dhollister
Sep 19, 12:49 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
rt_brained
Aug 11, 07:55 PM
Is Europe not a way bigger mobile phone market than the US anyway. I don't see why any technology company would alienate a huge sector of its market in this way. It will definitely be released in Europe too.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
And coin-operated.
It will not be a flip phone, or a slide phone or any of those stupid ass gimmicky phones you use over there. It will be just a nano derivative I would say. It will be GSM, it will be quad band.
And coin-operated.
portishead
Apr 11, 08:16 PM
They are abandoning it. I know quite a few FCP editors who have switched to Avid MC5 or Premiere Pro.
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
Overreact much? FCP hasn't even been announced and your company is already talking about jumping ship? I call b.s. I'm in LA and I haven't heard anyone talking about switching anything. What needed features do you need that don't already exist?
We are large facility with about 10-12 full time FCP editors and we will probably switch to Avid MC5 unless Apple provides *needed* features for the future.
I'd there's a general mood of 'Apple is abandoning FCP' in the post community and facilities/users are setting up their exit strategies.
And its a strategy. Buying into new software is expensive and time consuming.
Overreact much? FCP hasn't even been announced and your company is already talking about jumping ship? I call b.s. I'm in LA and I haven't heard anyone talking about switching anything. What needed features do you need that don't already exist?
squeeks
Apr 28, 06:10 PM
Look...I'll be the first to admit..there are some wacko Christians out there..like this dude from florida who burned the Quran..i mean wth was he thinking? but we're not all wacko as alot of you suggest... the posts a lot of people on here make, lump ALL of us together. And thats just not cool...
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn�t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
Same goes for conservatives and tea party members...Yes a lot of tea party members are quite radical. But not ALL of them you can probably safely say 99% of racists would consider themselves tea party..but that doesn�t mean everyone in the tea party is racist...
Consider this please before any of you go lumping all of a particular group into one derogatory name..
*LTD*
Apr 27, 10:49 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
If you're a criminal or a paranoid psycho, then yeah . . . it might be an issue. Even then, its rather useless to actually pinpoint someone's location.
Damn. some of you guys are *really* reaching here.
boshii
Apr 11, 11:32 AM
If it's been pushed that far back, LTE better be included.
I can't imagine we see our first LTE iPhone in 2013.
I can't imagine we see our first LTE iPhone in 2013.
drsmithy
Sep 14, 10:05 AM
On the server side.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
Couldn't be farther from the truth. I have no problem with Microsoft or Windows, evident by the fact that I've ran their operating systems for the last 10 years. I have a problem with all the crap they're putting in Vista, but otherwise - Win2k and XP Pro have left me primarily trouble-free.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 05:37 AM
For a desktop machine those iMac specs are utterly pathetic. A X1600 in 2007? Heck, it was a mediocre card 6 months ago, let alone in 6 months time. A crappy 2Mb cache C2D and both slow as hell compared to what every other desktop manufacturer will be offering?
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Willis
Jul 27, 04:02 PM
Roz Ho? said at Macworld SF that Microsoft BU was commiting at least 5 more years of mac software.
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
they say they like the platform... go figure.
ADD: just a thought aswell. Wonder if we may see the next Office at WWDC?
Yvan256
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
Wow. You'd think a FCP Users group would be able to track down a halfway decent graphic artist to make their banner graphic...
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
At least the one on their website looks fine (yet still ugly), the one on MacRumors looks resized and the pixels got messed up... :confused:
iGary
Feb 28, 05:14 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Whatever crutch gets you through life.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
Whatever crutch gets you through life.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:51 PM
1. It's Merom. Not Memrom, Menron, Memron or even L. Ron.
I got a good laugh out of the MacRumors Memron movement (of sorts)!
I got a good laugh out of the MacRumors Memron movement (of sorts)!
Mr. Mister
Jul 14, 06:55 PM
Power supply at the top? Blah! :mad: I hate the power supply on the top, not that
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
it would keep me from purchasing a new MacPro though. ;)
Power supplies produce a lot of heat. It makes great sense according to simply the most basic laws of thermodynamics.
chrono1081
Apr 8, 03:46 AM
This is a victory for all the elitist fanboys who think that Apple products should only be sold in Apple Stores in upscale shopping areas.
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:11 PM
If it is all just more bells and whistles I guess it will be time to get the upgrade from CS4 to CS5.
It sure does seem like Apple is abandoning the pro market that for a very long time influenced others to go Mac.
