-to-the bottom, designed-by-idiot-wombats PC market.

    178. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It would be if it were true. In actual fact it's HTML5, just as you'd expect.

    179. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Thunderbolt is an Intel technology. The cables are $40 whether you buy them from Apple or from anyone else. The reason is not because they are milking the market, but because thunderbolt has an active cable, not a passive one. i.e. Electronics in each plug.

      The were $60 per cable at launch. Moores law, plus the fact that they are not a proprietary monopoly will ensure the price continues to fall.

      But for the Mac Pro market, it's neither here nor there. When you're spending thousands on a computer system the odd $40 cable is irrelevant.

      PCs with internal expansion were a sign of an immature market. Mature product markets don't usually have internal modification as a way to upgrade.

      Expect fewer PCs from other manufacturers to be built as large mostly empty boxes, just in case the user wants to add something.

    180. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It's HTML 5. What browser are you using? IE6?

    181. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. That's what has all the sales-floor drones all jumping around. They make their money jacking up the final price with expensive add-ons.

      Have you ever actually shopped at an Apple Store? They're pretty laid back. As I understand it Apple doesn't pay commission so they have no incentive to nickle-and-dime you.

      "For the investment* you're making, I recommend you buy these $120 cables. It would be a mistake to scrimp on this great system you're getting.,"

      (*not a real investment, of course. In two years there will be stuff in the App store you can't run, because Apple will have discontinued OS updates for this model)

      Why do you haters always feel it necessary to lie? I think the quickest time to cutoff ever for a Mac was about 4 or 5 years, for some of the last PowerPC Macs made. It's looking like OS X 10.9 "Mavericks" will support everything supported by 10.8, too.

      Also, Thunderbolt cables are $50 or less each, not $120, and they're expensive because (a) they're low volume right now and (b) unlike most cables they aren't just wire, they have high performance active silicon embedded in them. At each end, so it's two chips minimum per cable. (Why? Because it turns out to be a hard engineering problem to run 10 gigabit signals on copper pairs over a few meters.)

      But hey I'm forgetting myself, it's your chance to post lazy thoughtless bashes equating Apple to snake oil cable salesmen! Keep on trollin'.

    182. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even look at the Mac Pro images out there on the web before deciding Apple's taking design cues from SilverStone? I'm thinking the answer is no. The Mac Pro's fan is not an intake fan at the bottom blowing up, it's an exhaust fan at the top. It's a very different fan type than the "Air Penetrator". And the system as a whole is not even remotely similar to vanilla ATX. (After looking it up I'd count this TJ08-E as very vanilla. No, mounting an extra fan there was not a SilverStone innovation. It's just a competently executed conventional ATX going by the eye test.)

      If Apple took cues from anyone, it was from themselves -- the "unified thermal core", a central heatsink with air flowing through vertically, is more similar to the PowerMac G4 Cube than anything else.

    183. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the price of the thing,

      Er, what?! The reveal was a "sneak peek" and they didn't choose to release pricing information at this time.

      I wonder why dual power supplies are not an option.

      Maybe because it's a workstation, not a server?

      The Mac Pro is not meant to be a consumer grade toy. It is meant to be a true workstation, which needs to be enterprise grade on the par with the Proliants and Poweredge boxes, like the retired XServe.

      Fake expert spotted!

      Hint: Dell's workstation machines are named "Precision". "Proliant" and "Poweredge" are server lines, mostly rackmount machines, not desktop workstations. I have a Dell Precision workstation on my desk at work and it's just an ordinary Dell quasi-ATX tower. It's slightly nicer than the non workstation grade Dell desktops but it's still generic Dell corporate desktop trash in so many ways.

      However, it just appears as a Mac Mini in a can with some beefier CPU power. No redundant drives, no redundant power supplies.

      Workstations almost never have redundant drives and PSUs.

      What is Apple thinking? They just seem (in my opinion, take it for what you will) to be a toymaker now.

      Well, maybe they're thinking they have a better idea who they're designing the machine for than random slashdotters who haven't got much of a clue about anything at all.

    184. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Shape does matter when it comes to cost of manufacturing and so forth. Round is just tricky. It means you either get curved or round boards,

      Neither of which is actually tricky to manufacture. For all but the lowest-cost applications, PCBs are cut out from panels using a CNC mill. The outline can be nearly any shape so long as it doesn't have any interior angles too sharp for the width of the bit. Large round shapes in the outline are no problem at all.

      or you waste a lot of internal space.

      You didn't really bother to look at the pictures did you? Hint: you can fit three rectangular boards arranged in a triangle inside a cylinder without issue. And the space between them is used for the heatsink.

      It means your older boards aren't reusable. This is basically treating form as more important than function.

      Are you a loon or something? There isn't anything special about a cylindrical enclosure which makes it harder to reuse board designs in a future product generation. If the enclosure doesn't have to change, neither do the boards. But the boards usually have to change anyways, just because you need to put new chips on them.

      Apple knows this and doesn't shy away from it. That's why they continually tweak and change things that are already working just so that people have to buy new accessories. Ie, new laptop last month which also meant that my old mac power supply and chargers were obsolete despite being only 3 years old.

      Yeah, that laptop power supply connector which Apple fucked with so much that they kept it unchanged for 6 years. And which they changed not because they're fond of screwing with things for no good reason, but because they were trying to make their new machines even thinner, and the old version of the connector was too thick. And your chargers weren't even obsolete. You could've bought a tiny passive adapter for $10.

      What is it about Apple that brings the worst of Slashdot out like this?

    185. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Stuarticus · · Score: 1

      Anyone considering buying one of these is likely involved in a data intensive process of some kind and already has plenty of external storage. Didn't the old Mac Pro only have two internal hard drive slots? Those won't hold a lot of 4k video, even if they are both 3TB.

      --
      If you think someone isn't free to have a different definition of "freedom" you may be a tyrant.
    186. Re: How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      So graphics designers and nuclear physicists are supposed to be MSCEs now?

      Perfectly capable mate, I'm the go-to guy for troubleshooting anything with a network cable here. Have 20 years in the PC and networking industry and have been fixing PCs and networks for a living since 1995.I do IP networks, Active Directory (and friends), vSphere and Unix box administration for a living.

      Fact is, the Mac is far less work. Linux is far less work once you configure it, assuming your environment is supported.

      The lost time/productivity for ME (and i know how to fix shit) is not worth it. If i was having to pay someone to fix it, it would be even less so.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    187. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by smash · · Score: 1

      Upgrading CPUs were not necessary to read your mail, i can still read my email on a crappy old laptop from 2003.

      --
      I run: Windows, OS X, Linux, FreeBSD. Just because you have a hammer, doesn't mean everything is a nail.
    188. Re:How stupid is a Mac Pro Cylinder? by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      might make a nice porta-potty... there's even a hole in the top for you to shit in :)

      Where the fan is, blowing up. Takes an Apple hater to shit in a fan blowing towards him just to bash Apple.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  2. Looks like by Moses48 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The new IOS 7 UI looks an awful lot like another mobile UI I've seen without the 3d effect. We better check to see if flat images are patented or part of brand distinction.

    1. Re:Looks like by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The new UI is clean, sleek, minimal. Not at all like Apple's traditional skeuomorphic designs. More like Google's products, in fact.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you know, when android came out everyone was bitching they ripped off ios. seriously, make up your minds. there's only so many ways you can draw a button, get over it.

    3. Re:Looks like by alen · · Score: 1

      yeah
      my HTC phone in 2010 had the animated weather screen by default. long before jelly bean.

      google stole the idea as well

    4. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real difference is one performs better than the other.

    5. Re:Looks like by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      2007 WM6, also HTC.

    6. Re:Looks like by cyberchondriac · · Score: 0

      The new IOS 7 UI looks an awful lot like another mobile UI I've seen without the 3d effect. We better check to see if flat images are patented or part of brand distinction.

      You could've stopped at it just plain looks awful. The flat look, the syrupy pastel colors...this thing is designed to appeal to 14 year old girls. This is the "My Little Pony" of OSes. Barf.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    7. Re:Looks like by jerk · · Score: 1

      Yes, it seems to me that they've taken everything I like from WindowsPhone 7.x+, a little from WebOS, and maybe some from Android and combined them to form my favorite mobile OS.

    8. Re:Looks like by trcooper · · Score: 1

      I think that was the the OP's point.

    9. Re: Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And that's one of the reasons that no one should have the ability to patent software features. This includes "green buttons with a phone symbol", as presented in a recent court case.
      Note that I said "no one". One large tech company already looks like a total douche for patenting the frigging obvious and taking it to court. Lets hope they've learned something.

    10. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except...

      Phone app shows picture of old phone handset
      Clock shows an analog clock
      Mail shows a paper envelope
      Etcetera

    11. Re:Looks like by Threni · · Score: 1

      Eh? No, you must be mistaken. You swipe up on iOs to get to the notifications; you swipe down on Android. Really they're totally different.

    12. Re:Looks like by Carnivore24 · · Score: 1

      You're looking at it wrong.

    13. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have no idea what you hallucinated, but I know you couldn't imagine a more psychedelic UI than that, even on LSD.
      Maybe thatâ(TM)s because it looks "clean, sleek and minimal" to you.

      To me and everyone here it looks like they let the intern "design" the UI, and he was on LSD.
      I could come up with better one in five minutes.

      The first thing I thought when I saw it, was: âoeLOL... RIP Apple XD".
      The second thing was "Wait... Windows 8?? Really??"
      Then I started laughing again.

      Is this the new fashion? To shoot oneself in the head?
      Because I'm all for it! The less pseudo-"designer" Apple fanboy hipsters there are, the better. Then iOS, OS X, Win 8, KDE, Gnome *and* Firefox wouldn't look so shit, and would actually focus on *being useful* instead.

    14. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The real difference is one performs better than the other.

      And you base that blinding insight on how many weeks of comparing iOS 7 to Android?

    15. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be an Apple supporter. I have a Mac Mini running Tiger. I discovered that in order to upgrade to a recent OS, I actually need to purchase all the operating systems in between. That made me want to puke. Is it easy to run a pirated version of OS X? Because that's what I'm going to try next..

    16. Re: Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If your Mac Mini originally came with Tiger, you can at best only upgrade to Lion (10.7) and at worst, Leopard, depending on if it is the Core 2, Core or G5 version. And those upgrades can't be that expensive now, can they? In either case, there are no serial numbers or "genuine advantage" checks on OS X, so you can just go ahead and borrow any original OS X disc and just install it without any issues whatsoever.

    17. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You seem to be an Apple supporter. I have a Mac Mini running Tiger. I discovered that in order to upgrade to a recent OS, I actually need to purchase all the operating systems in between.

      No you don't. Tiger is 10.4. You can skip 10.5 and buy 10.6 for $20 here:

      http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC573Z/A/mac-os-x-106-snow-leopard

      If you want to go further than 10.6, that's when you have to buy one version to get another. 10.7 (Lion) and 10.8 (Mountain Lion) are sold by electronic distribution through the Mac App Store exclusively, and 10.6 was the first version of OS X to get any version of the Mac App Store, so you have to upgrade to 10.6 before you can even attempt to buy 10.7 or 10.8. That costs you $20 extra, which, IMO, isn't that terrible.

      The real annoyance is that Apple removed 10.7 from the App Store after they released 10.8. For most people this is no big deal. But 10.8 dropped support for machines without both 64-bit CPUs and 64-bit firmware, which leaves some of the early Intel Macs without an easy path to get 10.7. As your mini is old enough that it came with 10.4, it's probably in that category (*). It's still possible to buy 10.7 but you have to talk to a human and convince them to sell you a 10.7 App Store fulfillment code:

      http://www.tuaw.com/2013/01/24/mac-os-x-10-7-lion-is-still-available-for-purchase-from-apple/

      * It might be worse: if it's a PowerPC G4 mini, it's obsolete enough that you should probably forget about upgrading the OS. 10.5 was the last version of OS X that supported PowerPC processors. It's slow enough on G4 CPUs that you might find it to be a downgrade.

    18. Re: Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Will try to find or burn an install disk for something newer. It's an Intel at least. Not sure it's a Core 2 or a Core though. I don't care if an original disk costs a tenth of what an empty disk costs. I won't pay. Thanks for the info anyway!

    19. Re:Looks like by taharvey · · Score: 1

      Except well designed... sincerely. Android design aesthetic is truly awful.

    20. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe a bit more like Google's products, but I'd say it "borrows" more from Metro than Android.

    21. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So let me guess:
      From WindowsPhone - Walled garden, ugly colours, API limitations (no real multitasking, no widgets, etc.)
      From WebOS - Horizontal card interface for "multitasking" instead of vertical because you can't see as many cards at once
      From Android - Apps will have an inconsistent look and feel for the next two years due to a fundamental shift in design

      Sounds great!

    22. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, it seems to me that they've taken everything I like from WindowsPhone 7.x+, a little from WebOS, and maybe some from Android and combined them to form my favorite mobile OS.

      Voltron?

    23. Re:Looks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, that depends on the launcher you are using in Android and how you have it configured. That "new" 3D tilting UI thing is ripped directly off from a few Android launchers as well.

    24. Re:Looks like by ArcadeMan · · Score: 1

      You don't need to buy 10.7, you can go from 10.6 to 10.8.

    25. Re:Looks like by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      I actually agree that it looks like it will be more attractive to females. But of all ages, not just girls.

      And given that women are a majority of their iPhone customers, why not? Is there some rule that GUIs should be designed to appeal to men more than women? Or is it just tradition?

    26. Re:Looks like by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      What's wrong with gender neutral? And what's your source that more women use the iPhone than men? FWIW, all the guys here where I work use iPhones, including myself (I have the 5).

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    27. Re:Looks like by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      It was just my recollection of.a report. Now I look again it wasn't that there are more women users than men. It's that the split is 57% me for iPhone an 74% men for android.

      So, yeah, that justification for a more feminine GUI was wrong.

      But also I was going on the screen shots in saying this looked more feminine. Actually the UI picks up it's colour tints from the wallpaper and/or other content, so it will depend on the user.

      As a man I didn't much like the look of the screen shots, but seeing more of it, and seeing it in motion I like it more. It'll probably just take a bit of getting used to.

      Really don't like the look of the new control panel though.

    28. Re:Looks like by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Oh, and btw, having seen Jony Ives comment of it looking better because it relies on the (Swiss) grid design system, and also because of the flat graphic design think that'll make it easier for developers to make apps that fit the style. Which is good for me.

      And of course app designers often design to appeal more to one gender or the other depending on their estimation of the demographics of likely users.

      Gender neutral design? Not so easy. What a male designer and a female designer thinks is gender neutral will differ. Maybe this is gender neutral? I don't know. What do women think of it?

    29. Re:Looks like by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      Maybe I'll like it better if I see it in action and in person, but the screenshots didn't seem appealing to me. I really don't get why they want to flatten the look of the icons, really.. do people misjudge that as screen glare maybe? I think the current ones look better. Of course, I can always stay with ios6 if I want.. but seeing that (1) on the Settings icon will drive me crazy. Guess I'm a little OCD about those update notifications..

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
  3. In Addition ... by jasnw · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Things that caught my eye were (1) iCloud keychain to allow better mobile-system tracking of passwords within the iOS and OS X framework, (2) iBooks on Mac (FINALLY!), (3) some expanded multitasking in iOS 7 (although it's not clear if it's really extended capabilities over iOS 6 or just a spiffier UI), and (4) Airdrop from within iOS 7 to nearby devices. The new Mac Pro line looks sharp, and I definitely lust for one even if I don't need one.

    1. Re:In Addition ... by MrEricSir · · Score: 4, Interesting

      And they finally dropped the strange 8-tab maximum on Mobile Safari!

      --
      There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
    2. Re:In Addition ... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      iCloud Keychain needed to happen. Didn't MobileMe subscribers have that functionality in the past? In any case it is most welcome news.

      iCloud iWork sounds interesting... but what's really missing from iWork is document sharing along the lines of Dropbox or Google Drive, at least if it's supposed to be more than just a toy. I suppose that could be part of the updates, but I didn't see anything along those lines mentioned in Engadget's live blog. Even for home use, though - I occasionally want to share documents with my wife. The current "email it to her" solution is straight out of 1995...

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    3. Re:In Addition ... by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      The iCloud keychain really needs to be cross platform. Any tool like this really does.

