Consultant
Mar 29, 08:57 AM
And Amazon thinks crippling ioS compatibility will be good business? FAIL.
ftaok
Apr 7, 07:32 PM
Don't apply the phone dynamic to Tablets. Android is not likely to take a lead in tablet market share for a long time if forever.
It really doesn't matter what the percentages are. At some point, the growth rate for tablets will start to slow down. By then, if you aren't already working on the next big thing, you're in trouble.
The point is that Apple is likely to be working to be working on that product already. The question is whether companies like Moto, Samsung, and HP are.
It really doesn't matter what the percentages are. At some point, the growth rate for tablets will start to slow down. By then, if you aren't already working on the next big thing, you're in trouble.
The point is that Apple is likely to be working to be working on that product already. The question is whether companies like Moto, Samsung, and HP are.
Multimedia
Aug 2, 10:17 PM
Hm. Hey guys... I'm a longtime reader of MR. I always read your comments and never recall posting (Creepy, eh?)
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.Nope. The entire line will be Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. MBP will get speed bump to 2.33GHz for further differentiation while MB will remain 2GHz. No logic to keep buying Core Duo processors for the same money as Core 2 or less than they bought Yonah to begin with. They are already making record profits. I doubt they will deliberately cripple mini, iMac and MB when everything is selling like hot cakes anyway. There are plenty of other ways each line differentiates from the other. To leave any line in Core Duo would be outright greedy and I dont' see Apple as having that personality trait.
I fugure it's a 50-50 chance Steve tells the developers next week they can start thinking about 64-bit optimization due to the Core 2 shift that will be complete this year.
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.Nope. The entire line will be Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. MBP will get speed bump to 2.33GHz for further differentiation while MB will remain 2GHz. No logic to keep buying Core Duo processors for the same money as Core 2 or less than they bought Yonah to begin with. They are already making record profits. I doubt they will deliberately cripple mini, iMac and MB when everything is selling like hot cakes anyway. There are plenty of other ways each line differentiates from the other. To leave any line in Core Duo would be outright greedy and I dont' see Apple as having that personality trait.
I fugure it's a 50-50 chance Steve tells the developers next week they can start thinking about 64-bit optimization due to the Core 2 shift that will be complete this year.
Palad1
May 6, 04:50 AM
Windows 8 being available on ARM platforms would make this move, albeit a bold one, pretty viable.
gugy
Aug 2, 01:15 PM
Why is everyone so convinced that there will be significant updates to the Cinema Displays? Remember how long the non-Alu plastic displays were out? It must have been five years, while the Alu displays have been out for less then two years.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
Wow, I have a 30" monitor and I would not mind to have a 40" + monitor.:eek:
Seriously, I have dual monitors and I think a larger monitor would be welcome. Not maybe for dual monitor set up because it would be too large, but for a single large monitor, it would be great. Plus the use for entertainment display to watch movies and TV would be really cool.
The technology is here. I really expect Apple to come up something bigger for the Pro crowd and WWDC is the perfect event for that. Remember, people never thought the 30" would ever come up.
Regarding the design, I agree that Apple will keep the same enclosure. Is a very nice design and I don't think will change anytime soon.
As for Isight built in, I like the idea, but if you have dual monitors, seems weird to have dual Isight. I rather have the BTO option for an extra price.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
Wow, I have a 30" monitor and I would not mind to have a 40" + monitor.:eek:
Seriously, I have dual monitors and I think a larger monitor would be welcome. Not maybe for dual monitor set up because it would be too large, but for a single large monitor, it would be great. Plus the use for entertainment display to watch movies and TV would be really cool.
The technology is here. I really expect Apple to come up something bigger for the Pro crowd and WWDC is the perfect event for that. Remember, people never thought the 30" would ever come up.
Regarding the design, I agree that Apple will keep the same enclosure. Is a very nice design and I don't think will change anytime soon.
As for Isight built in, I like the idea, but if you have dual monitors, seems weird to have dual Isight. I rather have the BTO option for an extra price.
*LTD*
Apr 25, 09:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
"As many observers have noted, the iOS location database does not record exact GPS data, instead seeking to pinpoint the locations of Wi-Fi access points and cell towers that the device comes within range of"
So what's all the fuss over? It shows what cell towers you were near. OMG!!
"As many observers have noted, the iOS location database does not record exact GPS data, instead seeking to pinpoint the locations of Wi-Fi access points and cell towers that the device comes within range of"
So what's all the fuss over? It shows what cell towers you were near. OMG!!
chabig
Aug 4, 12:05 AM
Merom in the MBP for sure. Now.
