LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 11:22 AM
So the presentation should be in about 10 hours?
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
There have been live streams in the past but last I heard Apple killed it for this meeting.
Lethal
Has any one heard of live coverage? A livestream will probably be too much to ask, but maybe one of the tech blogs is doing a text/photo update.
There have been live streams in the past but last I heard Apple killed it for this meeting.
Lethal
zap2
Aug 11, 01:19 PM
Ill only buy it if stupid little spoilt english kids dont buy it, i dont mean posh english kids but yobbish ones, I want it to be the coolest thing in the world. The nano has become the essential for yobbish teenage boys and girls in the uk and I just want those stupid turds to stick to their quote "amazing black v3's with itunes and video" which dont actually have itunes and video!!!!!!!!!!! :mad: :mad: :mad: Im not ageist because im 16.....
Do you really care that much about what people think? If people have something does that really make it "uncool"? Perhaps you should stop care if people like it, hate it , or kill for it, and make up your own option about it based on your likes and dislike about how it looks, works and acts(in this case how bug the software/hardware is)
BUt i'd love to see unlocked phones that can work on all major phone cell companys, they could be price but if they do lots of stuff people will buy it.. it might also be a good idea to release deals with companys(2 year agreements would get it cheaper but you can still buy it unlocked from the Apple store
Do you really care that much about what people think? If people have something does that really make it "uncool"? Perhaps you should stop care if people like it, hate it , or kill for it, and make up your own option about it based on your likes and dislike about how it looks, works and acts(in this case how bug the software/hardware is)
BUt i'd love to see unlocked phones that can work on all major phone cell companys, they could be price but if they do lots of stuff people will buy it.. it might also be a good idea to release deals with companys(2 year agreements would get it cheaper but you can still buy it unlocked from the Apple store
treblah
Sep 19, 07:45 AM
The mermon G6s should be out before summer.
Fixed. :D
Fixed. :D
aafuss1
Jul 14, 11:54 PM
Interesting question, but I don't think any of us here will have the answers.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
PCs don't use EFI. I don't know if a generic AGP/PCIe card can be initialized by EFI, or if the card will need some EFI code to be on-board.
As for OS X, I think we can be fairly certain that Apple will only bundle drivers for cards that Apple sells. If you install a third-party card, they will probably tell you that you'll need a driver from the card's manufacturer - that's what they've historically told customers.
Generic VGA drivers? I'm sure they were developed - they'd be very useful during that time when OS X/Intel was internal-only. But I wouldn't expect them to be bundled with a shipping copy of the system software.
Now, assuming that the Mac firmware (including whatever EFI drivers they include in it) is capable of initializing a generic video card, then there should be no need for more than a device driver, which the card vendors can probably provide, if they are so inclined. If the cards will require special ROM code for EFI, however, then we're back to the same problem that plagued the PPC systems.
I agree-eg. to add a Crossfire configuration would mean that Apple would need to have a preference pane to configure that, which they don't-they supply a driver only.
e-coli
Aug 11, 04:37 PM
How dare you. Since when does apple release a product that is not up to par or even above. Of course they will do it good, it is apple. It is going to be amazing i can just feel it!
Uhh...Motion version 1 was complete crap...totally unusable. Aperture...slow as Christmas, and has serious image degradation problems.
Don't buy into all the hype.
Apple's stock keeps sinking, and they're being investigated by the SEC (or on the brink), so this could be a rumor that's being intentionally leaked to satisfy Wall Street.
Uhh...Motion version 1 was complete crap...totally unusable. Aperture...slow as Christmas, and has serious image degradation problems.
Don't buy into all the hype.
Apple's stock keeps sinking, and they're being investigated by the SEC (or on the brink), so this could be a rumor that's being intentionally leaked to satisfy Wall Street.
portishead
Apr 12, 12:35 PM
So wait,on the projects you're working on,is everyone using recorders to record direct to prores or do you enjoy having to waste time converting everything you get?
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
I almost never have to convert. All clients I work with require ProRes deliverables, and any tapeless material I get is ProRes. If I capture I use ProRes.
Then I'm guessing you do your cross fades manualy?
I just delete any transitions before. It's not that hard.
edit:and I do get your point,it works,but other competitors over the last couple years have brought improvements that I'd like to also see in FCP
I know trust me. I have a HUGE LIST of improvements, but overall FCP still works well for me for 90% of my projects.
JimEJr
Apr 27, 10:30 AM
Its not about being a criminal or paranoid. This data is for the sole purpose of marketers to sell us crap.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
Well, I'm tired of seeing ads everywhere I turn. You can't go to the bathroom now without seeing a ad shoved in your face and its becoming tiresome.
Well, Fry could have added our iPads and our phones too. Its disgusting already how much advertising has infiltrated our lives. You can't even read a news story on the internet without an ad being being intrusively shoved in your face.
Well then shut your eyes and plug your ears...or kiss your content (aka what you DO want) good bye as those ads are what is paying for you to enjoy that news story you refer to and most anything else that is free or a lower cost than it would be without ads. You can't have it both ways. Want all bloggers, media, etc. to do everything without ads AND without a charge? You try running a biz that way...see how long you'll be able to pay your bills.