    4. Re:In Addition ... by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      iCloud Keychain needed to happen. Didn't MobileMe subscribers have that functionality in the past? In any case it is most welcome news.

      iCloud iWork sounds interesting... but what's really missing from iWork is document sharing along the lines of Dropbox or Google Drive, at least if it's supposed to be more than just a toy. I suppose that could be part of the updates, but I didn't see anything along those lines mentioned in Engadget's live blog. Even for home use, though - I occasionally want to share documents with my wife. The current "email it to her" solution is straight out of 1995...

      What MobileMe had, this new Keychain is that on steroids. If you want something to compare it to, think Dashlane, which I installed after seeing David Pogue's gushing review of it on the NYTimes.

    5. Re:In Addition ... by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      The iCloud keychain really needs to be cross platform. Any tool like this really does.

      Since I doubt that's going to happen, I can suggest Dashlane for those who want that sort of thing now. It's Windows/Mac/IOS/Android compatible. although if you want device syncage, you'll have to buy a subscription.

    6. Re:In Addition ... by Nerdfest · · Score: 2

      Sure, so should iMessage, They promised FaceTime would be, iCloud, etc. That wouldn't lock you into Apple's devices. Never buy a device that has to try to force you to stay instead of making you *want* to stay.

    7. Re:In Addition ... by noh8rz10 · · Score: 1

      Things that caught my eye were (1) iCloud keychain to allow better mobile-system tracking of passwords by NSA Project PRISM ...

      ftfy!

    8. Re:In Addition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Air Drop between IPad's could be incredibly handy.

    9. Re:In Addition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just use LastPass instead.

    10. Re:In Addition ... by vlueboy · · Score: 1

      And they finally dropped the strange 8-tab maximum on Mobile Safari!

      You just had to remind me of my annoying 4-tab max in the stock Android browser for Froyo. The Phone is only two years old, and I doubt it's a max based on free ram. Dolphin and Opera certainly don't stop at 4. Browsing weather + slashdot + wikipedia eats 3 tabs and ensures I must go closing tabs pretty quickly when I want to actually visit a site.

      Pressing the hardware "escape" button on the phone triggers back-to-previous-page OR exit-tab-AND-return-to-shell depending on your browsing session. Actual deterministic closing happens through a preview-tab picker GUI of abysmal design. It's meant to switch windows rather than closing, and you must hit the lilliputian x on the top right. 80% of the time you inadvertently return to the wrong tab and have to start over. Why couldn't they add a "Close" option via long-press? That's Froyo, btw, so it's ~1/5 android phones still out there, AND there are no over the air upgrades away from that. I don't like apple's hold on your hardware, but IOS will cascade to everyone and the 8-tab limit, though it's not as painful as Froyo's 4 tab one.

    11. Re:In Addition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they bring back the start menu an OS cannot be successful without it

    12. Re:In Addition ... by fermion · · Score: 2
      The one thing apple did to screw up my workflow was getting rid of the key chain and disk on the online side. Everyone complained about the $100 a year for mac.com(I mean really, less that $10 bucks a month were enough to make everyone crazy, what freetards) but for me it meant my machines were interchangeable and a crash was not going to mean I lost anything important. icloud sucks in comparison and is not yet worth the money they want for it. It is really just a way to sell music.

      If keychain integration is back in, then icloud is back on the way to being a decent product.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    13. Re:In Addition ... by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      iBooks on Mac (FINALLY!)

      It's still pretty pathetic - where you were previously locked into one OS with your purchases, you're now locked into two. When both major competitors (Kindle, Play Books) also offer web-based readers that work on any platform with a reasonably up-to-date browser, there is really no comparison.

    14. Re:In Addition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is cross-platform, within the platforms covered by the NSA's alliance of cloud vendors. PRISM can read your passwords from iCloud's keychain and cross-reference them in its report with whatever you've stored in any other participating service.

    15. Re:In Addition ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed. I'm pretty firmly soaked into Apple's ecosystem (2 iPhones, 2 iPads, 3 Macs, lots of app purchase), but I'll never buy anything willingly from iBooks in its current state, not because of any ideological issues but simply because the lack of cross-platform support means that Apple's service is strictly inferior to Amazon's. I've lost access to eBooks before due to platform abandonment. Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice....

    16. Re:In Addition ... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      opera mobile works better, in my limited experience

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    17. Re:In Addition ... by RR · · Score: 1

      opera mobile works better, in my limited experience

      Not anymore! Since they decided to quit developing their own browser engine, the new Opera runs quite poorly. Especially on older/cheaper hardware, which used to be their strong suite.

      --
      Have a nice time.
    18. Re:In Addition ... by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      that's too bad. it doesn't affect me anymore, since i've moved away from android.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    19. Re:In Addition ... by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      lastpass is pretty good, and a value at 20 bucks a year

    20. Re:In Addition ... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      some expanded multitasking in iOS 7 (although it's not clear if it's really extended capabilities over iOS 6 or just a spiffier UI)

      I'm pretty sure it's just a UI redesign. There's no reason why Apple would change their multitasking API. The exact same justifications for it apply now as 2 years ago when they introduced it.

    21. Re:In Addition ... by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      I'm pretty sure it's just a UI redesign. There's no reason why Apple would change their multitasking API. The exact same justifications for it apply now as 2 years ago when they introduced it.

      1. iOS has been a full Unix implementation all the time, so no _capabilities_ needed to be added, ever.
      2. iOS runs on a device with severe power limitations, so given a choice of giving apps the capability of running in the background and giving users decent battery life, battery life is more important.
      3. If you watched the keynote, _any_ app can now run in the background all the time, but iOS uses a very simple and clever mechanism to avoid wasting CPU time: Background time is limited depending on how much the user _actively_ uses the app in the foreground. If the user is on facebook for eight hours every day of their (sad) life, it doesn't hurt much allowing it to run in the background as well. If I use a weather app once in the morning for two minutes and never again all day, it's not allowed much CPU time running in the background.

    22. Re:In Addition ... by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the update. Haven't seen the keynote yet. Maybe tomorrow.

      But what you're describing seems simply an addition to the existing multitasking system. What it's not is changing it to unlimited multitasking, as other mobile OSs do. And as you point out the reason is to ensure background apps can't kill battery life.

  4. So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Once again Apple absolutely *schools* Google and Microsoft on how to design software. If you own stock in either of those companies, I'd advise you get on the phone and sell it NOW before the true impact of these announcements take hold.

    1. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I wouldn't sell the stock, I would simply give it away -- just as all three of the companies you mentioned give away your private details and content to the NSA.
       
        -- Ethanol-fueled

    2. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Berkyjay · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Two words: Apple Maps.

    3. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      On the contrary, Apple didn't really show anything very new here. Maybe the new Mac, but iOS 7 in particular is just an incremental upgrade with no big headline features like they have always had in the past.

      Apple seems to have lost its spark, at a time when its rivals are releasing some really new and interesting stuff.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      What is the best maps app on the planet, Alex

    5. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      Wait until google releases the background apps get more cycles near usage time as a 'new and interesting' feature.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    6. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      ...I'd advise you get on the phone and sell it NOW...

      You trade on the phone?!...I wish I would have unloaded Zeppelin while I still could.

    7. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by gtall · · Score: 0

      Name one new interesting piece of computing crap Apple's rivals have introduced recently?

    8. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Berkyjay · · Score: 2

      Oh sorry, we were looking for Google Maps.....that's GOOGLE maps.

    9. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly! As evidenced by that earth-moving announcement, investors were so utterly FLOORED by the news, they were delirious from rage and depression over all their stocks losing all their value that they couldn't even find their way home!

    10. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      Even worse the ONE feature i was really looking for (Airdrop), is iphone 5 or above. I fucking hate that my 4S is the only device I have with a cellular connection and i cant share anything with it. Its a tiny little island of 'fuck you'. Definitely going ot android after this shit show.

      --
      Good-bye
    11. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Holi · · Score: 1

      I am sorry but you are the weakest link.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    12. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by h4rr4r · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Which is why their 93% of devices run the latest OS made me laugh. It is not the latest OS if it is missing the stuff people care about.

    13. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by immaterial · · Score: 1

      There isn't that much with the Maps software itself, though, is there? In fact, it is quite smooth and responsive. It was Apple's occasionally less-than-accurate maps database and very sparse points-of-interest database that seems to be the problem.

    14. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Which is the same thing people said when iOS 6, iOS 5, iOS 4, iOS 3, and iOS 2 debuted.

      Showing that people miss the fucking point: Apple is not about massive, sweeping changes for the sake of new. Apple iterates and increments to 'perfect' their design.

      You may not LIKE the way they design, but you can't claim to be surprised by it if you've ever actually looked at how they release products.

    15. Re: So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cavities. That's right, after Ginger Bread, Ice Cream Sandwich and Jelly Bean, Google gave us cavities.

    16. Re: So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod the parent as +5 please.
      It's true that there is nothing exciting in this IOS7 update - it's likely the biggest iPhone news of all.

    17. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really? I mean, plenty of people like android, and if you want to switch, then by all means go ahead and switch.
      But if your main reason for switching is software upgrade and compatibility with old phones you are going to be
      a sad man. Name 1 Android phone released 2 years ago that is getting google's latest android version released
      this year at all, even if it is missing one feature?

    18. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by tlhIngan · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, Apple didn't really show anything very new here. Maybe the new Mac, but iOS 7 in particular is just an incremental upgrade with no big headline features like they have always had in the past.

      Well, given it's a DEVELOPER conference, it should be compared to Google I/O. Which as I recall, was also pretty much a yawner this year.

      About the only interesting things was an all-day ultrabook with 9-12 hours of battery life. Which for Apple, tends to be fairly spot on - 8-14+ hours can be expected (yes, quite a few people seem to be able to exceed the battery life estimates, quite easily in fact.). The danged thing has more battery life than an iPad!

      For iOS 7, the fact that they are cramming in full multitasking should be VERY interesting, because generally the argument against is developers suck - they cannot write battery efficient code (that timer coalescing on OS X? It's actually very important and something I've personally done on other embedded OSes. It's not an easy job, and finding a pesky thread that wakss up every 100ms took weeks). I'm not entirely sure how it'll work - after all, if you have a game running, in the background, how does the OS handle it? (Most OSes don't and it spins away consuming cycles).

      The new, "flatter" look is kinda impressive. I first thought they would do a Windows with the ultra flat plain shaded thing, but no, it's actually aesthetically pleasing. At least Apple didn't copy the fugly Android clock with the bolded hour.

    19. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by spire3661 · · Score: 1

      I want more file freedom. Right now getting arbitrary data onto a stock iOS devices without infrastructure is a chore. I was hoping AirDrop would help ease some of that. Now that its clear that Im not getting it, I'm going to jump ship. Its a long standing issue i have had. The iphone 5 or better requirement for something so trivial is really what bugs me the most. This was my first iOS device and probably my last. What is the problem?

      --
      Good-bye
    20. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Such as? All the platforms are fairly incremental at this point. There's nothing wrong with that.

    21. Re: So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Cavities. That's right, after Ginger Bread, Ice Cream Sandwich and Jelly Bean, Google gave us cavities.

      LOL :-) I can see it now Google Android 5.0 'Caries'...

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    22. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Clsid · · Score: 1

      You've got to be kidding. What would you call the Mac Pro? Sure, the Macbook and OSX are incremental upgrades, but iOS packs a lot of new stuff now. If you fail to realize that you must be either getting old or you have lost your ability to enjoy new technology, no matter where it comes from.

    23. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, Apple didn't really show anything very new here. Maybe the new Mac, but iOS 7 in particular is just an incremental upgrade with no big headline features like they have always had in the past.

      So for years you complained about "no real multitasking" - now that its here, it's not even worth a mention.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    24. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      It isn't proper multitasking, just an updated interface for the crippled stuff they always had.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    25. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      It isn't proper multitasking, just an updated interface for the crippled stuff they always had.

      False. An updated interface and full multitasking for all apps.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    26. Re:So long lamedroid and windows mobilame. by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, Apple didn't really show anything very new here. Maybe the new Mac, but iOS 7 in particular is just an incremental upgrade with no big headline features like they have always had in the past.

      Apple seems to have lost its spark, at a time when its rivals are releasing some really new and interesting stuff.

      On the other hand, you seem to have not the slightest clue what Apple's design goals are. Some companies design phones for people who think that having a bigger phone indicates you have a bigger dick, and actually think that's important. Apple makes iOS more and more invisible. It's not _supposed_ to be what you call "new and interesting". Once you grow up you don't care about "new and interesting" anymore.

  5. OMG Flat Icons! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Jizzed in my pants.....

  6. Seriously? Is this all they got? by DumbMarketingGuy · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I admit I was not one of those doom-mongers who predicted Apple's demise after the death of Steve Jobs. But it has to be said, this is a very poor show. Where is the next innovative product that will rub Microsoft's face in its own mediocrity? Where is the next iPad?

    The AAPL stock price tells a sorry tale. Not long ago there was talk of it hitting $1000, now look at it.

    This Tim Cook guy seems to lack the charisma of Steve Jobs. He doesn't have a reality distortion field. Perhaps he should consider at least wearing a black turtleneck?

    As a tech-savvy geek who has been reading slashdot since the very early days (as can be seen from my very low UID) - I know my opinions on this subject should be taken very seriously.

    Apple - please get your act together.

    1. Re:Seriously? Is this all they got? by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      This was clearly an announcement of a return to the Mac. They want to sell more laptops, AppleTVs and wifi routers.

      The AppleTV integration just turned your laptop or mac mini into a game system btw. That may very well be the sleeper feature of the whole announcement.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    2. Re:Seriously? Is this all they got? by mlts · · Score: 1

      Apple has a product right under their nose. Right now they have tipped their hat to some auto makers, but in reality, they need to make a 1 DIN audio head with a fold-out screen that connects to the vehicle's CANbus and can offer functions regardless of what make the car is.

      The car audio industry is similar to how cellphones were before smartphones got mainstream adoption. Heck, even thieves don't bother stealing car radios these days. Apple could easily send Alpine, Kenwood, and Sony running for the hills if they released a decent audio unit and got car makers to install it from the factory.

    3. Re:Seriously? Is this all they got? by h4rr4r · · Score: 1

      How is that going to work?
      How is the lag not going to be totally unacceptable?

      Maybe it will work for angry birds, but you can forget real game system performance.

    4. Re:Seriously? Is this all they got? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Where is the next innovative product that will rub Microsoft's face in its own mediocrity? Where is the next iPad?

      iPad was a whole new product category, and it was only introduced 3 years ago. You can't expect new categories every year, only new products. And there's several of those!

      But clearly you're scraping the bottom of the barrel in your desire to attack Apple. The CEO clothes? This isn't a girlie glamour and celeb magazine.

  7. New Pool How many patents do they infringe ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Place your bets. How many companies and patent holdings will come forward in the next year claiming patent infringement ? LOL

  8. tabs in the Finder window? by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    For those of us NOT on the Mac bandwagon, what's Finder?

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by DumbMarketingGuy · · Score: 1, Funny

      Finder is sort of like Norton Utilities for the Mac.

    2. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by j_l_cgull · · Score: 4, Informative

      Windows Explorer for Mac OS X.

    3. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by AnotherShep · · Score: 5, Funny

      Explorer in Windows or one of a million shitty things that sort of work in Linux.

    4. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's the default file Navigator, like Explorer for Windows, Nautilus for GNOME, or Dolphin in KDE.

    5. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Windows Explorer

    6. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the Mac analogue of Windows Explorer.

    7. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For those of us NOT on the Mac bandwagon, what's Finder?

      OSX equivalent of explorer.exe .. Basically the file system browser.

    8. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mac equivalent of Windows Explorer

    9. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by DJCouchyCouch · · Score: 2

      If only there was a way to google it!

    10. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Careful, it doesn't take much to raise the ire of the mac fanboi. Ignorance of their religion is heresy.

    11. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by zerosomething · · Score: 2

      The Finder is the windowing aspect of the OS. It's what the windowing system of NeXTSTEP has become.

      --
      It all starts at 0
    12. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Malc · · Score: 1

      I'd be happy with that if I could browse a Windows-based file share at the same speed as Windows Explorer. Right now I can't get it to list the files within an hour of a folder on a build server (about 4,000 files). One of the few things that makes me use Windows... it's often faster to boot Windows in VMWare and shut it down again than it is to use Finder.

      Bonus points if I could natively use Windows UNC paths from those people still stuck on Windows without adding "smb:" and having to swap all the back slashes for forward slashes.

    13. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think MS is going to switch to slashes anytime soon. Almost like they stick with backward slashes out of principle. Backwards, no?