I really hope that's not the case.
It sure does seem like Apple is abandoning the pro market that for a very long time influenced others to go Mac.
I really hope that's not the case.
Abstract
Jul 20, 07:42 PM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Orgy-core.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Orgy-core.
FF_productions
Aug 5, 03:26 PM
Finally MR has put together a final rumor roundup...
e-coli
Mar 26, 01:08 PM
Am I the only person not particularly thrilled with Lion?
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 06:47 PM
Wow. I have never, ever in my life been so tempted to troll a MacRumors thread, nor have I ever been so infuriated by the use of a set of double quotation marks.
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
Gay marriage is not "marriage." Gay marriage is marriage.
Gay people are not "gay." They are gay.
So a few things:
1) Deal with it.
2) Gays are going to keep on getting married. Whether that means that they have to leave your ass-backwards country to come to a real civilization to do so, or write their own damn marriage contract and hire a rational person to perform the ceremony, they will.
3) As Lee said, what two consenting adults do in the privacy of their own homes (hell, anywhere, in fact) is their own damn business.
4) The claim by Bill McEnaney that gay people living together "should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another" is outrageous. (NB that this person had just said they must live "as siblings" which is weird, given that platonic love is only reservation from physical romance, not emotional romance...)
5) If you are going to pull the "protect the sanctity of marriage" card on me, think very hard about the institutions of divorce and annulment.
6) Many people (and many of the small number who claim to anyway) do not share your beliefs. Catholics have sex. In and out of marriage. *See Point One.*
7) Please try to be just a smidgen more cultured in your attitudes, and a little less abrasive in sharing them. Though I try to reserve judgment, I am currently not alone in thinking that you are completely insane just by your posts in this thread.
I feel better now. :)
2) okay, they can pretend to get married
3) We don't care what they are doing in there
5) Divorce is a terrible and tragic thing
6) The Catholic Church doesn't pretend that the people in it are perfect.
A) Maybe your feelings on the situation would be different if you actually had a girlfriend.
B) I'm interested to learn what exactly the physical and psychological risks of non-marital sex are?
You're kidding. Right?
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornication
You can pretend that particular fornication sessions are sacred because some guy wearing a white collar said so.
Definitions are useful
No, it's called "living a human lifestyle".
Why should your hang-ups be of any relevance to anybody else? Perhaps you need to deal with your own perceptions instead of relying on some dusty tome to tell you what to think. You know that Plato was a repressed homosexual, don't you? He spent hours at the gymnasium ogling naked young men, and perhaps like S/Paul, spent a lot of effort telling other people how to love to expiate his guilty feelings.
You are extraordinarily keen to prescribe what other people should do. What's it got to do with you?
You sound like a real catch, but hey, what you choose to do is up to you.
So, you assert that a married non-Christian couple can do nothing but fornicate? What an appallingly demeaning attitude! Do you regard any couple you meet as probable fornicators by default? Do you question them about whether they use birth control, or whether they were married, and if so whether it was in a Catholic church with the proper sacraments? You clearly swallow Catholic dogma hook, line and sinker, so choosing righteous friends must be a real PITA.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?
That is because to a Christian they aren't married. He probably doesn't because a marriage between two non-Catholic Christians is generally valid.
Lee, I agree with you about what you say, but he clearly did say that this was only his opinion. People are allowed that, even if it is hateful and exclusionist.
inclusivism is not inherently good and that position holds no hatred or malice
They decided not to rehire him, so?
gekko513
Jul 15, 12:27 PM
Also, 1GB of RAM, who are they kidding? More like Mac Amateur
Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.
Many prefer to buy their own RAM because it's usually cheaper. There would be more people crying if Apple bundled 2GB of expensive RAM. They could offer a RAM downgrade of course, but then why not just give the price of the downgraded version, which leaves us at square one again.
maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:51 AM
Maybe they need to wait in order to get 28/32nm A5 chips. No point in having an iPhone 5 with a 3 hour battery life
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
leekohler
Apr 27, 01:18 PM
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
No it's not. It's basically what Mitt Romney put in place in Massachusetts. And he's a (gasp!) Republican!
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
No, it's not. This is not the first time it's happened either.
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Such as?
fivepoint
Apr 27, 02:27 PM
I am fairly confident that rather than pointing to a conspiracy, this simply shows that when scanned, the operator had enabled some sort of "auto-text" option that attempted to read and convert then embed the raw text info in the PDF, as to make the text "selectable" in preview programs.