In reality, the more data advertisers have about you, the better they will be able to put forth ads that are much more relevant to you. If we're going to have ads, might as well have them be for something of genuine interest to each one of us.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:07 PM
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
There is a huge difference between an OS and a cellphone standard. Having two cellphone standards is like having two internets. You as a customer have no idea weather you use CDMA or GSM. I dont know about you, but I use my cell for talking end send/receive data. I dont give a rats ass whether this done through code division or time division...
There is a huge difference between an OS and a cellphone standard. Having two cellphone standards is like having two internets. You as a customer have no idea weather you use CDMA or GSM. I dont know about you, but I use my cell for talking end send/receive data. I dont give a rats ass whether this done through code division or time division...
rmwebs
Mar 26, 04:54 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
Probably all three ;) The QA team has gradually got worse and worse over the last few years. Apple have become more and more greedy, and you can bet the Mac OS coders cant be bothered to work on its ancient codebase when across the office a group of people get to play with the newer (granted still based on Mac OS) iOS.
thedarkhalf
Apr 27, 08:27 AM
The fact is that the iPhone is logging the location of the near by hot spot and cell tower. So if the cell tower is 50 miles away is some instances it is tracking that information not that the GPS location of your phone 50 miles from your phone. If you did the tracking thing on your computer and saw the map with your info, you would notice that some of the dots are places that you probably have never been. When I did and I went up to Northern Michigan it was tracking information approx 60 miles from the road I was on. This is why I never worried about this cause I knew it wasn't actually tracking my iPhones GPS location rather the nearest cell or Wifi location.
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
This is correct. In checking my trip to NC last year, it's showing locations i wasn't even close to. literally 81 miles away from the closest destination I was at (including the trip up and down).
Check a map of all ATT cell towers, i confirmed one cell tower in a location very close to whats pinned on the map (it's about 4 blocks off)
ergle2
Sep 20, 01:50 PM
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
aristotle
Apr 6, 04:54 PM
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
Why put out good money after bad? Shouldn't Motorola be responsible for providing a new demo unit?
If there are no sales then why should the store bother spending their own money on creating a demo unit out of one of the units on sale?
Why put out good money after bad? Shouldn't Motorola be responsible for providing a new demo unit?
If there are no sales then why should the store bother spending their own money on creating a demo unit out of one of the units on sale?
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:38 AM
I wish these people would just be honest and tell the American people their real motivation; we don't want a n***** in the White House.
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:49 PM
Weird... I think there's more involved in this than we can imagine.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
One thing that comes to my mind is the possibility they were holding their stock to sell it outside the country, as there's been a high demand and higher value to sell overseas.
Or... a competitor made an arrangement with Be$t Buy to sell a minimum quota a day (well... very odd, but possible) for who knows what reason.
It's a strange concept on BB's part, but if I had a store I would sell all my stock if there's a demand for it. If I hold off, my customers would be driven away to a competitor and I would loose both present and future sales.
SuperCachetes
Mar 5, 07:30 PM
The same model applies to the 'church'.
They are on the wane, and need new conscripts.
Gays are less likely to give them that.
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
They are on the wane, and need new conscripts.
Gays are less likely to give them that.
That's (sadly) believable. See, now you're talking. I knew you didn't always pop round just to throw a cheeky non sequitur into the works. ;)
mdelvecchio
Mar 31, 03:47 PM
The source hasn't been released. It's the source code that people are talking about. The source code that Google has always released up till now.
thats the point -- he was clarifiying that despite the OS being out, the source hasnt been released. thats the point being made.
thats the point -- he was clarifiying that despite the OS being out, the source hasnt been released. thats the point being made.
moooosedude
Jul 20, 08:27 AM
The Mactopus??
So I was just in the office workin on my new Mactopus...
or
Hey honey! I just dropped 3K on our new Mactopus!
...It could be very fun.
~moooosedude
So I was just in the office workin on my new Mactopus...
or
Hey honey! I just dropped 3K on our new Mactopus!
...It could be very fun.
~moooosedude
jicon
Aug 17, 02:11 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Porco
Nov 28, 10:41 PM
The full article is very funny.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way," he told the Reuters Media Summit, when asked if Universal would negotiate a royalty fee for the iPod that would be similar to Microsoft's Zune.
"The Zune (deal) was an amazingly interesting exercise, to end up with a piece of technology," he added.
"It would be a nice idea" if I got money for nothing too! And why am I tempted to read "an amazingly interesting exercise" as an amazingly interesting exercise ... he added, dollar signs flashing in his eyes like some real-life Scrooge McDuck' ?
And to end up with "a piece of technology"! Yes! wow! hahahahah, I bet Microsoft were astounded about that too.
As the various parodies of such behaviour online indicates, the whole thing would be hilarious if it wasn't so ... true.
Pirates will pirate unless you give them a compelling reason not to. Legitimate customers will stay that way unless they feel piracy is an action they are ethically comfortable with. This kind of garbage makes that happen.