      Isn't is a problem with Windows if it take so long to load a list of files? If they made the API freely available, then the SAMBA team wouldn't have to backward engineer it. If they didn't keep changing it, then the SAMBA group wouldn't have to keep chasing Microsoft.

    14. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      Bonus points if I could natively use Windows UNC paths from those people still stuck on Windows without adding "smb:"

      There's nothing at all wrong with standardizing on URI. Windows even has a structure in place for adding URI's for other applications, but they still don't offer SMB built-in.

    15. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      P.S. What did you mean by "list the files within an hour of a folder?" This sounds like a job for find in the Terminal, but I really can't tell what you're saying.

    16. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Noughmad · · Score: 2

      Except that Dolphin has tabs, and its predecessor Konqueror had tabs for as long as I remember. Windows explorer still doesn't.

      --
      PlusFive Slashdot reader for Android. Can post comments.
    17. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Every single file manager is better than the piece of shit that is Finder. Explorer isn't even as shit as Finder is. Words fail to describe how much of a abortion Finder is.

    18. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by AnotherShep · · Score: 1

      That's nice!

    19. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Malc · · Score: 1

      Lots of threads on the internet like this: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2172049?start=0&tstart=0

      Very few successful solutions. And for those suggesting the use of a Terminal, even that is slower than Windows Explorer if I'm browsing a Windows share in another office.

    20. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      If your server is linux-based, you can run netatalk on it. Works fairly nicely for me at home.

    21. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      It's the quite-cleverly-named equivalent of explorer.

      You see, with the "Finder" you find things, whereas with "Explorer" you have no fucking idea where you are - and you're just exploring.

      It's pretty limited in some respects compared to explorer, but in other respects it's much nicer. Also in common with explorer it looks after drawing the desktop and handling the dock (the equivalent of the taskbar in windows).

      And again in common with Explorer it will occasionally hang. However, unlike in windows, you can get to a bash prompt and type "killall Finder", which will kill the process. Something inside OSX, probably launchd, will automatically relaunch it for you.

    22. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      It's less than Windows Explorer, even. It's the only file manager I know of that doesn't provide any way to copy the current opened path to the clipboard.

      (yes, I know about drag-to-terminal)

    23. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      Lots of threads on the internet like this: https://discussions.apple.com/thread/2172049?start=0&tstart=0

      Which says:

      Finder is slow at listing the directory content of the shares The problem only occurs in Apple Finder. When I do "ls" from Terminal the directory listing displays in the same moment I hit enter.

      so either the Finder is assuming some file system operations are always going to be fast when they're not fast over SMB, or smbfs needs to figure out how to make whatever the Finder's doing faster, or some combination of the two. I could certainly imagine the first of those being true (the stuff above UNIX has been known to implicitly assume that file system operations are cheap, when they might not be cheap for remote file systems).

    24. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      I could certainly imagine the first of those being true (the stuff above UNIX has been known to implicitly assume that file system operations are cheap, when they might not be cheap for remote file systems).

      Some of the stuff above UNIX was significantly redone in Snow Leopard or Lion or both to provide new APIs that do fewer system calls to get file system information, and I think the Finder was changed to use that, so things may have improved somewhat.

      There were also VFS-layer changes in Lion to allow system calls to make file system requests that bundle multiple operations into one, so that an open/create could be done in a single VFS-layer call, allowing a single over-the-wire call to be made.

      The cited discussion stated with a post from somebody running Snow Leopard (10.6.1); I don't remember whether the stuff above UNIX was changed in Snow Leopard or not (yes, I know, Snow Leopard was mainly a performance release, but that doesn't mean no significant performance changes were made after that), but the VFS-layer changes were in Lion, so there could have been some improvements post-Snow Leopard.

    25. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by grouchomarxist · · Score: 1

      No, the Finder is the file manager.

    26. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by ameen.ross · · Score: 1

      Not a Windows person, but in Windows you can do + + ESC to open task manager and then click to kill the offending process. Explorer will also restart automatically.

      --
      $(echo cm0gLXJmIC8= | base64 --decode)
    27. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by ameen.ross · · Score: 1

      <CTRL> + <SHIFT> + ESC

      --
      $(echo cm0gLXJmIC8= | base64 --decode)
    28. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know, you're quite right, but in OSX I can ssh in from another machine - or even from my iPod - and kill it that way. Of course, I'd far prefer it if the damn thing didn't fuck out in the first place, but there you are.

    29. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Malc · · Score: 1

      I'm running Lion. The performance is terrible.

    30. Re:tabs in the Finder window? by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1

      I'm running Lion. The performance is terrible.

      A network trace and the output of "sudo fs_usage -w -f {pid of Finder}" while it's trying to show the contents of the directory might be interesting. Is the performance terrible for ls, or just for the Finder?

  9. new mac pro misses in a few areas by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    I hope it's just more then one PCI-e X4 link power the 6 TB ports.

    Flash storage sounds cool but at what cost? and size?

    Dual GPU in a small case like that?

    How will the dual GPU be hooked up I hope at least X8 X8 but can be as bad as X16 link split to 2 X8 X8 and a X4 for TB.

    1. Re: new mac pro misses in a few areas by Wovel · · Score: 1

      The specs are up on Apples site now. The 6 ports are on 3 separate TB controllers.

  10. Windriod Phone? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Pretty much looks like a cross between Windows Phone and Android now, moreso the former.

    Though the OS is at least someone distinguishable from those - the Weather app you could put side by side with Yahoo Weather and no one would be able to tell you which was which.

    1. Re:Windriod Phone? by jerk · · Score: 1

      I'm all for it. Windows Phone is a great-looking OS (I think it looks better than any version of Android or iOS 6.x) with poor support from developers. Also, the new Yahoo Weather app is beautiful and has become my go-to weather app almost purely for aesthetics (and it doesn't hurt that they now use Weather Underground as a source for data.)

  11. My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

    Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

    1. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well-known, as in Walmart?

      Actually the lesson I take is there there are whole bunch of technical guys who have zero aesthetic appreciation. A UNIX dev laptop which doesn't flex when you lift it, has a nice screen and doesn't have stickers all over it. As a special bonus, all the hardware is properly working, and the OS can render fonts without looking like ass.

    2. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're a "freelancer" and working on a 8600, you must be very thin.

    3. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      An oldie but a goodie. Nice.

    4. Re:My Mac Sucks by edmudama · · Score: 1

      And... you got trolled, hard.

      --
      More data, damnit!
    5. Re:My Mac Sucks by Shadowmist · · Score: 0

      I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a 8600/300 w/64 Megs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Pentium Pro 200 running NT 4, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

      In addition, during this file transfer, Netscape will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

      I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My 486/66 with 8 megs of ram runs faster than this 300 mhz machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

      Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

      An 8600? your standard for Macs is something from the pre-Jobs Stone Age? Get a Mac from this century and try again. I'll just consider this a flamebait post.

    6. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      see also: why do people use a pile of shit OS like Windows 8?)

      Maybe it's hipsters using it ironically?

    7. Re:My Mac Sucks by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      You sir, win one free Internet.

      Well played, +1.

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    8. Re:My Mac Sucks by RatBastard · · Score: 2

      You might want to pull that fishhook out of your mouth.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    9. Re:My Mac Sucks by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      9/10, would read again.

    10. Re:My Mac Sucks by burning_plastic · · Score: 1

      Yay! Haven't see this one posted for a long time ;->

    11. Re:My Mac Sucks by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Let me guess. Your running Mac OS 8.5 or worse 8.6 right? Yeah, that was at the height of Scully's tenure. 7.5 was really the last great classic Mac OS (9.2 was okay but needed a fast CPU and too much RAM).

      Anyways, downgrade to 7.5 and watch that baby fly. It'll feel like a whole new machine.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    12. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Woooooosh!

    13. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks, man, I hadn't seen this one in a long time.

    14. Re:My Mac Sucks by styrotech · · Score: 1

      Wow that is really slow! It took 15yrs for your post to show up :)

    15. Re:My Mac Sucks by unrtst · · Score: 1

      An 8600? your standard for Macs is something from the pre-Jobs Stone Age? Get a Mac from this century and try again. I'll just consider this a flamebait post.

      Ok, I know the GP was just a funny old repost, and your reply is either ignorant or meant to be ironic or some such, but...
      Steve Jobs was brought back on as CEO of Apple in 1997.
      The Power Macintosh 8600 was released in 1997, and the 300 Mhz version came out in 1998.
      Pre-Jobs stone age would be pre-Apple, unless you forgot to include Post-Jobs-Apple-First-Time and Pre-Jobs-Apple-Second-Time, and that would only apply if the GP said he had an 8500 (at the latest).

    16. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you serious? Have you tried using Vista to copy a file recently? I waited 20 seconds for a 1.4 KB file to copy! Can you imagine if I had tried to drag a 17 MB file? Seriously, I think you're just full of BS trying to come up with bad things to say about MAC, or you have a failing hard drive. Not only that, what do you expect with only 64 MB of RAM? Or did you mean 64 GB? If by "8600" you're referring to the Radeon 8600M graphics chip, that's not really relevant to copying a file. If you're just talking about video memory on your graphics chip, 64 MB is pretty tight, and I didn't even think they made one with that little memory, but it's still irrelevant to how fast a file copies because the video processor doesn't constrain the performance of the computations needed to perform the copy: it's IO constrained, so if anything you've just got a faulty hard drive, or you don't know what you're talking about. I also don't think any MAC that had a Radeon 8600 series GPU supported 64 GB of RAM, so I'm guessing you're getting system memory confused with video memory. They're not the same thing. You can't use video memory when you're copying a file! And there's absolutely NO WAY a 486 is going to run faster than your MAC. The 486 was from the 1990s. The micro controller in your mouse probably runs faster than it does, which tells me you're either very uninformed, or just hate MAC for its success. You should also upgrade your browser if you're still using Netscape. Firefox is better. You can also you Safari which is already on your MAC.

    17. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Epic WHOOSH

    18. Re:My Mac Sucks by Clsid · · Score: 1

      Well, I don't know about you but I can do better even with my "inferior" 8100. Remember, Macs will always beat PCs because of the SCSI drives. Plus I have a Jaz drive connected to mine and it works wonders at 1000 MB per disk. Sometimes I do have to fiddle with scratch disks and what not, plus the ocassional bomb icon from MacOS 8, but hey, I bet your desktop doesn't look as pretty as mine. Oh, and before I forget, I can totally game here with Marathon, Warcraft 2 and SimCity 2000.

    19. Re:My Mac Sucks by Clsid · · Score: 1

      He made a joke in case you fail to realize it.

    20. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      doesn't flex with you lift it but shatters the circuit boards when you put it down.

    21. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      are you kidding me that worth at least 5 free internets

    22. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      May I type "Woooosh" on my 486/sx with 2 megs of ram and turbo button fully depressed.

    23. Re:My Mac Sucks by Shadowmist · · Score: 1

      The 8600 was a design relic of of the Sculley years. It was one of a bunch of beige pro-level Macs that were being slaughtered by the Mac clones put out by Power Computing et. al. You really aren't seeing the Jobs era of design until the IMac and the Blue and White G3 era.

    24. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sculley was gone 4 years when it was introduced so that shows how much Apple lost their way

    25. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Scully or Joe Morgan?

    26. Re:My Mac Sucks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Let me guess. Your running Mac OS 8.5 or worse 8.6 right? Yeah, that was at the height of Scully's tenure. 7.5 was really the last great classic Mac OS

      Huh? Scully left in 1993, before System 7.5 was even finished. Michael Spindler oversaw the development of PowerPC and Copland.

  12. Summary fail by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs,

    Um....
    Macs have supported multiple displays for something like 20 years. They've supported HDTVs since DVI-HDMI adapters were invented. The news here is that OSX Mavericks has significantly improved multi-monitor management, such as the ability to have a menu bar and dock on all screens simultaneously and new window grouping features.

    I know it's hip to complain about how the editors can do basic fact checking, but this is ridiculous.

    1. Re:Summary fail by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      This is a unified display, not spanned or mirrored. Take two displays and treat them like one.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  13. Is it me by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Is it me or is iOS 7 a total rip-off of Android and Google's apps? Same flat style icons, same "cards", similar notifications and on-going events, similar features etc,

    I'm just... surprised.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Is it me by alen · · Score: 2

      except for the wifi/bluetooth and the other radio buttons, these have been on IOS for years in the multi tasking bar
      app store has had cards for at least a year now if not longer

      they got rid of scott forestall last year and he was the one who refused any changes to IOS. once they got rid of him it was pretty easy to make the changes

    2. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Kinda how like when Android came out it was supposed to be a ripoff of IOS? Round and round we go.....

    3. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it me or is Linux just a total rip-off of numerous versions of UNIX?

    4. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      except for the wifi/bluetooth and the other radio buttons, these have been on IOS for years in the multi tasking bar
      app store has had cards for at least a year now if not longer

      they got rid of scott forestall last year and he was the one who refused any changes to IOS. once they got rid of him it was pretty easy to make the changes

      hmm. are you really under the impression that they were on IOS first?

    5. Re:Is it me by alen · · Score: 2

      and if they weren't, who cares

      original android was for a blackberry rip off phone. after the iphone came out google had to redesign a lot of it for touchscreens.

      this is how change works. someone comes out with something, someone else copies it and ads their own twist. rinse, cycle, repeat

    6. Re:Is it me by jerk · · Score: 1

      I think it's more similar to Windows Phone (which I think is the most aesthetically pleasing OS available on mobile.) The only thing that's kept me from switching to WP from iOS is the lack of apps and accessories. I bought a Windows Phone 7.5 handset, which I still have, but haven't used it for more than a month at a time (mail was the deal killer for me.)

    7. Re: Is it me by Wovel · · Score: 1

      It's just you seeing what you want to see.

    8. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is it me or is iOS 7 a total rip-off of Android and Google's apps?

      Yeah, it is just you.

    9. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      original android was for a blackberry rip off phone. after the iphone came out google had to redesign a lot of it for touchscreens.

      Just FYI: you don't have any clue what you're talking about.

    10. Re:Is it me by JayWilmont · · Score: 1

      Cards? Those aren't (originally) an Android thing, they were a Palm webOS thing.

    11. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes. iOS is a complete rip-off of Android. That's just exactly right.

    12. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just standardizing the interfaces to the Boundless Informant.

    13. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep, flat is fashionable. But that's just the *style*. The *design* is quite different from Win8 or Android - that is, the thought process behind the experience. When and where they've used context layering, what animations communicate, the relationship between 'screens' and the viewport, etc. I'd say it was closer to (but more developed than) Google, and very different from Metro.

      The parallax effect seems like a bit of a gimmick, albeit one that extends from the same premise as the other new design decisions. The visual layering and nesting is probably the most interesting choice.

    14. Re:Is it me by MindlessAutomata · · Score: 1

      I think they're noting it simply because the accusation is that Google lifts from Apple, and now it's looking more and more like the pendulum is swinging the other way.

    15. Re:Is it me by makomk · · Score: 1

      It's not just you. Amongst other things the lock screen looks almost identical to Android's at a glance, right down to the default choice of wallpaper. When I first saw a photo of it, I had to double-check it wasn't some tweaked variant of the Android UI, it's that similar.

    16. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now Apple can sue everyone for copying their new design.

    17. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the iPhone interface that Jon Ive would have had from the beginning. He railed hard against Scott Forestall's skeumorphic version with it's faux leather, and stitching. Unfortunately Forestall won, and he was in charge of the iOS look and feel from the get go.

      After the Maps debacle, Forestall got canned and Jon Ive got put in charge of the look and feel. This is new look and feel for the iOS may look similar to what you see on Win8 and Android, but it has always been Ive's vision of how it should be. If you know anything about his design bias, it has always been toward simplicity and clean lines, and away from wasted space.

    18. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but then again so is Metro... I guess that's just where we're headed right now. 3D buttons ruled the 90s, liquid themes with shadows and highlights ruled the 2000s, now I guess it's all about flat.

    19. Re:Is it me by ikaruga · · Score: 0

      Apple has done nothing for iOS but mostly rip off Android since iOS3.

    20. Re:Is it me by taharvey · · Score: 1

      It is just you. I agree with the other commenter that you are seeing what you want to see.

      But, there is a general trend away from skeuomorphic design and towards a modern design ethos. This can be seen with iOS, android, window mobile 8. Both have a place. Apple created the modern mobile device market, and used skeuomorphic design broadly to ease people into a new environment in a familiar way. It was a very appropriate approach, and had its time and place. However a modernist approach can convey more information than skeuomorphic design, which can be limited by it physical paradigm.

