flyfish29
Mar 26, 04:13 PM
its my understanding that apple made this browser BEFORE MSIE was pulled from the mac. M$ pulled IE because they believed Safari was better and faster and could better serve the mac. it was also part of a marketing plan by M$ to remove IE as a stand alone browser from Win and Mac. Think before you post and do your homework. The rest of use don't want to read something that's not true or thot out.
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.
Yes, Apple made this browser before M$ IE was pulled, but it was obvious that M$ would be pulling it long before they announced it. With the integratioin of IE into windows it was only a matter of time and if Apple had waited until the announcement they would have been so far behind that the mainstream would have suffered. Safari is just now getting up to speed on its accessability to most web pages- and I even still have major accessability problems with some financial pages and registering at some other types of pages. Most people don't know about the alternative browsers out there such as Mozilla, etc. so it would have proved devestating to Apple had they not been on the ball with Safari. They just know netscape, IE and now safari. I think iMac-Japan's comment on this particular issue is partly true as is your Calebj14.
maverick808
Oct 23, 10:00 PM
Does anyone really think Apple would do a major hardware update without a press conference of any kind?
Depends what you mean by major hardware update.
The iMac was updated without a press conference of any kind. That update included C2D, brand new larger screen model, FW800, much better video cards (at least as an option) and better speakers. I'd call the release of an entirely new model (the 24"), and processor and other updates across the line, a major hardware update. And that happened with no conference of any kind.
The MacBook (non pro) was released without any event or conference. That update included a completely new enclosure, new processor architecture (and obviously new CPU), increased screen resolution, brightness... well, it was a whole new machine. And again... no press conference.
I'd call that a major hardware update. I guess you must have a different definition of major hardware update... although I can't think what could be more major than the silent MacBook release, which was a completely new machine.
Depends what you mean by major hardware update.
The iMac was updated without a press conference of any kind. That update included C2D, brand new larger screen model, FW800, much better video cards (at least as an option) and better speakers. I'd call the release of an entirely new model (the 24"), and processor and other updates across the line, a major hardware update. And that happened with no conference of any kind.
The MacBook (non pro) was released without any event or conference. That update included a completely new enclosure, new processor architecture (and obviously new CPU), increased screen resolution, brightness... well, it was a whole new machine. And again... no press conference.
I'd call that a major hardware update. I guess you must have a different definition of major hardware update... although I can't think what could be more major than the silent MacBook release, which was a completely new machine.
iJohnHenry
Apr 17, 08:04 AM
I'm 32, still love driving
Very humorous. :)
Very humorous. :)
guzhogi
Jul 18, 09:56 AM
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
lordonuthin
Apr 14, 06:26 PM
So I should put the -bigadv into my i7, it's not a great i7 I think its at 1.66ghz and in a laptop. Should I risk it? How can I maximise the PPD from my i7 as its only doing like 1-2k a day I think.
1.66 Ghz and a laptop isn't going to make it for bigadv units they need to be completed within about 3-4 days to make it worthwhile and I doubt your machine would make that time frame. An overclocked i7 920 at about 3-4? Ghz will work. My i7 920 is not overclocked so I don't do bigadv units on it and it also is running 3 gpu's so it has some overhead from them.
1.66 Ghz and a laptop isn't going to make it for bigadv units they need to be completed within about 3-4 days to make it worthwhile and I doubt your machine would make that time frame. An overclocked i7 920 at about 3-4? Ghz will work. My i7 920 is not overclocked so I don't do bigadv units on it and it also is running 3 gpu's so it has some overhead from them.
steviem
Mar 18, 07:46 AM
The only way to impose a no fly zone is to have your fighter jets and bombers in the region. Also they have to destroy/disarm Libya's SAMs and possibly destroy/disable Libyan Air Force air fields.
Remember several Gulf States are part of this force too, so it isn't 'the West imposing democracy' like before.
There was nothing about us making up lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Just footage and communication from the people of Libya and news organizations showing the devastation Gaddafi is putting upon his own people.
I see no reason for troops to enter Libya, apart from the UN once the Libyan people overthrow Gaddafi if there is a need for aid. Although I'd much rather see UN over in Japan getting food and supplies to cities affected by the recent Earthquake/tsunami and nuclear reactor scares.
Remember several Gulf States are part of this force too, so it isn't 'the West imposing democracy' like before.