Apple is showing "64-bit" in the one banner.
That banner is showing Apple's existing products, not future products. The 64 bit logo is no doubt referring to the current line of G5 machines.
Chris
Apple is showing "64-bit" in the one banner.
That banner is showing Apple's existing products, not future products. The 64 bit logo is no doubt referring to the current line of G5 machines.
Chris
AZREOSpecialist
Apr 26, 03:05 PM
Who cares? I thought this was macrumors not android news...
Stop living in a vacuum.
Stop living in a vacuum.
balamw
Apr 10, 07:33 PM
Didn't all your methods, whatever they are called, give a priority to do the parenthesis operation first?
It is not my assumption, it is the method/explanation given by others
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
It is not my assumption, it is the method/explanation given by others
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
McGiord
Apr 10, 08:12 AM
gnasher729:
You were not allowed to vote twice.
So you voted for?
:D
You were not allowed to vote twice.
So you voted for?
:D
mattwolfmatt
Apr 25, 10:40 AM
The info circulating around is false.
Steve
PS shouldn't you be at your gym right now? It's Monday morning, after all.
Steve
PS shouldn't you be at your gym right now? It's Monday morning, after all.
axonic labs
May 6, 01:11 AM
Oh Charlie, you so silly.
Charlie is still trying to bring nVidia down. Apple won't switch to a slower CPU.
Charlie is still trying to bring nVidia down. Apple won't switch to a slower CPU.
Brometheus
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
I think Steve Jobs is someone who doesn't suffer idiots gladly. Note how he didn't say "there is no list of locations on people's iPhones", what he said was "we don't track anyone". The opposite of "we don't track anyone" is "Apple is tracking some people's movements". Do you have any evidence of this? Do you _believe_ it?
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.
MattInOz
Mar 26, 10:43 PM
Wait let me get this right.
The preface of the argument is that apple hasn't said it having an April iOS event as yet like they normally do.
But invites for those event are sent out maybe a week in advance plus Easter is late in the month.
It'll be funny if they send out invites next friday.
The preface of the argument is that apple hasn't said it having an April iOS event as yet like they normally do.
But invites for those event are sent out maybe a week in advance plus Easter is late in the month.
It'll be funny if they send out invites next friday.
Popeye206
Apr 5, 03:34 PM
Allowing this, Apple would have set a presidence, so yes, I understand why Apple asked for this to be stopped... Tomorrow company 'x' would be releasing their JB app. Adobe will be releasing Flash on to Cydia LOL.
Since we are talking in the context of smartphones, we should compare smartphone developer licenses, and not others. Apple vs Apple not Apple vs Lemon.
You can nit-pick it all you want. $99 is nothing for a quality program like what Apple offers to developers. Plus, you can still get the SDK for free. You can still develop for free. It's just if you want "in" on the AppStore and other resources, you pay. So... again... what's the beef?
Since we are talking in the context of smartphones, we should compare smartphone developer licenses, and not others. Apple vs Apple not Apple vs Lemon.
You can nit-pick it all you want. $99 is nothing for a quality program like what Apple offers to developers. Plus, you can still get the SDK for free. You can still develop for free. It's just if you want "in" on the AppStore and other resources, you pay. So... again... what's the beef?
rtharper
Sep 11, 01:26 AM
OK, honestly, I just don't get this. I don't see how a Core 2 Duo laptop right now is going to be so much more 'future proof' than a Core Duo laptop. Are you anticipating some time in the near future where everyone with Core Duo laptops is going to find that no-one is making *nix for 32-bit processors or something?
No, but the thermal efficiency and performance bump are not trivial issues to me if I'm going to spend near 3,000USD on something. I'm also praying for a graphics bump, which is VERY important for futureproofing.
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
Ever done graphics work or gaming on a laptop? Unfortunately, I need a notebook, and I can afford one machine. Therefore, I wouldn't mind some of the enhancements that may come with the Merom update.
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
It wouldn't make me happy; it would fulfill my needs of a laptop. Apple OS is damned good for everything, and much faster than X11 under FreeBSD, for example. I've been trying to chuck windows forever but am dependent on it for a few apps that happen to run on OSX as well, but not other *nix platforms. Dual booting would suck. Plus, the form factor is nice.
Unfortunately, I don't have all year to wait. I have the need for a new laptop as my current laptop is rather ag�d and out of warrantly, and having my sole machine fail as Dell machines seem to be so wont to do is not something I'm looking forward to with out a replacement.
No, but the thermal efficiency and performance bump are not trivial issues to me if I'm going to spend near 3,000USD on something. I'm also praying for a graphics bump, which is VERY important for futureproofing.