      One can argue that the market transition has occurred, and moving to more functional design concepts can occur without losing the market behind. But I don't see any copying here, per se other than modern design is the current fashion. But arguably Jony Ive is the most iconic design in driving modern computer design for the last decade, so it should be no surprise that his UI design follow his fashion, as is everyone else's.

      But frankly Android? No. A touch of WIndows mobile? Maybe. However, where windows mobile went extremely flat, losing most visual cues, iOS was highly skeuomorphic at the other end of the spectrum. iOS has a modern semi-flat design that still maintains a lot of visual cues, while leaving behind the skeuomorphic trimmings. But, from what I've seen, Windows mobile should commended for their unique approach, android has never been much more than a poor copy of iOS, with poor design that look like it was made by guy who'd rather be using a command line. And Samsung, who really owns the Android market, their TouchWiz UI design is mind-blowingly awful.

    21. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, android can look in a lot of different ways, but I definitely got some android ICS-vibes from the pictures.

    22. Re:Is it me by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      this is how change works. someone comes out with something, someone else copies it and ads their own twist. rinse, cycle, repeat

      Or in Apple's case, sue.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    23. Re:Is it me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Google's app design team has explicitly tried to emulate the design principles that made Apple's products successful. Those same principles apply to updating iOS. All of the mobile operating systems ultimately converge--Android's shoddy and juvenile design has evolved into something mostly mature and professional, which has involved removing a lot of clutter.

      Apple hasn't fundamentally changed anything, really. Going with a lighter weight to the same Helvetica Neue typeface they've used for years and a simplification of the textures they used while simplifying icon artwork has a flavor of WP8 to it, but it's not text and tile driven. The only thing that's Android-like about the new design is that Apple has de-cluttered its own design just as Google decluttered its own last year. They're still distinct aesthetic flavors. Unless you considered Android simply a de-glossed iOS, then they're still what they were before.

      Android took a lot from iOS over the years, with the common claim that it just makes sense to do it. Why wouldn't other OSes do the same when it makes sense?

      There aren't many other directions to go that aren't purely gimmicks. Everything still looks and feels very Apple, except for that awful new control center, which hopefully will be revisited before the final build. Even the candy colors have come and gone over the years in Apple's products.

    24. Re:Is it me by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      Is it me or is iOS 7 a total rip-off of Android and Google's apps?

      It's just you.

  14. Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 4, Insightful

    We waited a half hour after the end of the keynote for this terrible summary, really? Multiple-monitor support has been in the Mac OS since 1987; the summary doesn't make it even reportedly clear that today's announcement was about (much-needed, IMO) new features for said ability. And "including hdtvs"? Again, this has been possible since hdtvs came into existence (via hdmi out or div->hdmi adapters). The new feature here is being able to use an airplay-cable device as a secondary display.

    1. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      "Reportedly" -> "Remotely"

      Now I'm angry iOS 7 doesn't include read-your-mind autocorrect.

    2. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We waited a half hour after the end of the keynote for this terrible summary, really? Multiple-monitor support has been in the Mac OS since 1987; the summary doesn't make it even reportedly clear that today's announcement was about (much-needed, IMO) new features for said ability. And "including hdtvs"? Again, this has been possible since hdtvs came into existence (via hdmi out or div->hdmi adapters). The new feature here is being able to use an airplay-cable device as a secondary display.

      OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.

    3. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by RobbieCrash · · Score: 1

      But previously your dock and top menu bar were only available on your main monitor; now they move to whichever monitor you're working on.

      Also previously entering fullscreen mode in any app impacted the other monitor somehow; that is no-longer the case either.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    4. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That's something they fucked up a few years ago with OS X 10.7 and people have been howling about it ever since (and is exactly why I inserted the "(much-needed, IMO)" into my post). Nonetheless, that wasn't so much an issue of multi-monitor support as dumbass full-screen "feature" support; it could be mostly avoided by just maximizing your windows instead of using full-screen. The biggest issue with their multi-monitor support, IMO, was having the menu bar on only one screen. It's been that way forever and has always driven me crazy.

      I'm glad to see they're finally fixing all of these issues - which is exactly why I was disappointed with the shitty summary saying "Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs!"

    5. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Exactly. The summary didn't list any of the actual new features; it simply said "Macs will now support multiple displays," which is a ludicrous statement.

    6. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by RobbieCrash · · Score: 2

      Maybe it's just ridiculous nerd pedanticism, previously they allowed it; with the new version they actually support it.

      --
      Keep on knockin'
      https://robbiecrash.me
    7. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by ducomputergeek · · Score: 1

      Really, because I just make my XCode panel as big as which ever screen I'm using. I've not really seen much of advantage of going into "full screen mode" as far as screen real estate is concerned vs just dragging the corner and making the panel bigger.

      And I have a 15" MBP with a 27" Acer monitor next to it connected via thunderbolt to HDMI adaptor. The difference in screen real estate on the 27" monitor is barely noticeable vs the enlarged panel to me. Then I keep Mail and iMessage up on the 15" screen.

      Guess to each their own...

      --
      "The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - Thatcher.
    8. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 1

      That's something they fucked up a few years ago with OS X 10.7 and people have been howling about it ever since (and is exactly why I inserted the "(much-needed, IMO)" into my post). Nonetheless, that wasn't so much an issue of multi-monitor support as dumbass full-screen "feature" support; it could be mostly avoided by just maximizing your windows instead of using full-screen. The biggest issue with their multi-monitor support, IMO, was having the menu bar on only one screen. It's been that way forever and has always driven me crazy. I'm glad to see they're finally fixing all of these issues - which is exactly why I was disappointed with the shitty summary saying "Macs will now support multiple displays, including HDTVs!"

      Yeah I know I could manually size my window, but that is just annoying. Especially on my laptop, which I switch between a 27" 2556x1660 display and its native 15" at whatever mediocre resolution it has (I forget these days). It's one thing that I love about Windows 7 that Apple does terribly - the ability to auto size windows to use a specific area or % of the screen with some hot-keys.

    9. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 1

      Really, because I just make my XCode panel as big as which ever screen I'm using. I've not really seen much of advantage of going into "full screen mode" as far as screen real estate is concerned vs just dragging the corner and making the panel bigger.

      And I have a 15" MBP with a 27" Acer monitor next to it connected via thunderbolt to HDMI adaptor. The difference in screen real estate on the 27" monitor is barely noticeable vs the enlarged panel to me. Then I keep Mail and iMessage up on the 15" screen.

      Guess to each their own...

      *shrug* I use the gestures on the touchpad like crazy and I find them to be easier to use in full screen mode than in windowed mode. But yeah using a Dell UltraSharp 27" myself. But on my laptop I dislike having to constantly resize my windows based on whether I am plugged into the 27" display or on the native display.

    10. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by rsborg · · Score: 1

      OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry... I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode)....

      So what you're really saying is that "full-screen" mode was useless for you. I use multiple monitors on my MBP, and it's still better at supporting my shitty workplace external monitors than my Thinkpad (prev years model) was. Doing a preso doesn't FUBAR my MBP multi-monitor setup like it did my Thinkpad. BetterSnapTool fixes most of the aero-snap features that Win7 had over OSX.

      I never use full-screen, now I might (if IT blesses us with 10.9 any time soon).

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    11. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by omnichad · · Score: 1

      I've just never used their full-screen mode. Tried it once, saw the grey second screen and was done. You can get 3 displays on the new Mac Pro without AirPlay. But to get more screens on something like a Mac Mini, this might be a welcome temporary solution. Certainly not useful to me, though.

    12. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by omnichad · · Score: 2

      ...impacted the other monitor somehow

      Yes - they completely disabled the other monitor - rendering a plain grey textured pattern on it.

    13. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh, so maximizing the window instead of using full screen made the second monitor worthless? You are such a fucking drama queen rofl.

    14. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Princeofcups · · Score: 1

      OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.

      This comment is a joke, right? I've had dual monitors on Macs since before OSX even existed, and support has always been above par, including now. The only problem I have is that sometimes an application does not understand that there is a second monitor, which is what you are experiencing. Some games do that for me. So how is that the OSs fault, exactly?

      --
      The only thing worse than a Democrat is a Republican.
    15. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Completely unacceptable handling of multiple monitors, combined with "oh, all your Spaces are in a line now - we can't do grids anymore" are why I'm still using OSX 10.6.x on my remaining Apple hardware.

      CAPTCHA: recorded (hi NSA/PRISM!)

    16. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      There are a number of nice window-management apps for the Mac, like Window Magnet. Also, don't forget the little green "+" button in the title bar (next to the yellow minimize button). That button is used to tell the window "size yourself to an appropriate size." What is appropriate depends on the app; in Xcode (and probably most apps) this button will make the window fill all the available space (essentially full screen), which is what you want. (In Safari, it'll maximize the height of the window, but won't make it any wider unless the page content is already wider than the window currently is. In Finder, it'll size the window to try to fit all it's contents without scrolling, but no larger. ... Whatever the app thinks is the best use of space.)

    17. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > But previously your top menu bar were only available on your main monitor

      That has been annoying since they introduced multiple monitors in 1987. Glad they finally fixed it.

    18. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Check out http://manytricks.com/moom/, gives a lot of resizing options that can be keybound.

    19. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 1

      OS X has THE worst multi-monitor support in the industry. Without question. I actually broke down and sold my secondary display because it is next to worthless on a Mac. I like to run XCode in full-screen mode (more real estate for dual pane mode). The second monitor is literally just a gray colored paper weight in this mode. Do I really need to use my air-play compatible device as a second display? Not at all. It will still be useless to me.

      This comment is a joke, right? I've had dual monitors on Macs since before OSX even existed, and support has always been above par, including now. The only problem I have is that sometimes an application does not understand that there is a second monitor, which is what you are experiencing. Some games do that for me. So how is that the OSs fault, exactly?

      No the problem I describe is an issue with OS X fullscreen mode. Not the app. You can see it with all of the Apple apps, not just 3rd party software. I'm not saying you can't do multiple monitors. I'm saying that multiple monitors on Mac OS is worse than it is on any other OS out there. If you're on your second monitor where do you need to go if you need to access a menu item? The primary display. Not everything has a shortcut available. It is most certainly not a joke, the way that Apple handles multiple monitors, however, is.

    20. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      3 displays is already possible on the Mac Mini (2 via the Thunderbolt connector and 1 via HDMI). In fact, I don't think there are any shipping macs that support less than 3 displays (which makes the badly-written summary all the more absurd).

    21. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 1

      There are a number of nice window-management apps for the Mac, like Window Magnet. Also, don't forget the little green "+" button in the title bar (next to the yellow minimize button). That button is used to tell the window "size yourself to an appropriate size." What is appropriate depends on the app; in Xcode (and probably most apps) this button will make the window fill all the available space (essentially full screen), which is what you want. (In Safari, it'll maximize the height of the window, but won't make it any wider unless the page content is already wider than the window currently is. In Finder, it'll size the window to try to fit all it's contents without scrolling, but no larger. ... Whatever the app thinks is the best use of space.)

      Yeah I don't trust those three buttons in your window on OS X. They never feel consistent. I've never liked them since OS X came out. I've been using a Mac professionally on and off since 9.something or other back in 1998. Maybe it was 8, I don't remember. Either way, it seems like those 3 buttons in OS X are entirely arbitrary (well the red one hides, but I have keyboard shortcut for that).

    22. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a load of crap. I have been running dual monitor on my MacBook Pro's for years and it has been working fine.
      It even could figure out which screens I wanted as primary or secondary when I switched between fx my tv or my monitor on my desk. A task what would make my IBM/Lenovo notebook crash/blue screen or just to black half of the time.
      Never had any problems on my mbp, it switches without any problems and manages to move all windows so I can get to them if I go from dual screen on the desk to single screen on the couch.

    23. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Yes, I have a little app (Secondbar) that duplicates the menubar on my second monitor. It works well, but not quite perfectly. Nice to see this finally supported at the system level.

    24. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Do you actually use a Mac? The red (X) one closes the window (also Command-W). Hiding (Command-H) is something different altogether and applies to the app as a whole. The yellow (-) button minimizes the window to the dock (Command-M). Neither of these two buttons are "arbitrary." They're both totally consistent.

      The green "Zoom" button (+) (no hotkey though of course you could assign one in System Preferences if you want) does as I described before - sizes the window to "optimal size."* This is the only one that may not seem entirely "consistent," in that it results in different window sizes for different apps; but that only follows logically from the fact that not every window needs to be the same size (ie. full screen or whatever). What is is the "optimal" size depends on the app's developers and the content being displayed. There is no reason a Finder window should take up full width on a 27" monitor (it would be 80% whitespace and unnecessarily block other windows) so the zoom button causes the window to size itself to fit it's contents and no more. Xcode, on the other hand, is designed to make use of all that width, so the zoom button will size the window to fill all the available space. There's nothing inconsistent about this - the underlying principle is the same in both instances, and the behavior is reliably repeatable in each app.

      For your purposes, I'd bind "Zoom" to some convenient hotkey and then you can easily fix Xcode's window size/position with a single keystroke when switching monitors (or try a window manager like Slate that can do this automatically when your monitor config changes; I don't think the one I mentioned before has that feature).

      * Older versions of iTunes being an exception; this button used to transform the iTunes window into the mini player. Thankfully they seem to have fixed that recently. Another 20 years of incremental improvements and maybe iTunes won't be an abomination anymore...

    25. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      The red one (X) (Command-W) doesn't hide, it closes the window. Hiding (Command-H) is something entirely different and affects the app as a whole. Have you actually used a Mac?

      The yellow one (-) (Command-M) minimizes the window to the dock.

      Neither of these things is even remotely "arbitrary." Both of them are completely consistent.

      Now, to the green (+) Zoom button. It has no hotkey, but you could always set one up in System Preferences (I suggest you do, so you can quickly fix your Xcode window size/position when you change your monitor config). As I said, it's purpose is to size the window to the optimal size. This isn't the same size for every window in the system (i.e. it isn't a "maximize" button!), because not every window should be the same size. For an Xcode workspace window, it makes sense to fill the entire screen - and that's what the button does. Finder does not do this (what use is a Finder window filling a 27" screen when 90% of it is whitespace?) because the optimal size for a Finder window is "show as much content as possible without blocking anything else" - as such it'll expand (or shrink) to fit the content as necessary. There is nothing inconsistent about the principle behind this button, and the behavior that stems from it is generally logical. And certainly it is consistent enough that you can always rely on it to maximize your Xcode workspace.

    26. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Sorry about responding twice, came back a while later, forgot to hit "load all comments" and thought I'd neglected to hit post after previewing, as I am wont to do. Internets are too difficult for me, it seems!

    27. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      it's a bit tangential but what's the difference between maximizing and full-screen? aren't they the same thing, when it comes to program windows?

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    28. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      On the Mac, full-screen is a feature wherein the window essentially takes control of the entire screen - even the menu bar and the dock are hidden (sliding in on mouseover when necessary), and the window title bar is removed, too. Basically the screen becomes nothing but the content view of the window, plus the window's toolbar if there is one. This screen actually becomes its own Space (Spaces being OS X's virtual desktops implementation). This may be particularly useful to someone working on an 11" or 13" MacBook; less so on larger screens.

      "Maximizing," in the sense I was using it, simply means to make the window as big as possible. The dock (assuming you don't have it hidden at all times), the menu bar, the window title bar, etc. are all still visible. The window doesn't get its own Space. It's just a window.

    29. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by perryizgr8 · · Score: 1

      thanks. i'm totally unfamiliar with osx.

      --
      Wealth is the gift that keeps on giving.
    30. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Then for more context in this subthread: if you have multiple monitors hooked up to your Mac and you use the full-screen feature, the window fills the monitor it is on and the other monitor becomes utterly useless, filled with a blank grey texture. Quite frustrating to power users with multiple displays. I think this was a byproduct of (1) Apple imagining full screen would be used primarily on single, small laptop screens, and (2) the fact that each fullscreen window lived in its own Space (virtual desktop), and Spaces as they currently stand take over all monitors as a unit. Note that along with fixing this full screen annoyance in 10.9, the updated Spaces can (must?) create separate virtual desktops for each monitor.

    31. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hate the single menu bar. I came from a linux background, and that has been torture. Working on right screen, need to move mouse all the way to the left, then go back all the way to the right. Bah. Would be cool if each screen had its own active app and that app was focused in the title bar of each screen.