There was nothing about us making up lies about Weapons of Mass Destruction. Just footage and communication from the people of Libya and news organizations showing the devastation Gaddafi is putting upon his own people.
I see no reason for troops to enter Libya, apart from the UN once the Libyan people overthrow Gaddafi if there is a need for aid. Although I'd much rather see UN over in Japan getting food and supplies to cities affected by the recent Earthquake/tsunami and nuclear reactor scares.
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:38 PM
You mean made easier to use?
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
WCat
Jul 19, 05:10 PM
Like some others here have asked, I just have to wonder how some of these top-tier analysts manage to maintain cred with such lousy predictions? Not only were they off on the numbers quite a bit, but they were also off in the overall direction. That's pretty major.
Leave it to Apple to prove the "common knowledge" wrong yet again! Isn't that what they're best at??
Leave it to Apple to prove the "common knowledge" wrong yet again! Isn't that what they're best at??
CEAbiscuit
Nov 28, 12:04 PM
guys i think you're being too hard on zune. play with one. it's not THAT bad. it's ugly, but the interface isn't bad at all. I don't plan on buying a zune (my ipod is fine and i'm waiting on a video pod), but it's good to have it in the marketplace for competition sake. maybe apple will actually pay attention to some of the features like the built in radio tuner which is a nobrainer...
I played with it in a Target over the weekend. It IS THAT bad. I agree with the competition aspect, but the the things comes off clunky and akward...
I played with it in a Target over the weekend. It IS THAT bad. I agree with the competition aspect, but the the things comes off clunky and akward...
syklee26
Sep 6, 02:15 PM
i know this is off topic but are they ever gonna do anything about the outrageous cost of .Mac subscription?
Bengt77
Sep 1, 01:38 PM
If iMacs don't get Conroe inside that is going to be SO WEAK. The Power GAP between all Macs and the Mac Pro would be so wide you could drive a truck through it. Makes no sense to me for Conroe to not go into something. Right now that's only iMac. Market for Conroe headless Mac has got to be huge. :confused: :eek: :(
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
I completely agree. If the iMac goes Merom, we can be sure Apple will come out with a headless Conroe powered Mac. (xMac or maybe just Mac, anyone? :rolleyes:) If the iMac does [i]indeed[i] turn out to be Merom only, I'll wait for that other anouncement...
2.33GHz is the top of Merom folks. How can that be the best Apple can offer non Mac Pro customers? Seems rediculous. There has got to be a home for Conroe Processors in iMacs or a new mid-tower.
I completely agree. If the iMac goes Merom, we can be sure Apple will come out with a headless Conroe powered Mac. (xMac or maybe just Mac, anyone? :rolleyes:) If the iMac does [i]indeed[i] turn out to be Merom only, I'll wait for that other anouncement...
snberk103
Apr 10, 07:21 PM
....
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
Really, is there even someone who doesn't know how to drive an automatic ? It's pretty self-explanatory, not much of a learning curve shifting from Park to Drive and hitting the gas. ...
When I was in University my buddy told me the following story - he swore it was true.
His mom drove a manual (and had only every driven manuals), and he had an automatic. One day he was driving her back from the garage where she had left her car for servicing and mom asked if she could drive his car because she wanted to see what it was like.
Naturally, it took her all of 30 seconds to figure it out (though he did note that mom kept trying to depress the clutch, even if she wasn't trying to shift.) Everything was fine, they were sailing through the traffic, and then mom wanted to stop at a store and run some errands. This meant parallel parking since they were still in town. He was a bit worried, because trying to parallel park a strange car is always a bit challenging, and sons always think their mothers are not the best parkers.
And this is what she did. She pulled up right next to an open spot, put on her turn signal, and put the car into (P)ark. She then started goosing the gas. My buddy was looking at his mom, quizzically. Mom was staring at the open spot next them intently, and revving the engine. Finally he asked her what she was doing. It seems she thought that the (P)ark meant that the car 'automatically parked' itself by moving 90� to the side. You told the car which way to go (left or right) via the turn signals.
My buddy explained that that was not how it worked. Mom sighed - pulled up a 1/2 car length, popped it into (R)erverse and parked his car smooth as butter - turned to him and commented that if an "automatic" car with (P)ark couldn't park itself, then what was the point.
Far as know, she drove a manual for the rest of her life. I don't know if he was ever sure whether is mom was pulling his leg or not.
h'biki
Apr 16, 02:30 AM
For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
.