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
Ever done graphics work or gaming on a laptop? Unfortunately, I need a notebook, and I can afford one machine. Therefore, I wouldn't mind some of the enhancements that may come with the Merom update.
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
It wouldn't make me happy; it would fulfill my needs of a laptop. Apple OS is damned good for everything, and much faster than X11 under FreeBSD, for example. I've been trying to chuck windows forever but am dependent on it for a few apps that happen to run on OSX as well, but not other *nix platforms. Dual booting would suck. Plus, the form factor is nice.
Unfortunately, I don't have all year to wait. I have the need for a new laptop as my current laptop is rather ag�d and out of warrantly, and having my sole machine fail as Dell machines seem to be so wont to do is not something I'm looking forward to with out a replacement.
(marc)
May 6, 09:42 AM
Time to rename a Quarter Pounder into a "Royale with cheese"! :D
pizzafunghi
May 7, 04:03 PM
I'd get it if it were free!!
gmail is free... so why can't mobile me?
Now I start thinking about it, I've never paid Google a single cent, but I use
*Gmail
*Google search engine
*Google maps
*Google Earth
(*And I used Picasa for a short period of time)
Maybe some orther stuff but the point is... its all free!:)
Today:
Google -> Advertising - Free Services
mobile.me -> No Advertising - Paid Services
Tomorrow?:
mobile.me -> Free Services - iAds (thanks to Html5)
iWork.com -> Free Services - iAds
They are clearly entering googles market. Online services & advertising. I see Apple as the only company who could successfully compete with google.
gmail is free... so why can't mobile me?
Now I start thinking about it, I've never paid Google a single cent, but I use
*Gmail
*Google search engine
*Google maps
*Google Earth
(*And I used Picasa for a short period of time)
Maybe some orther stuff but the point is... its all free!:)
Today:
Google -> Advertising - Free Services
mobile.me -> No Advertising - Paid Services
Tomorrow?:
mobile.me -> Free Services - iAds (thanks to Html5)
iWork.com -> Free Services - iAds
They are clearly entering googles market. Online services & advertising. I see Apple as the only company who could successfully compete with google.
lPHONE
May 6, 12:28 AM
This story broke 5 minutes ago and I'm already over it... Who cares if Apple wants to use something they think is new and revolutionary? Your opinion isn't going to stop them. While you're over here thinking "I can't do bootcamp with ARM" Apple is thinking "Bootcamp will be obsolite when we get done here" :apple:
thogs_cave
Aug 11, 03:56 PM
Supposedly about 20% faster at the same clock speed, plus they are 64 bit, but the benefits of that in these machines is somewhat debatable. It's a nice upgrade, but not a huge one. [...] But that "goodness" mostly looks like greater memory access, which is a moot point in a machine with two ram slots. Most of the "goodness" isn't anything a laptop user will notice.
Which is really the point. It's not a quantum leap like the MacBook was over the iBook. (Having moved from one to the other, I can vouch for that.) I doubt I'd really notice the difference for 99.9% of what I do.
Which is really the point. It's not a quantum leap like the MacBook was over the iBook. (Having moved from one to the other, I can vouch for that.) I doubt I'd really notice the difference for 99.9% of what I do.
Glen Quagmire
Aug 7, 02:35 PM
If i stuck 4x nvidia whatchamacallit would it make any difference to gaming etc on one monitor? Or is an extra graphics card just for extra monitors?
:confused:
It's for extra monitors.
:confused:
It's for extra monitors.
ricosuave
May 6, 01:44 AM
Here we go again...
Hint: Intel is your winner, AAPL. Understand that.
Edit: for you young'ins, this a panel of IBM G5 processors. Specifically designed for Apple. The processor partnership was supposed to be groundbreaking.
Soon after, Apple went begging to Intel and, well, what's the processor brand in the Mac you are reading this on?
Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
Hint: Intel is your winner, AAPL. Understand that.
Edit: for you young'ins, this a panel of IBM G5 processors. Specifically designed for Apple. The processor partnership was supposed to be groundbreaking.
Soon after, Apple went begging to Intel and, well, what's the processor brand in the Mac you are reading this on?
Funny you should ask, I'm running a dual Core A5 ARM chip on this here iPad.
Additionally, I would love a Mac Mini running Lion Server on a super efficient and low power ARM chip.
rhsgolfer33
Apr 20, 06:19 PM
Capital gains allows you to choose the timeline and the price to a point. If Capital Gains is special because of time-linked shifts in pricing, why isn't freelance income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
LightSpeed1
Apr 22, 12:40 AM
Not gonna happen And I hope it doesn't.