    32. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by jittles · · Score: 1

      Do you actually use a Mac? The red (X) one closes the window (also Command-W). Hiding (Command-H) is something different altogether and applies to the app as a whole. The yellow (-) button minimizes the window to the dock (Command-M). Neither of these two buttons are "arbitrary." They're both totally consistent. The green "Zoom" button (+) (no hotkey though of course you could assign one in System Preferences if you want) does as I described before - sizes the window to "optimal size."* This is the only one that may not seem entirely "consistent," in that it results in different window sizes for different apps; but that only follows logically from the fact that not every window needs to be the same size (ie. full screen or whatever). What is is the "optimal" size depends on the app's developers and the content being displayed. There is no reason a Finder window should take up full width on a 27" monitor (it would be 80% whitespace and unnecessarily block other windows) so the zoom button causes the window to size itself to fit it's contents and no more. Xcode, on the other hand, is designed to make use of all that width, so the zoom button will size the window to fill all the available space. There's nothing inconsistent about this - the underlying principle is the same in both instances, and the behavior is reliably repeatable in each app. For your purposes, I'd bind "Zoom" to some convenient hotkey and then you can easily fix Xcode's window size/position with a single keystroke when switching monitors (or try a window manager like Slate that can do this automatically when your monitor config changes; I don't think the one I mentioned before has that feature). * Older versions of iTunes being an exception; this button used to transform the iTunes window into the mini player. Thankfully they seem to have fixed that recently. Another 20 years of incremental improvements and maybe iTunes won't be an abomination anymore...

      Yes I've used a Mac. I typed that post from a Mac. Sorry if I said the red button, I meant the yellow one. But you see that the app sizing its own window on that button is what makes it feel inconsistent. It may make sense to you, but its different than what Mac OS, Windows and x-windows based OSes were doing at the time that it was introduced (unless my memory is serving me incorrectly).

    33. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Sounds like Mavericks fixes your problems.

    34. Re:Multiple displays since 1987 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My boss can barely write an email yet manages to run multiple monitors on his Mac just fine.

  15. The NeXT CyLINDER by ArhcAngel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    So, Steve Jobs gives us the NeXT CUBE and Cook and Co. give us the Mac Pro CyLINDER.

    --
    "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    1. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by bkmoore · · Score: 1

      And Cook's successor will give us the Mac Pro SpHERE.

    2. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by gtall · · Score: 2

      Yes, but it will float on a magnetic cushion.

    3. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I can't wait for the iPod Tetrahedron!

    4. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 2

      And Cook's successor will give us the Mac Pro SpHERE.

      Yes, but it will float on a magnetic cushion.

      which will unfortunately wipe the hard-disk reducing its usefulness significantly but the hipsters won't notice because it pretty.

      on a different but related note what is with the general public conflating mac use with tech savvy? most mac users i know use it because they are to confused by windows so need a easier system. I know that not all are that way but that has just been my personal experience.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    5. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by ejasons · · Score: 1

      on a different but related note what is with the general public conflating mac use with tech savvy? most mac users i know use it because they are to confused by windows so need a easier system. I know that not all are that way but that has just been my personal experience.

      Maybe in your call center. Most engineers that I work with have Macs as their personal systems (we use Linux for development).

    6. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, it will be powered by sloshing up and down through a magnetic cushion while spinning.
         

    7. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      which will unfortunately wipe the hard-disk reducing its usefulness significantly but the hipsters won't notice because it pretty.

      Hard... disk? Was that some sort of primitive SSD? ;)

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    8. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by Jeremy+Erwin · · Score: 1

      I'm waisting for the tessERacT

    9. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      And Cook's successor will give us the Mac Pro SpHERE.

      Yes, but it will float on a magnetic cushion.

      which will unfortunately wipe the hard-disk reducing its usefulness significantly but the hipsters won't notice because it pretty.

      No, that feature is the new anti-NSA/FBI HDD security feature...

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
    10. Re:The NeXT CyLINDER by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

      on a different but related note what is with the general public conflating mac use with tech savvy? most mac users i know use it because they are to confused by windows so need a easier system. I know that not all are that way but that has just been my personal experience.

      My experience has pretty much been:
      Most non-tech people: Windows that came with the box they bought; rarely MacOS that came with the box they bought because someone told them it was 'better'.
      Hipsters: Macs, because they're 'cool'.
      Tech people that enjoy tinkering: Linux, because it LETS you tinker to your heart's content.
      Tech people that are sick of tinkering: Macs, because they give you a Unixy enough environment out of the box; but 'just works' for dealing with standard everyday tasks; at the expense of customisability (i.e. get used to the Apple way, because you can't change it)

      I pretty much fall in to that last category. My servers are Linux; my desktops and laptops are Macs (with VMWare Fusion for work stuff where I code on Windows). I can't make it as comfortable as I can make a Linux box, but it also lets me 'plug it in, turn it on and start doing stuff' without having to think about it when I get a new system or do a major upgrade.

      There's a lot of things that I find really useful in the overall system, such as having my Apple account linked to the Mac App Store, so when I set up a new Mac, I just give it those details and it sucks down and installs the various apps I like to have. Sure, I COULD do these kinds of things manually (or spend the time to set up my own automated system), but I'm old and lazy and just can't be bothered spending half my time "making my system perfect" like I did when I was younger.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
  16. The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth it's only pci-e X4 and I hope that each port or has it's own X4 link or at least one X4 link for 2 ports.

    But adding a video card is out over a X4 link maybe even a a raid setup that uses a X8 pci-e card may be slowed down as well.

    As well useing a lot of stuff on the same bus.

    1. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by adisakp · · Score: 5, Informative

      The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth it's only pci-e X4 and I hope that each port or has it's own X4 link or at least one X4 link for 2 ports.

      Thunderbolt 2 is 20Gb/s. There are 6 ports and 3 Thunderbolt controllers (each controller handles a full 20Gb/s across 2 ports).

      FWIW, PCIe 1.0 x8 is only 16Gb/s and x4 is only 8Gb/s.

      The bandwidth here is basically faster than 6 x8 slots.

    2. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by adisakp · · Score: 2

      Anyhow... that's a lot faster than any consumer or prosumer storage solutions. It might be a little slow only if you were driving an external video card but the internal cards can handle 3X 4K displays already.

    3. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 2

      missing the point how are the TB chips linked to the chip set? and does each controller have it's own X4 link?

    4. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Informative

      "Thunderbolt 2 is 20Gb/s"

      Remember that 'Thunderbolt' speed numbers include both the PCIe and the Displayport data channels(and, to the best of my knowledge, the capacity allocation between the video and data channels is fixed, even if only one is being used). By aggregating the previous 4 10Gb channels into two 20Gb channels, they allowed full Displayport 1.2 resolution and expect to bottleneck external storage devices slightly less; but the PCIe side still looks like PCIe 2.0 x4. Not slow; but substantially slower than x8 and x16 PCIe 2.0 and slower still than PCIe 3.

    5. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by Microlith · · Score: 4, Informative

      PCIe 1.0 x8 is only 16Gb/s and x4 is only 8Gb/s.

      And PCIe 1.0 is well and truly obsolete. PCIe 3.0 is shipping already and we have devices targeted at workstations maxing out PCIe 2.0 x8 links handily. Never mind the latency increases imposed by Thunderbolt.

      TB has its place, but as the exclusive means of expansion in a system it is lacking.

    6. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by adisakp · · Score: 3, Informative

      missing the point how are the TB chips linked to the chip set? and does each controller have it's own X4 link?

      The TB 2.0 chipsets use a x4 PCIe 2.0 link per controller. Guess that means that each pair of two TB ports shares the bandwidth of a controller (6 ports / 3 controllers / 12 PCIe 2.0 lanes total.

      Probably not fast enough for external graphics that would outperform the (extremely fast) internal graphics solution but still orders of magnitude more bandwidth than any current external consumer or prosumer storage solution.

    7. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      and workstations also have full sized video cards the mac pro seems to small to for the heat out put of 1 of them + cpu much less 2 GPU's + CPU?

    8. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by kllrnohj · · Score: 1

      The bandwidth here is basically faster than 6 x8 slots.

      False. The x8 slots you'll find in any PC these days is PCI-e 3.0, which is 64Gb/s. The bandwidth in those 6 Thunderbolt connectors is less than a *single* x16 slot these days (128Gb/s).

      And in case you think that's overkill, note that higher end video cards are bottlenecked by anything less than x8 (64Gb/s). Good luck combining 3 Thunderbolt connections together to drive a single video card.

    9. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "The bandwidth here is basically faster than 6 x8 slots."

      Why don't you compare them to current PCIe? Oh yeah, because then you'd have nothing to say.

      Current PCIe is 10GT/s PER LANE. Oh yeah, and Gen1 PCIe is 2.5 GT/s per lane, not 2 like you quoted. You can't even get obsolete technology right without lying about it.

      These 6 ports are cumulatively slower than a single x16 slot. I suggest you stop posting.

    10. Re:The TB bus does not have a lot of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice way to use the latest Thunderbolt numbers, but use a PCIe spec that's 2 revs back.

      Who's using PCIe 1.0? New motherboards ship with PCIe 3.0. That's ~7.9 GB/s per lane.

      PCIe 3.0 x8 => ~63 GB/s.
      PCIe 3.0 x4 => ~31 GB/s

  17. And another thing by jaymz666 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Does OSX Mavericks come with a Sarah Palin or a Tom Cruise doll?

    1. Re:And another thing by XxtraLarGe · · Score: 1

      Does OSX Mavericks come with a Sarah Palin or a Tom Cruise doll?

      Just so long as they don't include a Grumpy Old Man McCain doll.

      --
      Taking guns away from the 99% gives the 1% 100% of the power.
    2. Re:And another thing by gtall · · Score: 1

      Yep, an anatomically correct Sarah Palin doll...oh the shame!!

    3. Re:And another thing by FrankDrebin · · Score: 1

      Bend over, Maverick always arrives with Goose.

      --
      Anybody want a peanut?
    4. Re:And another thing by antdude · · Score: 1

      Or NBA's Dallas team?

      --
      Ant(Dude) @ Quality Foraged Links (AQFL.net) & The Ant Farm (antfarm.ma.cx / antfarm.home.dhs.org).
  18. Cooling by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Informative

    I mean really... why?

    Now that Apple.com is updated, you can find out why - it's a cylinder because the GPUs and CPU are mounted around a central cooling core made from a single piece of aluminum with a single massive fan on top.

    1. Re:Cooling by NatasRevol · · Score: 1

      If by massive you mean 6".

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    2. Re:Cooling by Theaetetus · · Score: 1

      If by massive you mean 6".

      Obligatory penis-sized jokes aside, a 6" fan is massive compared to the standard 80 or 120 mm fans in other cases.

    3. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes because that's the only possible way to make a computer. They made it a cylinder because it "looks cool" not because of anything else. They could have put these parts in a more conventional case and made a cheaper, more upgradable product which was just as fast or faster.

    4. Re:Cooling by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      6" is 152mm. That's not massive. It's ~25% larger than a 120mm fan.

      And there's only one instead of 4-8 fans.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    5. Re:Cooling by makomk · · Score: 3, Informative

      Except that if you look inside, the actual system is triangular in shape. It's basically a cylinder because someone thought that would look cool.

    6. Re:Cooling by Theaetetus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      6" is 152mm. That's not massive. It's ~25% larger than a 120mm fan.

      And there's only one instead of 4-8 fans.

      It's actually 60% larger than a 120mm fan. Don't forget about that r^2 term. And one larger fan draws more air per minute with lower power and, more importantly, significantly less noise than 4-8 fans.

    7. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      You know what I think?

      You probably shouldn't spend money on a cylindrical Mac Pro.

      That way you won't have to be angry about them.

    8. Re:Cooling by Theaetetus · · Score: 4, Funny

      Except that if you look inside, the actual system is triangular in shape. It's basically a cylinder because someone thought that would look cool.

      I'll believe that hypothesis the second you find a triangular fan.

    9. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not up-to-date on modern motherboards, but does the expansion board have to be *on* the motherboard? It seems to me like you could have twice the cooling surface with a cube instead of a triangular prism.

    10. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      fyi: 6" is about 150mm. So 120mm vs 150mm.

    11. Re:Cooling by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Because the case is a big part of the expense of a high-end workstation?
      Seriously?

      Seems more likely that they made it a cylinder because it *is* cool than because it looks that way-- a cylinder with a fan at one end should provide far more efficient airflow than a box.

    12. Re:Cooling by makomk · · Score: 1

      6" fans are already relatively common as side/top fans on enthusiast PC cases, amongst other places. They're not really that much bigger than the ubiquitous 120mm fan.

    13. Re:Cooling by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what I think?

      You probably shouldn't spend money on a cylindrical Mac Pro.

      That way you won't have to be angry about them.

      You must be new here. Every Apple related story posted here draws several times more people who log on just to tell each other how much they hate Apple and how they would never buy an Apple product because they all suck than it draws in Apple Fanboys extolling said products virtue. Any Apple Fanboy that shows his face here gets shredded, it's like throwing a child into a shark pond. The purpose of Apple and Microsoft stores on /. is mostly to goad the hater crowd into boosting click-through rates....

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    14. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll believe that hypothesis the second you find a triangular fan.

      There are a lot of 3D graphics nerds here who'd like a quiet word with you...

    15. Re:Cooling by dfghjk · · Score: 1

      "And one larger fan draws more air per minute with lower power and, more importantly, significantly less noise than 4-8 fans."

      Not at comparable airflow it won't, but "comparable" is always the enemy of Apple arguments. It's so convenient to define what is wanted by what Apple does, why not do it here too?

      The single, large fan is great if it can provide enough flow for the job, but for such a supposed computing powerhouse it sure could stand being larger than it is. Just think, with the extra diameter needed for the larger fan they could have afforded to put a hard drive bay in there, but then it would threaten to be as utilitarian as it is pretentious now.

      This is just like the mini has always been, clever packaging crippled by making it simply too small. Hell, even the mini can now take 2 hard drives, this thing is limited to the storage solution of a Macbook Air! Ridiculous.

    16. Re:Cooling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      6" is 152mm. That's not massive. It's ~25% larger than a 120mm fan.

      It's actually 60% larger than a 120mm fan.

      Where the fuck did you learn math?

      "25% larger" is 125% of the original size. 120mm x 1.25 = 150mm

    17. Re:Cooling by crutchy · · Score: 1

      if they were designing a case to be physically cool (rather than for aesthetics) it would look like this... http://www.engadget.com/2008/06/06/thermalrights-computer-case-is-all-cooling-all-the-time/

    18. Re:Cooling by crutchy · · Score: 1

      i imagine you could shape one of these into a triangle shape... http://www.gizmodo.com.au/2009/10/dyson-air-multiplier-review-lovably-overpriced/

    19. Re:Cooling by crutchy · · Score: 1

      It seems to me like you could have twice the cooling surface with a cube instead of a triangular prism.

      i'm surprised they went with a mere triangle shape

      cubes are lame... apple should have gone with a hypercube if they really wanted to push the boundary of nerdism

    20. Re:Cooling by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      Yeah, right--a complicated system of radiators and heat pipes, instead of a simple, elegant design in which all boards face onto, and radiate into, a big chimney with a fan at one end

    21. Re:Cooling by bingoUV · · Score: 1

      This factually incorrect post modded +5 informative debunks your theory.

      --
      Bingo Dictionary - Pragmatist, n. A myopic idealist.
  19. "Summary" by 54mc · · Score: 1

    This is about the longest TFS I've ever seen. It's only about half the length of the full article!

    --
    Joy! Beautiful spark of the gods!
  20. It's the largest Apple-branded dildo money can buy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It even comes with input ports.

  21. Keynote video by jones_supa · · Score: 0
    1. Re:Keynote video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like the video doesn't match the description. This is an old keynote with Scott Forstall (who was fired!)

    2. Re:Keynote video by jones_supa · · Score: 1

      D'oh! That's one facepalm for me then.

    3. Re:Keynote video by ArcadeMan · · Score: 2

      As punishment, you must use a green felt wallpaper for a week.

  22. only 1 build in SDD card? and no E-sata? by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    only 1 build in SDD card? No build in raid at all? and for some pro work loads like video that will be way to small.

    Seem low and the chip set has lot's of sata ports that are going unused.

    1. Re:only 1 build in SDD card? and no E-sata? by 0racle · · Score: 1

      Thunderbolt - Everything is external to this thing.