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
It only worked on certain text, as is par for the course.
Hopefully you're not insinuating that I am pointing to a conspiracy, I'm pretty sure I was quite clear on that account.
As for the 'auto-text' thing... interesting, why though would the several dates, etc. be on separate layers? And why would the signatures be separate from the typed text? Just slightly different colorations? My only thought was that the thing was retouched in order to improve the appearance of a poor quality scan... but why would they be so sloppy in reassembling? Why not make it a single layer image before releasing? I don't buy that it was simply overlooked... It's the White House for crying out loud. It's as if they WANT they want the controversy to continue???
MacRumors
Aug 5, 03:23 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
With the 2006 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) quickly approaching, the Mac rumor scene has been buzzing with rumors and reports. As usual, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. In last year's WWDC roundup, we summarized the possibility of an Intel-based Mac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/06/20050605001340.shtml). Readers should remember that it was only a year ago that Apple first announced they would be switching to the Intel platform.
Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Apple has already announced that Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) will be discussed and demonstrated at WWDC 2006. In fact, a recent slip-up (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060803151315.shtml) on Apple's developers pages indicates that Apple will be distributing a Developer's Preview of Leopard at WWDC.
Detailed information about Leopard, however, has been very limited. Very few reliable sources of information have come forward. The earliest rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060324092148.shtml) pointed to Virtualization software to be built into Leopard, but this was flatly denied (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060709120049.shtml) by Phil Schiller.
Job postings (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060126125042.shtml), Patent applications (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060314174322.shtml) and Page 2 rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/10/20051021014014.shtml) point to a focus on updating Finder with extensive and improved integration with Spotlight. This has even been the topic of some presumed fake (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060804154559.shtml) screenshots.
Perhaps the most corroborated claims are ones of Apple's iChat 4.0 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060628195853.shtml). Appleinsider claimed that iChat 4.0 will incorporate the ability to call traditional phone lines much like existing Voice over IP services, with similar reports elsewhere on the web.
While MacOSXRumors have offered a list of other possible features: virtual desktops (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802154741.shtml), collaborative features (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060609041938.shtml), tabbed iChat (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2006/08/05/more-on-leopard-revamped-ical-tabbed-chat-improved-developer-tools-and-more/), the reliability of this source is not entirely certain.
Mac Pro
The Intel-update to the PowerMac line remains highly anticipated. The first hints at a name-change came in January 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060130215832.shtml) when Apple was revealed to have trademarked the term "Mac Pro". This was largely dismissed until Steve Jobs revealed the plan to change the name of the existing PowerBook and iBook lines to "MacBook" and "MacBook Pro". Meanwhile, we received early confirmation in May (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060531215206.shtml) that the Mac Pro was indeed targeted for release at WWDC 2006.
In July (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml), Appleinsider felt confident that Apple had chosen the Woodcrest (dual-core Xeon) process for use in the upcoming Mac Pros. While similar to the recently released Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in architecture, the Woodcrest processors allow for multi-processor configurations which have been a feature of the high end PowerMacs. Meanwhile, ThinkSecret believes (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) that the Mac Pro will instead use the Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips that were recently released. One Page 2 rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802151736.shtml) claimed Apple would incorporate both Conroe and Woodcrest into different Mac Pro models, but the validity of this information has been cast in serious doubt.
Other features also rumored include substantially different (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) enclosures, dual optical drives (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060714150350.shtml) and an Intel-designed motherboard (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/12/20051227133503.shtml).
iPhone
Despite ongoing unsubstantiated claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802215346.shtml) that the iPhone will be released soon, there has been very little credible evidence that the iPhone will be seen at WWDC.
iPod
iPod rumors are more difficult to pin down, as iPod rumors have been circulating in full force for months. Rumors of a full video iPod (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060119104515.shtml) started in early but peaked (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060309183950.shtml) in late March due to Apple's impending 30th anniversary. Subsequent rumors of video iPod delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060413131333.shtml) and difficult Hollywood negotiations (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060621163959.shtml) have pushed off the release further, with one analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802114855.shtml) believing September-October to be a more likely timeframe. In July, however, ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060718164759.shtml) had mentioned the possibility of iPod nano updates at WWDC.
Coverage
Steve Jobs will present the Keynote address starting at 10am Pacific Time on Monday August 7th. MacRumors.com will provide live text-transcript coverage of the event on MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The MacRumorsLive system uses the latest web technologies to efficiently provide dynamic text updates.