One of the *few* examples of companies pulling out. Premiere was another high profile example. But over the last 3 years has seen companies companies porting their Windows/Linux/Unix software to OS X as well as a flood of original development -- which to me indicate that the platform is healthy.
(Examples include Maya, the return of MatLab to the platform, Absofts C++ Complier, Combustion, Shake [when it was with Nothing Real]... as well as original progs like iView, Proteus, SpamSieve etc]
.
One of the *few* examples of companies pulling out. Premiere was another high profile example. But over the last 3 years has seen companies companies porting their Windows/Linux/Unix software to OS X as well as a flood of original development -- which to me indicate that the platform is healthy.
(Examples include Maya, the return of MatLab to the platform, Absofts C++ Complier, Combustion, Shake [when it was with Nothing Real]... as well as original progs like iView, Proteus, SpamSieve etc]
AppliedVisual
Nov 17, 12:37 PM
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
FB-DIMMs aren't going to disappear anytime soon -- not in the next few years anyway. There currently is nothing better or more reliable for installing 16GB or more in a system without dividing up RAM into multiple, independent banks and controllers, often on a per-CPU base (as is done on current NUMA, AMD Opteron and other offerings from Sun, IBM, etc..).
Probably won't see FB-DIMM style RAM on systems like the iMac anytime soon, no need for it. But for now, it's what makes the most sense for Mac Pro and Xserve.
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.
FB-DIMMs aren't going to disappear anytime soon -- not in the next few years anyway. There currently is nothing better or more reliable for installing 16GB or more in a system without dividing up RAM into multiple, independent banks and controllers, often on a per-CPU base (as is done on current NUMA, AMD Opteron and other offerings from Sun, IBM, etc..).
Probably won't see FB-DIMM style RAM on systems like the iMac anytime soon, no need for it. But for now, it's what makes the most sense for Mac Pro and Xserve.
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.
AidenShaw
Nov 29, 08:37 PM
Living room, car, blah blah blah.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:
M. Jobs can be an expert at emitting hot air... ;)
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:
M. Jobs can be an expert at emitting hot air... ;)
Veinticinco
Mar 23, 04:24 AM
they won't ! iPod classic is the best selling for
I very much doubt that.
Unless of course you're actually a SVP in Apple Sales and are speaking from a position of authority :rolleyes:
I very much doubt that.
Unless of course you're actually a SVP in Apple Sales and are speaking from a position of authority :rolleyes:
ssk2
Apr 3, 12:32 PM
After watching the ad 3 times, I *think* I like it. It treads just the right sign of 'schmoltzy' without going too far over. It (the device) looks gorgeous too, from a purely personal view.
It hasn't won me over (iPad v Playbook), but there's not doubting its a good ad.
It hasn't won me over (iPad v Playbook), but there's not doubting its a good ad.
Fubar1977
Apr 17, 10:46 AM
The German and Japanese stuff seems to be the best from a quality point of view.
My Mitsubishi had a really nice old-school auto box in it.
My Mitsubishi had a really nice old-school auto box in it.
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 04:29 AM
I dont know if they did, but it sounds like they didn't. That's the difference here. Apple was granted the trademark.
Nope, they weren't. The trademark is in its opposition phase right now, it has not been granted yet. Microsoft has filed opposition to it.
Nope, they weren't. The trademark is in its opposition phase right now, it has not been granted yet. Microsoft has filed opposition to it.
Chaos123x
Apr 12, 09:57 PM
My thoughts exactly!. As a owner of FCP 7 (and the rumord price drop for FCP X) How much will the upgrade cost? Price speculation time!
I hope they don't consider this a all new program and not offer upgrades.
But then again it might be offered for cheap on the App Store anyway.
I hope they don't consider this a all new program and not offer upgrades.
But then again it might be offered for cheap on the App Store anyway.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:28 AM
bmustaf
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
blakdragun
Feb 24, 06:43 PM
Here's my mbp setup.
nice clean setup.
nice clean setup.
boncellis
Sep 6, 07:35 PM
There has to be something in the cards that Apple plans to implement that will trump Amazon. I just don't think it will be the iPod this time. What's in store, I wonder...
jav6454
Mar 24, 10:27 PM
Ehhh...you're right that it's no 1200watt corsair. But it supports dual CPUs, crap ton of ram, and 5770x2 or 5870...surely it could support a 6970(from a tdp perspective)
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