      --
      "I use a Mac because I'm just better than you are."
    2. Re:only 1 build in SDD card? and no E-sata? by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 1

      Which is a REALLY great design ethos! Start with a slick, cool-looking cylinder then surround it with all kinds of random-shaped-and-colored boxes connected with snaky wires everywhere!

      --
      Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  23. So, no iPhone 6? by VP · · Score: 1

    What is the current guess at a release date for it?

    1. Re:So, no iPhone 6? by alen · · Score: 1

      september or october like the last 3 releases

    2. Re:So, no iPhone 6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Clearly you have not been paying attention. Mobile devices have moved to a fall release schedule.

    3. Re:So, no iPhone 6? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      they never announce new phones at wwdc. no one was expecting one. they'll have a separate event for it later in the year, probably september.

  24. But . . . Design! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The new IOS 7 UI looks an awful lot like another mobile UI I've seen without the 3d effect.

    Love how TFS gushes about Apple's placing importance on "design", and then represents a few trivial UI tweaks as "a total redesign".

  25. back doors included by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    probably it comes already with back-doors so the government can snoop on you.

  26. The Post-PC world is a little shaky by The+Cat · · Score: 3, Informative

    Looking at all the work Apple has done on that Mac Pro and Macbook Air, it seems they aren't putting all their eggs in the mobile basket any more.

    Good to see some common sense. Post-PC is marketing hype. The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.

    1. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by alen · · Score: 1

      the point is that in post-pc you buy the mobile devices more often and they bring in more profit and value

      the PC will be there but its something you only buy once in a while because you use your mobile device more

    2. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by rsborg · · Score: 1

      Looking at all the work Apple has done on that Mac Pro and Macbook Air, it seems they aren't putting all their eggs in the mobile basket any more.

      Good to see some common sense. Post-PC is marketing hype. The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.

      You could easily translate Post-PC as Post-Windows and it's a far more accurate term (without being acrimonious). Apple (and Google) is stepping into the gaping void that MSFT has left open with their Win8/Surface boondoggle/catastrophe.

      The "PC" will always exist, however, it may consist of a healthy mix of OSX, Windows and ChromeOS (and linux).

      --
      Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
    3. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by lister+king+of+smeg · · Score: 1

      the point is that in post-pc you buy the mobile devices more often and they bring in more profit and value

      the PC will be there but its something you only buy once in a while because you use your mobile device more

      the PC will be there but its something you only buy once in a while because you rarely drop you pc on the concrete you will comparatively often drop your mobile device shattering the screen (and/or back depending on which generation) into a million pieces.

      --
      ---Saying gnome 3 is better than windows 8 not so much a compliment as it is damning with light praise.
    4. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Post-PC is marketing hype. The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.

      You really have no idea of what's happening around you and you don't even understand what post-PC means.

      Before tablets really took off, everyone was buying a computer because that was the only option to access Internet, manage photos, etc. But most non-technical people only used their computers for email, web and text messaging. Using a PC for that is complete overkill.

      Tablets are here to stay, and so are "PCs" but since you seem too stubborn to understand that simple explanation, let's go with the standard Slashdot analogy cars!

      Compare that to motorcycles and trucks. Imagine the PC is a big utility truck. It's tough, it's reliable but it's also expensive. And five years ago the only other option was to buy a motorcycle. But you can't go shopping with a motorcycle, get groceries, etc. So everyone buys a truck.

      Suddenly, a company invents the car. It's smaller and less expensive than a truck but it's so much more than a motorcycle. It fits the needs of 99% of the population. Companies still make trucks because you can't do everything with a car, but still the car is now the standard vehicle and the best-selling one too. It's the post-truck era. Trucks are still available, but it's not the most popular option anymore.

      The PC/Mac is the truck and the iPad is the car.

      How fucking hard is that to understand?

      If that doesn't work, I'm sure an American will be able to explain that to you with guns instead of cars.

    5. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by Accordion+Noir · · Score: 1

      The PC will be standard technology for at least the next 100 years.

      I know that was obviously hyperbole, but 100 years ago you might have been typing up a note on a not-yet-standardized typewriter and sending it downstairs using a pneumatic tube from whence it would be taken to a telegraph for longer distances. Wikipedia actually says the first teletypewriter was invented at that time as the cutting-est of the cutting edge tech, so things were ramping up for ongoing rapid change. In San Francisco a hundred years ago, ice for iceboxes was still being delivered by horse drawn wagons. Things have changed more in the last two-hundred years than in the entire history of the species.

      To think that anything will be the same 100 years out is folly. The only clear prediction would be a "backward" progression where civilization collapses and our great grand-children are growing food with known pre-industrial tech and using busted hard-drives full of a century's worth of data as hand-mirrors. On the other hand, where tech might head if it "keeps going" is anybody's guess but it won't be the same as today.

      --
      "Ruthlessly pursuing the idea that the accordion is just another instrument."
    6. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by taharvey · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm... Seen the market stats recently?

      Jobs statement years ago that mobile is Cars, and PCs are truck was extremely visionary. We can see that Apple and others have produced mobile devices at a huge ratio over PCs in the last couple years. While I don't need a tablet because I use a laptop extensively, I am aware that I as an engineer, am a truck user. While for every on of me, there are 10 other people who only need to surf the web and check their email, and write an occasional document on their tablets.

      Still, while cars have out numbered trucks for 80 years, trucks are still important... and profitable.

    7. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by LordLimecat · · Score: 1

      If you judge the state of the PC industry by what Apple is selling, you must live in an expensive world.

    8. Re:The Post-PC world is a little shaky by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hopefully they've realised that most people left using desktops are developers and other power users, which they depend on to develop iOS apps. Some of the new features in OSX seem to suggest this.

  27. PCIe flash in the Mac Pro by Lucas123 · · Score: 1

    Mac Pro’s flash internal storage will offer an astoundingly fast 1.25GBps reads and 1.0GBps writes. That's great, but is this a sign of things to come? Like a Macbook Pro with PCIe flash? Oh, the possibilities...

    1. Re:PCIe flash in the Mac Pro by YttriumOxide · · Score: 1

      Mac Pro’s flash internal storage will offer an astoundingly fast 1.25GBps reads and 1.0GBps writes. That's great, but is this a sign of things to come? Like a Macbook Pro with PCIe flash? Oh, the possibilities...

      I'm due for an upgrade of my work laptop next April... REALLY hoping there's a new line of Macbook Pros out by then, since otherwise I'll be getting the current generation, which may be a little outdated by then. (I have to have a Mac for work - not that I'm complaining, but it's worth mentioning in case anyone says I should get a <insert_favourite_other_brand_here> instead).

      I would truly love to see a MBP with PCIe flash come out - it'd suit my work needs pretty much perfectly.

      --
      My book about LSD and Self-Discovery
      Also on facebook as: DroppingAcidDaleBewan
    2. Re:PCIe flash in the Mac Pro by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

      Mac Pro’s flash internal storage will offer an astoundingly fast 1.25GBps reads and 1.0GBps writes. That's great, but is this a sign of things to come? Like a Macbook Pro with PCIe flash? Oh, the possibilities...

      The new Airs already have PCIe flash.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  28. Fisher price by Lussarn · · Score: 0

    It looks like Win XP

  29. Sharks here at Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why no mention/comments of the new hardware being assembled in the USA?

    1. Re:Sharks here at Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because "assembled" does mean any of its parts is being made in the USA. They are just "assembling" them in the USA so people think they are creating jobs or something. Very few high-tech skills involved (source: I've worked at such places).

    2. Re:Sharks here at Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Doesn't the US need much more of these types of job? From what is on the "news" there's an education gap and plenty of people to fill jobs at this skill level. When enough of these jobs are (not created, but transferred) to the US , then manufacturers can bring their kit and the whole she-bang can help the US get out of the rut. Or are you saying those aren't "jobs" because they're just assembling?

    3. Re:Sharks here at Slashdot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As Apple uses Intel CPUs in Macs, one of the most high-tech components often is built in the USA. Even when the computers they go into are assembled in China. That'd be why they only ever printed "Assembled in China" on their products instead of "Everything Inside Made And Assembled In China". They weren't trying to be deceptive then, and they aren't trying to be deceptive now. Electronic supply chains are global regardless of place of final assembly -- finding a modern mass-manufactured product which was sourced exclusively from one nation is virtually impossible.

  30. What am I missing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What am I missing here? Slide to unlock? Slide up control panel? This is stuff I've had since 2.0 on Android. Better multi-tasking? I'm running two apps at once side-by-side on the same screen with my S4 right now.

  31. only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC workstions by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC workstations can have X2 the cpu power and X2 the ram bandwidth.

    as well Full X16 pci-e slots that are faster then TB.

  32. wrong name for osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    this is only osx 10.9.. 10.10 is supposed to be maverick.

    1. Re:wrong name for osx by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      this is only osx 10.9.. 10.10 is supposed to be maverick.

      Once again, Apple's playing catch-up. Don't they realize that Maverick Meerkat was like six releases of Ubuntu ago?

  33. Tubular in 1984? by SteveSgt · · Score: 1

    1. iOS7: Multitasking? It's about time. What is this, 1984?

    2. Mac Pro Desktop: All of that tubular elegance is going lost in a rats-nest of external boxes and cables because all of the expansion of that chassis has to be external--there's no internal room for optical drives, RAID arrays, media card readers/writers, etc. And SSDs big enough for media production are still way too expensive. And how do you rack mount a dozen of them in the machine room of a video editing suite (as I've done many times in my business)?

    1. Re:Tubular in 1984? by gl4ss · · Score: 0

      you're not apples target market.

      don't ask me who is though, I wouldn't know. but I know that power users aren't it.

      --
      world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
    2. Re:Tubular in 1984? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And no 5.25" floppy drive!

    3. Re: Tubular in 1984? by klubar · · Score: 1

      I'm waiting for someone to announce a rack mount kit for a tubular computer case. Actually, anyone who needs cheap computing horsepower probably isn't buying mac computers. These are targeted at the single-shingle video producers and others for whom a single "work station" is fine. At the high end, all of the disk is iSCSI or something similar so TB doesn't matter.

    4. Re:Tubular in 1984? by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      1. iOS7: Multitasking? It's about time. What is this, 1984?

      iOS has allowed third party developers to multitask since iOS 4.

    5. Re: Tubular in 1984? by Wovel · · Score: 1

      I chuckled at the combination of high end and iSCSI in the same sentence. ...

    6. Re:Tubular in 1984? by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Buy a single external enclosure that supports as many drives as you need. That's then one Thunderbolt cable and one power cable.

  34. Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu and a good (can be build video chip) may be at $800-$1200 as I see the new mac pro at $2,500-$3,000 base.

    1. Re:Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I would of bought a mini if it had a good video card but ended up needing to go with an iMac. The mini's graphics is the main limiting factor in it, everything else is really good.

    2. Re:Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      Face the facts: Apple isn't going to make a desktop for power users that goes directly against Dell, HP, and Lenovo. There is little margin in this cutthroat part of the market. They are sticking to general consumers who don't care to build their own systems and creative professionals, not your average slashdotter.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    3. Re:Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Apple needs a mini + with a good desktop cpu and a good (can be build video chip) may be at $800-$1200 as I see the new mac pro at $2,500-$3,000 base.

      I agreed with a similar comment elsewhere. There's a clear hole between mini and pro that's orthagonal to the macbook.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
  35. 25 foot surf ... by perpenso · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Does OSX Mavericks come with a Sarah Palin or a Tom Cruise doll?

    No. But it does come with images of the big wave surfing location, Mavericks, for which it is actually named. A location that has 25 foot surf on an average day. A really cool place.

    1. Re:25 foot surf ... by tmark · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, Mavericks. A place where when things crash, people die.

      I shudder to think how every other big wave spot's name will be co-opted by Apple.

    2. Re:25 foot surf ... by TubeSteak · · Score: 1

      No. But it does come with images of the big wave surfing location, Mavericks, for which it is actually named. A location that has 25 foot surf on an average day.

      I can see Russia from the top of this wave!

      --
      [Fuck Beta]
      o0t!
    3. Re:25 foot surf ... by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      A location that has 25 foot surf on an average day.

      On an average day they have 6 foot waves. In winter on a lot of days it gets bigger, though, and it looks really amazing. The big waves are far out on the ocean, so it isn't as impressive to look at as, for example, Waiamea.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    4. Re:25 foot surf ... by Savage-Rabbit · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes, Mavericks. A place where when things crash, people die.

      I shudder to think how every other big wave spot's name will be co-opted by Apple.

      Right, and cupcakes, donuts, eclairs, froyo, gingerbreads, honeycombs, ice-cream sandwiches and jellybeans make you fat and give you diabetes... I shudder to think which unhealthy snack will be co-opted by Google next (although I will concede that Android 'Donut' is a slightly better choice than Android 'Carrot'). Oh, and don't even get me stated on Canonical's Gusty Gibbons, Natty Narwhals and Saucy Salamanders.

      --
      Only to idiots, are orders laws.
      -- Henning von Tresckow
    5. Re:25 foot surf ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. But it does come with images of the big wave surfing location, Mavericks, for which it is actually named. A location that has 25 foot surf on an average day..

      A location that has 25 year old amatuers trying to surf on an average day.

      FTFY

    6. Re:25 foot surf ... by Bongo · · Score: 1

      But such creative appeal!

      Android Agave Nectar
      Android Cane Crystals
      Android Lactose
      Android Dextrose
      Android High Fructose Corn Syrup

  36. Nize rip off of BB10 features. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good work Apple. After years of sueing pople for copying you, you take inovations from Blackberry and put them in iOS7. Good work.

    Two that stick out:
    Swipe up to unlock.
    gesture to the right to peak into e-mail.

    Very well done sirs!

  37. No clear window ? No LEDs ? by perpenso · · Score: 1

    I mean really... why?

    Saddened by the lack of a clear window panel to show off blue led light strips and glowing fans? :-)

    1. Re:No clear window ? No LEDs ? by jaymz666 · · Score: 1

      Hardly. It's a tool, not a toy or display piece.

  38. Re:WRONG Keynote video by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the WWDC video from last year when they announced the retina Macbooks.

  39. Expected more than that by DrXym · · Score: 1

    This is all distinctly underwhelming. Android and Windows Phone have been sporting a "flat" UI for some time and iOS late to that party. It's some change from the times when Apple were the trend setter and are now playing catchup. And other than the reskinned UI, the remaining stuff is basically fixes and tweaks.

  40. Lawyers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And cue lawsuits... Go!

  41. Chinese? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The wallpaper with the Chinese family isn't helping. It looks too much like a chinese iPhone knock-off.

  42. Apple joins another classic by csumpi · · Score: 1
  43. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what about the ram...
    seems only 4 slots are available...so much ram...

  44. longestpostever by Korruptionen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've been waiting for this event for weeks, as we're buying 90ish laptops for our school district... faculty use.

    First thing I noticed was the MacBook Air update... and how they are surprisingly dropping the clock speed of existing systems in favor of battery life. While I know their new software may be more efficient, and even the chipset itself may be more efficient, it just surprised me. Being around for the grand ol days of the "great hardware race", I didn't think they would actually move backwards (from 1.8GHz to 1.3GHz). First thing I thought of was that they are doing this so that they can have the great hardware race again... and announce faster systems all over again for that lineup.

    Next up, the Mac Pro looks like an homage paid to the G4 Cube. While I will admit owning one and thinking it was cool at the time, I think someone else pointed out here that the elegance is lost in the external cable mess. But let's be honest, the people who are being power users are already going for external enclosures for everything (especially storage) because it can be had faster and cheaper by going not Apple. To all those also who say "OMG you can't upgrade it", my experience has been those who buy Mac Pros work them hard and run them until they quit or completely replace them anyway. They want an all in one solution that they can use and replace as a whole... because they know about graphic design / video editing, and not necessarily about performance computing.

    iOS7. Auto updating, super cool for what we do with 800 iPads sitting here. I like it, even though it seems to be more like the Android phone I tested for a week recently (Galaxy S4). I was really hoping that with the release of iOS7, they would have been releasing what I consider "a properly sized phone for 2013". They didn't. Le sad.

    iCloud ... platform agnostic document modification through a web browser, cool... but not when you start having to pay for an over X amount of storage every month. They are just trying to generate more recurring revenue. iCloud keychain seems like a terrible idea in terms of security. I say this because of the whole keys to the kingdom approach. All of my users use iCloud now, and they still are using sticky notes on their laptops, though I'm trying to break them of this.