So for every iPod that would possibly hold a good couple of hundred Universal tracks amongst the thousands on there, I'd guess this kind of thing completely turns us nerds towards piracy rather than CD purchases/legitimate downloads. Is that $1 per iPod really going to make them as much money as the $xx they have lost on CDs and downloads? I'd guess not. Even if only 1% of people buying iPods pirate Universal tracks instead of buying them because of this deal (if it happens), it would be a loser for Universal. And of course the only people not financially at a loss because of it will be people who buy tracks, not the pirates who are back in the black as soon as they soak up the $1 surcharge by illegally downloading a Universal album as soon as they get their iPod.
If Apple did have the misfortune to be made to accept this kind of thing (unlikely right now I'd think, but you never know after a couple of ad-laden Zune-ar years), they should add the $1 to the price of the iPod so people ask "why does it cost $201?" and they should tell people on their web-site exactly why as well, providing details of how to get in touch with Universal to express their thanks.
Sorry if I've repeated any points already made... it's a Universally idiotic idea.
Amazing Iceman
Mar 31, 10:02 PM
I've really loved my experience with Android so far. I've had an iPhone and a iPhone 3G and I am an iPhone developer.... yet I use Android.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Just a quick question, hopefully not out of topic:
Which one do you prefer as a developer, not as a user: iOS or Android?
Good choice about the MBP i7. It's been over 3 years since I got my MBP, and it's time to replace it, but I may get an i7 iMac instead, as I now carry my iPad everywhere.
If a really good MBP comes out, I may reconsider and get one instead of the iMac. Too soon to decide.
Android will always be "open source" and this is not inconsistent with Google applying more control to stem inoperable fragmentation. These two ideas are not at odds.
I cannot wait for Google to do what I think Amazon is currently trying to do with their new App. Store.
That said I really like the new iPad 2, but sadly my next purchase would prolly be a i7 MacBook Pro.
Just a quick question, hopefully not out of topic:
Which one do you prefer as a developer, not as a user: iOS or Android?
Good choice about the MBP i7. It's been over 3 years since I got my MBP, and it's time to replace it, but I may get an i7 iMac instead, as I now carry my iPad everywhere.
If a really good MBP comes out, I may reconsider and get one instead of the iMac. Too soon to decide.
davea11ee
Apr 5, 06:27 PM
Time for my 8 cores to start all being used at the same time.
vincenz
Apr 28, 01:30 PM
Trump is the ultimate troll. Worst of all, he's just getting tons of free publicity every time the subject is brought up.
Steviejobz
Apr 8, 06:08 AM
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
BBY announced earnings on 3/24 - they operate on a different fiscal year so the quarter ended in February.
BBY announced earnings on 3/24 - they operate on a different fiscal year so the quarter ended in February.
Silentwave
Jul 14, 05:28 PM
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
While I agree that the 2.93 Conroe is unlikely to make its way into the macs, I don't think the difference will be 'substantial.' The Woodcrest has a faster FSB, and most other variables are equal except clock speed. Based on the benchmarks on the various Conroe versions, I think that the 2.66 Woodcrest will offer performance only very slightly slower than Conroe 2.93.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Just a nit, but IIRC isn't the codename for conroe based chips running at 2.4 and below with 2MB L2 caches Allendale? (there is a separate 2.4 with 4mb L2)
I'm still not sure whether Apple will go all woodcrest to get better prices on chips and RAM (FB-DIMM is exclusive to woodcrest in apple's potential lineup)but I would expect either 2x2GHz or 2x2.3GHz as a low end quad, and either a 2x2.66 or 2x3.0 for the high end. Perhaps the 3.0GHz will be a BTO option for the 2x2.66, like the 2.16 was a BTO originally on the 2.0 MBP.
"One more thing, you know we complained about not breaking 3GHz with Power-PC, so for our latest quad, we figured you'd all like to finally do that. So, you can order your top level 2.66 Xeon quad as a build to order with two of the 3.0GHz Xeon chips!"
While I agree that the 2.93 Conroe is unlikely to make its way into the macs, I don't think the difference will be 'substantial.' The Woodcrest has a faster FSB, and most other variables are equal except clock speed. Based on the benchmarks on the various Conroe versions, I think that the 2.66 Woodcrest will offer performance only very slightly slower than Conroe 2.93.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Just a nit, but IIRC isn't the codename for conroe based chips running at 2.4 and below with 2MB L2 caches Allendale? (there is a separate 2.4 with 4mb L2)
I'm still not sure whether Apple will go all woodcrest to get better prices on chips and RAM (FB-DIMM is exclusive to woodcrest in apple's potential lineup)but I would expect either 2x2GHz or 2x2.3GHz as a low end quad, and either a 2x2.66 or 2x3.0 for the high end. Perhaps the 3.0GHz will be a BTO option for the 2x2.66, like the 2.16 was a BTO originally on the 2.0 MBP.
"One more thing, you know we complained about not breaking 3GHz with Power-PC, so for our latest quad, we figured you'd all like to finally do that. So, you can order your top level 2.66 Xeon quad as a build to order with two of the 3.0GHz Xeon chips!"