Stay tuned, as last minute leaks are not unusual in the final moments before an event.
With the 2006 Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) quickly approaching, the Mac rumor scene has been buzzing with rumors and reports. As usual, MacRumors provides this Rumor Roundup as a summary of major rumors circulating around the Mac Web before the big event. In last year's WWDC roundup, we summarized the possibility of an Intel-based Mac (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/06/20050605001340.shtml). Readers should remember that it was only a year ago that Apple first announced they would be switching to the Intel platform.
Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard)
Apple has already announced that Mac OS X 10.5 (Leopard) will be discussed and demonstrated at WWDC 2006. In fact, a recent slip-up (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060803151315.shtml) on Apple's developers pages indicates that Apple will be distributing a Developer's Preview of Leopard at WWDC.
Detailed information about Leopard, however, has been very limited. Very few reliable sources of information have come forward. The earliest rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060324092148.shtml) pointed to Virtualization software to be built into Leopard, but this was flatly denied (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060709120049.shtml) by Phil Schiller.
Job postings (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060126125042.shtml), Patent applications (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060314174322.shtml) and Page 2 rumors (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/10/20051021014014.shtml) point to a focus on updating Finder with extensive and improved integration with Spotlight. This has even been the topic of some presumed fake (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060804154559.shtml) screenshots.
Perhaps the most corroborated claims are ones of Apple's iChat 4.0 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060628195853.shtml). Appleinsider claimed that iChat 4.0 will incorporate the ability to call traditional phone lines much like existing Voice over IP services, with similar reports elsewhere on the web.
While MacOSXRumors have offered a list of other possible features: virtual desktops (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802154741.shtml), collaborative features (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060609041938.shtml), tabbed iChat (http://www.macosxrumors.com/articles/2006/08/05/more-on-leopard-revamped-ical-tabbed-chat-improved-developer-tools-and-more/), the reliability of this source is not entirely certain.
Mac Pro
The Intel-update to the PowerMac line remains highly anticipated. The first hints at a name-change came in January 2006 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060130215832.shtml) when Apple was revealed to have trademarked the term "Mac Pro". This was largely dismissed until Steve Jobs revealed the plan to change the name of the existing PowerBook and iBook lines to "MacBook" and "MacBook Pro". Meanwhile, we received early confirmation in May (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060531215206.shtml) that the Mac Pro was indeed targeted for release at WWDC 2006.
In July (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml), Appleinsider felt confident that Apple had chosen the Woodcrest (dual-core Xeon) process for use in the upcoming Mac Pros. While similar to the recently released Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips in architecture, the Woodcrest processors allow for multi-processor configurations which have been a feature of the high end PowerMacs. Meanwhile, ThinkSecret believes (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) that the Mac Pro will instead use the Core 2 Duo (Conroe) chips that were recently released. One Page 2 rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802151736.shtml) claimed Apple would incorporate both Conroe and Woodcrest into different Mac Pro models, but the validity of this information has been cast in serious doubt.
Other features also rumored include substantially different (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060704122932.shtml) enclosures, dual optical drives (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060714150350.shtml) and an Intel-designed motherboard (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2005/12/20051227133503.shtml).
iPhone
Despite ongoing unsubstantiated claims (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802215346.shtml) that the iPhone will be released soon, there has been very little credible evidence that the iPhone will be seen at WWDC.
iPod
iPod rumors are more difficult to pin down, as iPod rumors have been circulating in full force for months. Rumors of a full video iPod (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/01/20060119104515.shtml) started in early but peaked (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060309183950.shtml) in late March due to Apple's impending 30th anniversary. Subsequent rumors of video iPod delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/04/20060413131333.shtml) and difficult Hollywood negotiations (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060621163959.shtml) have pushed off the release further, with one analyst (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060802114855.shtml) believing September-October to be a more likely timeframe. In July, however, ThinkSecret (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060718164759.shtml) had mentioned the possibility of iPod nano updates at WWDC.
Coverage
Steve Jobs will present the Keynote address starting at 10am Pacific Time on Monday August 7th. MacRumors.com will provide live text-transcript coverage of the event on MacRumorsLive.com (http://www.macrumorslive.com/). The MacRumorsLive system uses the latest web technologies to efficiently provide dynamic text updates.
Stay tuned, as last minute leaks are not unusual in the final moments before an event.