    Lastly, I am annoyed that none of this was even remotely ready to go today. I was hoping to be surprised with the release of software and that they had actually secretly worked with developers to have it out remotely soon. As a school, releasing iOS7 when school starts, well.. that's just a pain in the ass. Tim Cook is one of these most underwhelming speakers, and really just irritates me when I hear him. Whoever the dude in the blue shirt was... that guy was great with his speeches.

    PS... thank god no more cat names

    1. Re: longestpostever by Wovel · · Score: 1

      You may have noticed they did not make any announcements about iOS hardware today...

    2. Re:longestpostever by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      First thing I noticed was the MacBook Air update... and how they are surprisingly dropping the clock speed of existing systems in favor of battery life. While I know their new software may be more efficient, and even the chipset itself may be more efficient, it just surprised me. Being around for the grand ol days of the "great hardware race", I didn't think they would actually move backwards (from 1.8GHz to 1.3GHz). First thing I thought of was that they are doing this so that they can have the great hardware race again... and announce faster systems all over again for that lineup.

      I don't know if this was by choice or due to the new Haswell architecture. Also most PCs these days are overpowered for what most consumers use them for. Focusing on battery life is probably a better bet for the Air.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  45. Finder Tabs by Solandri · · Score: 1

    Just to head off any "Look what great new shiny Apple invented" by drooling fanboys: Finder tabs are a copy of QTTabBar for Windows - an extension written around 2004 by a Japanese guy who supposedly died in a traffic accident (nobody knows his real name). It's since been decompiled and updated to work with Windows 7. Obviously he got the idea from tabbed browsing in Firefox, but credit where credit is due.

    http://qttabbar.sourceforge.net/

    1. Re:Finder Tabs by IPvSex · · Score: 1

      There are also several well know Mac Apps that have done this for years -- Path Finder, Total Finder, Forklift.

    2. Re:Finder Tabs by immaterial · · Score: 1

      There have been many Finder tab implementations on the Mac as well; from Finder replacements like Path Finder (which got tabs ~2005ish) to Finder plugins that modify the Finder such as Total Finder. I believe there were Linux file managers with tabs well before 2004. Tabs in apps are nothing new and nobody is claiming that. We are however happy to see them finally natively baked in to Finder (though honestly tags have me more excited).

    3. Re:Finder Tabs by tgibbs · · Score: 1

      I use PathFinder, and like it a lot, but it's not really Apple-like. It's an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink feature-heavey program that would be confusing to non-techie users. Nice to see tabs finally becoming a standard feature.

      I wouldn't be surprised if I continue to prefer PathFinder, though.

  46. Meme formation..... by Areyoukiddingme · · Score: 1, Funny

    I dub thee: the Trash Pro.

    Come on people, let's make this one stick.

    1. Re:Meme formation..... by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Oscar's gone 21st century.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
  47. Meh. by Animats · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Yesterday, Firefox made a "major announcement" - curved tab graphics. Today, Apple announces removing the 3D icons. Oh, and multiple monitors are now supported using a new cable. Yawn. By the way, where are we in the black/white/beige/gray cycle this year?

    There was a program for the original Mac line which found every icon on the system and displayed it as one huge grid on the home screen. This was a joke, not a feature. Then came the iPhone and Metro. Now it's just annoying, scrolling through pages of icons. Can we have menus back?

    Apple is definitely having an idea shortage. Nothing comparable to Google Glass (which may or may not be a success, but at least is an advance in some direction). Nothing comparable to Microsoft's new-generation Kinect (which is a significant technical development, even if it needs an off switch). Not even a ruggedized iPhone (something several competing vendors now offer).

    1. Re: Meh. by Wovel · · Score: 1

      Google glass is not a product and probably never will be. Just because Apple does not have people running around with goofy prototypes stuck to their head does not mean they don't exist.

    2. Re:Meh. by RyuuzakiTetsuya · · Score: 1

      Wait, what? New cable? Multiple monitors have always been supported, I don't understand what you're getting at.

      The upgrade to multiple monitor support is that if your'e using an airplay target like an Apple TV, you can use it explicitly as an external display. Oh and when you full screen an app with multiple monitors it doesn't turn your other monitor into an expensive paper weight.

      --
      Non impediti ratione cogitationus.
    3. Re:Meh. by tgibbs · · Score: 2

      It's funny how people have this recollection of past Apple products being these dramatically original products. The only Apple product for which this could actually have been said to be the case was the original Mac (an even that is debatable). Every other major product was greeted at introduction with comments like "It's been done before," "a me-too product," "a niche product." And in the years between releases of new Apple product categories, there have always been numerous comments that to the effect that Apple has lost its creativity.

      I guess people like to imagine in retrospect that they were perceptive enough to recognize at introduction that the iPod, iPhone, iMac, and iPad were going to be great commercial successes. But in fact, none of them were startlingly original in any obvious ways. All resembled products that had been done before. What has distinguished Apple's products has always been execution rather than concept.

      That also means that I can't judge the significance of the changes to OS X or iOS. There were very few features that I haven't seen before. On the other had, none of them have every been done quite right. I won't be able to judge them until I can actually play with them to see if the execution is up to Apple's past standards.

    4. Re:Meh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yesterday, Firefox made a "major announcement" - curved tab graphics. Today, Apple announces removing the 3D icons. Oh, and multiple monitors are now supported using a new cable.
      Yawn. By the way, where are we in the black/white/beige/gray cycle this year?

      There was a program for the original Mac line which found every icon on the system and displayed it as one huge grid on the home screen. This was a joke, not a feature. Then came the iPhone and Metro. Now it's just annoying, scrolling through pages of icons. Can we have menus back?

      Apple is definitely having an idea shortage. Nothing comparable to Google Glass (which may or may not be a success, but at least is an advance in some direction). Nothing comparable to Microsoft's new-generation Kinect (which is a significant technical development, even if it needs an off switch). Not even a ruggedized iPhone (something several competing vendors now offer).

      They have hundreds of Billions in the bank and continue to get more every day due to the popularity of their devices. Trend or not, they are doing something right. Google and MS would love to have such problems. If competition is good enough, they'll have to innovate or die. Right now neither of the things you mention are worth anything as one isn't even available and the second only available via a bundled game machine.

    5. Re: Meh. by je+ne+sais+quoi · · Score: 1

      Apple is definitely having an idea shortage.

      . Dude, whatever. You keep you glasses and your kinect, I'll take the new mac pro and we'll see who gets more accomplished. The inventions you are describing are very innovative and clever, but they are not a phone or tablet that will end up in every home, they are not a device that will replace computers. They are in essence toys with a limited marketshare.

      --
      Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the war room!
    6. Re:Meh. by martyros · · Score: 1

      Apple is definitely having an idea shortage. Nothing comparable to Google Glass (which may or may not be a success, but at least is an advance in some direction). Nothing comparable to Microsoft's new-generation Kinect (which is a significant technical development, even if it needs an off switch). Not even a ruggedized iPhone (something several competing vendors now offer).

      But doing something completely new has never been Apple's modus operandi. Instead, they let other people try things that are completely new, see how they fail, then come in and "do it right":

      • There were lots of mp3 players before the iPod. But they never gained mass market appeal; Apple changed that.
      • I had a smartphone before the iPhone came out. I had even purchased apps and installed them; but overall, the experience was very unsatisfying, and I had basically determined that there wasn't much point in having a tiny computer in your pocket. The iPhone changed that.
      • Microsoft and others had been trying to get tablets to take off for years; Apple brought out the iPad and kick-started a whole new movement towards tablets.

      If things follow historical trends (which is a big if), then Google (and maybe some others) will come out with Google Glass, it will be a big flop, people will realize how useless having a HUD is and just about decide it's not worth it anymore -- and then Apple will come out with iSpec and redefine the market.

      --

      TCP: Why the Internet is full of SYN.

  48. Re: Looks like ... omg ... windows 8 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I read the description of the new interface, my immediate reaction was "it sounds like windows 8, and that's not a good thing." Maybe it's the worst parts of windows 8 married to the high cost of apple kit... what could go wrong?

  49. What about the extra spying module? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Does ios7 come with extra features to make spying easier for the NSA?

  50. Dual CPU Package? by giftedtiger74 · · Score: 2

    I noticed that I only see a single CPU package on the slides, yet somehow they can cram 12-cpu cores in there? The highest Xeon E5s I've seen appear to max out at 8cores/16threads. So the only way I can see that happening is if they can somehow get a multi-processor card or dual CPU mulit-cpu die package in there.

    1. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      They also claim it's a 256bit CPU in their slide. Not exactly confidence inspiring.

    2. Re:Dual CPU Package? by bdcrazy · · Score: 1

      I refer to the old video console wars. 32 vs 64 bit processing etc. The new processors can work on 256bit pieces of data at once via AVX.

      --
      Tonights forecast: Dark. Continued dark throughout most of the evening, with some widely-scattered light towards morning
    3. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      I get that but that's not what people mean when they talk about bit support in a cpu. Apple is either ignorant of this or being deliberately misleading.

    4. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'll take option C: You're being super dumb. Go look at their website. They specifically say 256-bit wide floating point instructions. They're talking about AVX, which has FP instructions that operate on 256-bit wide vector registers. Which you would've realized if you weren't just some random asshole trying much too hard to be the guy who found fhe evidence that Apple's incompetent or lying.

    5. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 0

      hate it when I start to reply before I notice that it's just an AC. If you want to talk to me son you're going to have to get an account.

    6. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think they mean 6 real cores, 12 hyper threaded fake "cores".

    7. Re:Dual CPU Package? by immaterial · · Score: 1

      Afraid to be proven wrong by an AC? I guess I'll step in and point out said Coward is absolutely right.

    8. Re:Dual CPU Package? by Barlo_Mung_42 · · Score: 1

      No, I'm able to admit when I'm wrong, I just don't waste time with ACs.

      You are right. I let my hatred of all things Apple get the better of me and I didn't check my source. I misremembered the slide as just saying 256 bit.

      Still seems like a weaselish thing to put in a slide. As though it's something they've done or makes their new system special; it's just a feature of the Intel chip they picked. They clearly knew that it's just a big sounding number and most people don't really know what it means.

    9. Re:Dual CPU Package? by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      They also claim it's a 256bit CPU in their slide. Not exactly confidence inspiring.

      Well, it is. Obviously, the previous generation of Intel CPUs had 256 bit registers as well, but Haswell has a much more complete 256 bit instruction set, including many three register instructions (that is register A = register B op register C, saving a move instruction in many cases), and Haswell is the very first Intel x86 style processor with fused multiply-add instructions.

  51. Legacy and Inter-opterability by pubwvj · · Score: 2

    Bringing iBooks to the MacOS is good.

    MacOS and iOS need to merge - We need to be able to use our data and our applications no matter what the hardware.

    Apple should offer legacy support back to Classic, at least, with full 68K/PPC support - there's a tremendous amount of excellent software that was never brought to OSX or iOS. People using that software can't upgrade and abandon their data and applications so they don't. If Apple offered legacy support I have eleven machines I would upgrade and I know of many more people in the same boat. Since they won't support my data and apps I keep fixing old machines and Apple's not making profits on new hardware and OS updates from us.

    1. Re:Legacy and Inter-opterability by H0p313ss · · Score: 1

      Bringing iBooks to the MacOS is good.

      I was a little surprised by this since I have a mac and an ipad and a bunch of free books in iBooks. I had simply never noticed before that I can't actually read those books on the mac.

      This is probably because I use the Kindle bookstore instead since they're cheaper on average. (Or were when I checked last...)

      Kind of amusing that the Kindle book reader has been available for years for OSX.

      --
      XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
    2. Re:Legacy and Inter-opterability by Jeremi · · Score: 1

      MacOS and iOS need to merge - We need to be able to use our data and our applications no matter what the hardware.

      So this would be like the Mac version of Windows 8?

      No thanks. :P

      --


      I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
    3. Re:Legacy and Inter-opterability by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

      So this would be like the Mac version of Windows 8 with app store lock in and maybe even driver lock in as well.

    4. Re:Legacy and Inter-opterability by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Apple should offer legacy support back to Classic, at least, with full 68K/PPC support - there's a tremendous amount of excellent software that was never brought to OSX or iOS.

      Keep dreaming.....Apple is the most backwards-compatibility antagonistic company around. I agree with you they SHOULD have backwards compatibility, but it's not going to happen. More likely within a decade, all the software you have for OSX will be outdated and won't run anywhere anymore.

    5. Re:Legacy and Inter-opterability by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

      I was a little surprised by this since I have a mac and an ipad and a bunch of free books in iBooks. I had simply never noticed before that I can't actually read those books on the mac.

      For free and for DRM-free ePub books: There's an app for that (on the Mac App Store).

  52. Mac Pro looks like stylish urn by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well, it does...

  53. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC workstations can have X2 the cpu power and X2 the ram bandwidth

    That's a bold thing to say about having 2x power considering that we don't have real benchmarks yet. Or are you just making it up?

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  54. Re: iOS 7, the most advanced form of Android yet by Wovel · · Score: 1

    It is weird how you seem to be claiming you watched the keynote when your words clearly show you haven't. Do you struggle with the truth in your personal life too?

  55. Jailbreak? by WoLpH · · Score: 0

    Maybe I'll consider taking a look at iOS 7 once the jailbreak is available. Till that time... no way. iOS might be slick and snappy but it's also damn unusable for the power user.

  56. the Stallion that shall mount the world by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    Under the new naming convention, Apple employees will be known as Stallions, developers shall be know as Geldings, and the consumers shall be known as Mares. The apple education consumers are called Ponies.

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
    1. Re:the Stallion that shall mount the world by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 2

      Under the new naming convention, Apple employees will be known as Stallions, developers shall be know as Geldings, and the consumers shall be known as Mares. The apple education consumers are called Ponies.

      And Apple Hater will be called asses.

      --
      Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
    2. Re:the Stallion that shall mount the world by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the first time in years that I'm itching for mod points. Well played, sir.

  57. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This has always been the way with "Pro" macs.

  58. the Master Cylinder by Ralph+Spoilsport · · Score: 1

    is useless. a Total disappointment. It has no PCIe expandability and that is a deal killer for high end video/animation folk. AFAIK, Thunderbolt 2 won't support 16x PCIe3 and the GPU processing is too weak. It will Display 4K but can't handle a proper 4K video editing workflow. In other words: back to Windows / Linux. Move along. Nothing to see here.

    --
    Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
    1. Re:the Master Cylinder by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      So what you are contending is the dual FirePro GPUs won't be able to handle 4K editing?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  59. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    apple system only has 1 cpu but the dell and other workstations will have 2 or more of them.

  60. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    Um you realize that there is more to processing power than the number of sockets right? If the number of sockets was the only factor then the top supercomputer in the world must have more sockets as number 2 right?

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  61. I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Sorry, but there is nothing professional about the new Mac Pro. It is Eye Candy; nothing more. Its proprietary layout means that there is very little that will be upgradeable (save for maxing out its measly four RAM slots, or swapping out the SSD). CPU not fast enough anymore? Graphics cards out-of-date? Sorry, time to buy a new Mac Pro. But of course that is what Apple want. Heaven forbid that someone would actually want to upgrade their CPU or change to the latest generation GPU.

    What is really anti-Professional about the Mac Pro? Dumping Internal storage bays and PCIe slots moving everything to external interfaces. SSDs have their place and so too do spinning disks. I could choose what I wanted, but with this new Mac Pro I have no choice. I would now have to have a stack of external drives sitting at my workstation. It won't look so pretty then.

    On top of that, plenty of companies have invested in PCIe-based hardware (Audio DAW cards and HD-SDI interface cards are just two examples of many). Companies who have invested heavily in such hardware are now SOL. What will they do? Buy an overpriced Mac Pro and reinvest in all new Thunderbolt-based hardware (that most likely doesn't exist yet given the slow uptake of Thunderbolt), or switch to PC based hardware?

    I have to look at the reason for the redesign, and it is very easy to see: Apple (and Intel) own Thunderbolt. They make a cut of every Thunderbolt device sold. Of course, they are going to push Thunderbolt over everything else. Did Apple actually listen to what their professional clients need?

    1. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 2

      I have to look at the reason for the redesign, and it is very easy to see: Apple (and Intel) own Thunderbolt. They make a cut of every Thunderbolt device sold. Of course, they are going to push Thunderbolt over everything else. Did Apple actually listen to what their professional clients need?

      Er, what? Intel owns Thunderbolt. The only thing that Apple owned temporarily was the Thunderbolt trademark. That trademarks has since been assigned to Intel. Apple does own the connector: however is royalty free and part of the VESA spec.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    2. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 1

      Yes, Intel orginally developed Thunderbolt (then codenamed LightPeak), but then they approached Apple with it. Apple and Intel have technically collaborated on Thunderbolt. Unsurprisingly, Apple now have quite a number of patents on Thunderbolt technology (and I'd speculate even more on Thunderbolt 2). Yes, the connector may be royalty free, but what is inside it isn't: Thunderbolt uses active cables.

      So, while Intel did create the original tech behind Thunderbolt, it isn't solely owned by them anymore. If you want to make Thunderbolt-based kit, you will need to pay the tax to Intel *and* Apple.

      The point I was trying to make is that Apple have a distinct financial interest in killing PCIe and replacing it with Thunderbolt / Thunderbolt 2.

    3. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by guytoronto · · Score: 1

      Professionals don't upgrade their CPU. They upgrade their whole system. What is the upgrade cycle? Three years? The latest CPUs need a new motherboard. New motherboard and CPU need new RAM. New mb, CPU, RAM + video card = new power supply. By the time you upgrade everything, the only thing remaining from your original built is the case which is of minimal value. And Apple doesn't own Thunderbolt. Educate yourself. Ignorance is not the new intelligence.

    4. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      The point I was trying to make is that Apple have a distinct financial interest in killing PCIe and replacing it with Thunderbolt / Thunderbolt 2.

      Yet Apple uses PCIe flash for the drive connector instead of SATA on the new MacPro. Maybe the reason Apple uses Thunderbolt is that they don't want to use other connectors. Besides TB, what other choices did Apple have? eSATA? No. PCI Express cabling? It is kinda clunky don't you think?

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    5. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are Thunderbolt to PCIe adapter cages. Slot the cards in, plug 'er in, away you go.

    6. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      You do know that Thunderbolt PCI-e adapter chassis exist, right?

      We've been running a bunch of Protools HDX cards inside one such chassis for quite some time now. You do NOT want to yank the Thunderbolt cable while the system is powered up, but apart from that it works fine and is quite convenient. I know a few guys who are running UAD cards inside the single-slot chassis version of these thing as well.

      Hell, Apogee Digital's Symphony Thunderbolt Adapter is nothing more then an Apogee branded PCI-e chassis with a Symphony 64 PCI-e card built into it.

      Make no mistake, I'm not happy about losing the ability to run 8x/16x cards (Thunderbolt only has enough bandwidth to bridge to a PCI-e 4x slot), but the fact that the Mac Pro has 3x TB controllers across 6 ports somewhat alleviates that.

    7. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 1

      Sure, not many professionals upgrade their CPU, but RAM and GPUs on the other hand do get upgraded. Only four RAM slots doesn't leave much room for upgrade, and the GPUs in this thing are on customised and proprietary boards. I can't imagine Apple keeping up with the GPU upgrade cycle in producing these boards. Of course it all comes down to what you are doing on this system at a professional level. In my opinion, Apple's shift to an almost completely proprietary design is a bad thing.

      As for Apple owning Thunderbolt: they do, in conjunction with Intel (and I never stated they owned it outright). They own enough patents on the technology that you can't make a Thunderbolt-based product without paying some money to Apple.

    8. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by NimbleSquirrel · · Score: 1

      Sure, if you're happy with PCIe 4x.

    9. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with listening to professional clients is that all they want is what they have but cheaper.

    10. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      First, no, Apple does not own Thunderbolt. It's entirely an Intel tech.

      Second, if you're a serious professional, you're probably already using an external RAID or SAN enclosure, since the piddly four HDD drive bays in the old Mac Pro probably aren't enough. And they're certainly not worried about a few external drives, so long as the performance is there (and it should be.)

      Third, even without Thunderbolt, PCIe-based DAW solutions have been losing ground to FireWire and even USB for years now. Go look around; there are probably 10 USB/FireWire interfaces for every PCIe interface out there. Thunderbolt will just put a nail in this coffin.

      The people who are value-conscious have already switched to Windows workstations. People who want or need OS X should mostly be fine buying a new interface or two.

    11. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by willzyba · · Score: 1

      Totally Agree. I own the original Apple Mac Pro and have been very happy with it for 5 years odd; till I discover I can no longer upgrade the OS. Now for a year I've been holding out for this new machine and F**** was a disappointment. I was hoping for 16 cores, nope. Worse, half the good stuff inside has gone; so where do I put my my mirrored 3TB hard-drives. I doesn't even come with a CD; so now I'm expected to buy this peace of junk and pack around it a bunch of plugin modules. So much for the neat all in one Macs; I'll have to go back to cables cluttering more desk. There is nothing professional about this kit; for business its junk. I don't care what it looks like; I want something practical. So now I'm off to research a Dell and see if we can't configure it in such a way so I can run OSX. Yes the OS is good and frankly it is the only reason left for owning an Apple. If Adobe build their suite for Linux, that rational will be gone also. Thanks god I switched to Android ages ago so I don't have the same problem with their useless phones.

    12. Re:I fail to see the 'Pro' in this Mac Pro. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did Apple actually listen to what their professional clients need?

      Yes, they did. That's what's really annoying you.

      Sorry, but there is nothing professional about the new Mac Pro.

      Professional being what? 12-core Xeons, two heavy-lifting graphics modules, the fastest production SSD interface, ECC RAM, and six Thunderbolt ports? It's all workstation-class, professional hardware. The only questionable part is the Gigabit ethernet.

      It's clear that you want a computer for professional computer part-swappers, and they built a computer for people with professional occupations. Video editing, design, photography? You're working with external storage anyway--the new Mac Pro has a faster SSD interface than anything else out there, so you can work on a responsive system. GPUs not powerful enough to run a rendering farm? Again, you're using external hardware for that. There weren't many compatible GPU upgrades available in the first place. PCIe audio hardware is really the only significant loss, and that's easily fixed by an external box you can put those cards into and still connect.

      Internal expansion cards are dying, and certainly not the mark of "professional" anything. They only existed in the first place because of technical and economical limitations in early hardware. Once external expansion buses reach parity, the internal slots will simply go away in favor of smaller, more energy efficient main systems.

  62. Blast from the past... by tgibbs · · Score: 1

    Some people appreciate the classics. It's a venerable anti-Mac troll from the computer stone age.

  63. New non-standard $50 USB cable needed too? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did he mention whether a new USB cable interface has been added that will cost you $$$ and only be officially available from the groovy and hip apple store, rather than being able to use any old micro USB cable lying about .... cos apple stuff, it just like, works, man

  64. Rounded Corners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is what happens when you take rounded corners to the extreme!

  65. Can't innovate no more, my ass by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    Video cuts to Woz.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.
  66. Hard Drive vs SSD by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    Hard... disk? Was that some sort of primitive SSD? ;)

    No ten times cheaper per Gb with sizes up to 6Gb as opposed to 1Gb. SSD's are fast, but in every other way they are worse.

  67. Legacy support exists via emulation. by bornagainpenguin · · Score: 1

    Apple should offer legacy support back to Classic, at least, with full 68K/PPC support - there's a tremendous amount of excellent software that was never brought to OSX

    Basilisk II does a really great job of supporting Classic MacOS 68k from MacOS 0.x to MacOS 8.1 and Sheepshaver is capable of supporting PPC MacOS 7.5.2 thru 9.0.4. If you want, there's even the vMac project and its more portable and actively developed spin off Mini vMac which allow you to emulate the old Apple Macintosh Plus...

    What exactly is it you think is missing?

    --
    Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
  68. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    How do you figure they get "up to 12 cores" from one CPU? Intel making a 12 core Xeon now?

  69. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by LDAPMAN · · Score: 1

    "up to 12 cores" in one CPU?

  70. Full multitasking by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    some expanded multitasking in iOS 7 (although it's not clear if it's really extended capabilities over iOS 6 or just a spiffier UI)

    In the keynote they talked for a bit about how apps were now allowed full multitasking, the system figures out when they normally want to be active and gives them some time. I'm not sure technically how that works yet, but it's not the older set of specific background app types.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  71. Iworks on the cloud by Meeni · · Score: 1

    Very worried about that. Since Preview is "cloud enabled" it's a POS that crashes constantly. It -was- the best PDF viewer before, it is crippled and buggy now. It always want to sync with 'the cloud' even when I don't want it to do this. I certainly hope that Keynotes remains the productive tool it is now, and not some bloated "cloudware" .

  72. Lets not forget tags 4 searching & grouping fi by elwinc · · Score: 1

    As of 2013, the user can attach arbitrary tags to a file and search by tag as well as filename (e.g. "important"). Turns out MS introduced file "comments" with Win XP, although searching by comment was awkward. Vista improved upon it, and of course Win 7 inherited it from Vista.

    --
    --- Often in error; never in doubt!
  73. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by Kielistic · · Score: 1

    If they ran the same CPUs and didn't have other bandwidth constraints than yes that would be the case.

    Let me guess: you think the CPU in the Mac will be magically faster than the CPU in every other workstation because they're in a Mac.

    You realize this Mac "Pro" isn't a supercomputer right?

  74. Re:It's the largest Apple-branded dildo money can by Lord+Maud'Dib · · Score: 1

    It's the Great American Challenge!

  75. Missing the boat with Apple TV by GrahamCox · · Score: 1

    Disappointed that there's no SDK and App Store for the Apple TV. I think that's just relegated it to being an irrelevant device in the footnote of Apple history, rather than a game-changing device, which I think it could have been.

  76. Control center great, needs shortcut to Gps instea by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am very happy quick access to Bluetooth , wifi , and airplane ,ode will finally be available. However, I do not need a quick link to a calculator. Instead quick access to my gps to save battery would be excellent . Also, update to apple maps ?

  77. I see mod trolls have a sense of humor by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    Anti-apple post about redundancy? Redundant. Guess what? More and more articles about Apple? Also redundant.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  78. Apple "Urns" Android for the iPhone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So the iPhone gets an Android Makeover.

    OSX catches up to Windows 7

    and they uncerimoniously "bury" the Mac Pro in an Urn on stage?

    A keynote to remember for sure..

  79. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

    If they ran the same CPUs and didn't have other bandwidth constraints than yes that would be the case.

    That's the assumption you are making. The processor that Intel supplies Apple may not be available to the general public. We know that it will be 12 cores in a single chip; Intel supplies up to 8 cores now. There may be additional engineering that is involved for Apple to use it and thus won't be usable in a MB the public can buy.

    Let me guess: you think the CPU in the Mac will be magically faster than the CPU in every other workstation because they're in a Mac.

    I think you can't make claims of 2x since we don't know anything about it other than 12 core Intel. Also we don't know if Apple has optimized 10.9 to offload more processing to the GPUs. The combination of hardware and software might make it competitive with other workstations, especially current ones.

    You realize this Mac "Pro" isn't a supercomputer right?

    Doubliing the number of sockets does not necessarily double the power of any system. You can that in massively parallel supercomputing. There are other factors that contribute to processin power.

    --
    Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
  80. Data and the Mac Pro Master Cylinder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    When I saw it.. I couldn't get this vision of Lt Commander Data out of my mind...

    http://youtu.be/96jPvL85MjM?t=2m16s

  81. WebOS lives again by ripvlan · · Score: 1

    As a long time user of Palm (Pre+), I was delighted to see the influences of WebOS on iOS7. Apple appears to have taken the best of the WebOS UI and used it in iOS7. The multi-tasking card interface, sliding inbox items side-to-side, and a few others.

    These were some of the features that I enjoyed the most, and missed when I upgraded to a new iPhone.

    I'm not saying "stole" - innovation and creativity requires looking at what others did and building upon it. So - good for them.

    That parallax UI looks very "neat" - I wonder if it's gimmicky though. The share via bluetooth will be useful - if it works with non iOS devices. Unfortunately my friends use some unknown Android release.

     

  82. Thank you, Apple.. by doccus · · Score: 1

    Thank you , Apple, for making it soo easy for me to completely toss your rubbish OS.. After 20 years of faithful Apple servitude, the last 5 years have seen you throw out any goodwill, and any quality, and usability you've developed over the years.. Oh how quickly we have fallen! When OSX first came out, it was a stable marvel of UNIX heritage, but since 10.6, all the "improvements" have amounted to changes made solely with the shareholder's interests at heart..removing essential features, increasing incompatibility, creating forced (and expensive!) upgrades of software that no longer ran on Macs, ands increasingly sluggish, and unstable, performance. It's been years since a crash could lock up the entire OS, but now, it happens.. Did you just install a Major OS upgrade last year? Well, it's obsolete this year, already. Want to run your 2 year old Application, but it's incompatible suddenly? It's OK, buy a new one! .. For bloody years I was a "Mac Evangelist", but looks like the company has "feet of clay", or perhaps the Apple is rotten from the core... That's OK, there's always Linux, and (heaven forbid) Windows.. although Windows 7 works very well, and will probably still be supported long after Apple completely abandons it's desktop market altogether... That to me is a clincher... Bye Bye...

  83. This needs to be updated: by ModernGeek · · Score: 1

    I don't want to start a holy war here, but what is the deal with you Mac fanatics? I've been sitting here at my freelance gig in front of a Mac (a MacBook Air w/8 Gigs of RAM) for about 20 minutes now while it attempts to copy a 17 Meg file from one folder on the hard drive to another folder. 20 minutes. At home, on my Acer Aspire 5920G running Windows 7, which by all standards should be a lot slower than this Mac, the same operation would take about 2 minutes. If that.

    In addition, during this file transfer, Safari will not work. And everything else has ground to a halt. Even BBEdit Lite is straining to keep up as I type this.

    I won't bore you with the laundry list of other problems that I've encountered while working on various Macs, but suffice it to say there have been many, not the least of which is I've never seen a Mac that has run faster than its Wintel counterpart, despite the Macs' faster chip architecture. My Core Duo with 2 gigs of ram runs faster than i7 machine at times. From a productivity standpoint, I don't get how people can claim that the Macintosh is a superior machine.

    Mac addicts, flame me if you'd like, but I'd rather hear some intelligent reasons why anyone would choose to use a Mac over other faster, cheaper, more stable systems.

    --
    Sig: I stole this sig.
  84. Re:only 1 cpu hurts it next to High end PC worksti by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

    12 core Xeon is one of the options. Yet to be seen if that option is available at launch or follows a little later. But it's not unusual for Apple to have first dibs on a new chip.

  85. Apple's New Mac O/S. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    gosgog:
    Just seems to me that Linux/Ubuntu have had most, of the socalled Apple Mac improvements, out on their various O/S/es a few years back!

  86. Re:Cooling (but speed too) by JBaustian · · Score: 1

    Because of that old speed-of-light conundrum, it makes sense to fit the processors and memory as close as possible to each other. A round shape is optimal, a cylindrical shape is essentially the same. Spreading everything out inside a huge box may be convenient for upgrades, but it slows down the speed of operations.

    Moving the other peripherals outside the device and connecting them with cables also helps with the heat problem.

    I think the new Mac Pro is fantastic, but I have no personal need for anything with even 1/10th this much power.

  87. Anyone else hate the automatic updates? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I used to use the "Update All" button to get all the latest application versions. However a couple of years ago I started to notice that stable applications were being updated to be less stable. Applications that had no ads were updated to include them (especially bothersome in apps I paid for.) Since then I have read the user comments for each update of the applications I care most about (20-30 apps.) I have several apps that I haven't updated in a long time due to this. Of all the items related to iOS 7 the automatic app update bothers me the most, it takes choice away from me and allows the developer to control what the app does (the malware opportunities of this are easily seen.) While it would be nice to have an intelligent way to "auto update" where it "Just Works", in my opinion, to achieve that Apple may have to change/enforce some policy allowing version roll-back or quality testing on the developer community. An alternative is to allow the poweruser to indicate a set of applications to freeze at the current version.

    On a similar note, at least iOS 7 does not include an "Auto update the iOS version".

  88. Re:Lets not forget tags 4 searching & grouping by Plumpaquatsch · · Score: 1

    As of 2013, the user can attach arbitrary tags to a file and search by tag as well as filename (e.g. "important"). Turns out MS introduced file "comments" with Win XP, although searching by comment was awkward. Vista improved upon it, and of course Win 7 inherited it from Vista.

    Oooh. Are you sure you wanna go there? http://www.themacintoshguy.com/mactips/archive/tip14.shtml

    Jan 1997. The feature is older, actually, but I'm too lazy to dig further.

    --
    Of course news about a fake are Fake News.