Seasought
Sep 26, 10:46 AM
I'll have to check and see what Cingular is offering deal-wise at the time, but being T-Mobile currently I won't be getting the phone until it expands after that 6 month period.
Assuming I can tolerate the phone in the first place. I've yet to see a cell phone that's impressed me. If anyone can however, it's Apple.
Assuming I can tolerate the phone in the first place. I've yet to see a cell phone that's impressed me. If anyone can however, it's Apple.
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 14, 08:26 AM
This can be good...does look like a photo only event....but we can still hope (iPhone with great camrea ?)
Is that wise? The camera in cellphones is at best a sorry excuse. Introducing a crappy camera at photokina... I don't know
Still I would love to see the iPhone.
Is that wise? The camera in cellphones is at best a sorry excuse. Introducing a crappy camera at photokina... I don't know
Still I would love to see the iPhone.
Popeye206
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
You never OWNED any of this stuff. You owned the physical media, and you had an unlimited license to you. The technology is just clarifying this.
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
justinbieber selena gomez
Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
+selena+gomez+2011+april
Justin Bieber Won#39;t Say If
justin bieber and selena gomez
Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez
selena gomez and justin bieber
Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
justin february This page
did justin bieber and selena
Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
Justin+ieber+selena+gomez
Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
+justin+ieber+2011+april
justin bieber and selena gomez
Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
If you had actually owned it, you could have copied it as much as you wanted-- legally-- and resold the copies to others. You have been capable of doing this, but it was illegal; it also was difficult to enforce the law. Now the technology is actually starting to match your legal rights. It's actually wonderful. You are not losing anything you had legally, but the true owners (the content creators and the people who support them financially) can stop getting ripped off by criminals.
+1 LOL!
Have to laugh... so many people here are upset about nothing. All it says in this rumor is that you would have the option of storing your libraries on-line and access them from multiple points. And if you upload something you already "own" they will take that too. Not just what you've purchased from iTunes.
It's a value added service that I'm sure Apple is looking to do something different with and I'm sure there's more to the story... like that this will be used for Video, books and other media too. The advantages:
Lynxpoint
Sep 14, 02:54 PM
aperture update aside, what do the "pro photographers" on here see as something missing in their workflow or that could critically change their workflow?
I like the sound of a monitor that self colour corrects, for example.
I like the sound of a monitor that self colour corrects, for example.
BC2009
Mar 30, 11:52 AM
It seems that App on its own is generic, but the combination with another word to define a particular thing is not... see
Lady + Gaga
Best + Buy
Face + Book
Micro + Soft
General + Electric
Pintos + Cheese .. okay, maybe not that
Very good points. Trademarks like this are granted all the time. The word "App" may have been common slang among IT professionals for a while, but certainly not "App Store". Like I said before though -- whenever Apple wants to use a common term they just stick an "i" in front of it. Wouldn't "iApp Store" have made this whole thing go away? :)
Lady + Gaga
Best + Buy
Face + Book
Micro + Soft
General + Electric
Pintos + Cheese .. okay, maybe not that
Very good points. Trademarks like this are granted all the time. The word "App" may have been common slang among IT professionals for a while, but certainly not "App Store". Like I said before though -- whenever Apple wants to use a common term they just stick an "i" in front of it. Wouldn't "iApp Store" have made this whole thing go away? :)
Hodapp
Sep 27, 12:25 PM
Do the new Cingular phones with iTunes still have the 100 song limit? It is a ridiculously easy restriction to remove if you have the right software and access to a PC. I've got about 150 songs on my SLVR, which is all that will really fit on a 512MB card.
chameleon81
Apr 30, 01:57 PM
Great, now can someone please release a product that actually uses Thunderbolt so I can get it for my MBP?
I think the same. Great! I will have a thunderbolt which promises ultra fast speed for non existing products.
I think the same. Great! I will have a thunderbolt which promises ultra fast speed for non existing products.
Synapple
Sep 14, 08:46 AM
Wow... this is great!
I knew Apple would have a stand at Photokina but an Apple special event even before it is awesome! :D
Apart from Aperture 2.0 I bet some hardware is a given.
Aperture in itself, albeit a significant application for pro photographers, would not warrant a special event... let alone a special event on a Sunday :eek:
I knew Apple would have a stand at Photokina but an Apple special event even before it is awesome! :D
Apart from Aperture 2.0 I bet some hardware is a given.
Aperture in itself, albeit a significant application for pro photographers, would not warrant a special event... let alone a special event on a Sunday :eek:
powers74
Mar 30, 12:39 PM
App market?
Program Store?
Program Market?
App Hub?
App Universe?
App Base?
Tool Shed?
Imagination?
Hello?
Program Store?
Program Market?
App Hub?
App Universe?
App Base?
Tool Shed?
Imagination?
Hello?
maclaptop
Apr 19, 07:44 AM
Apple is pathetic.
I'm with you.
Poor little Stevie, he's old and bored.
The greedy little man.
I'm with you.
Poor little Stevie, he's old and bored.
The greedy little man.
steve_hill4
Sep 9, 08:06 AM
The fact that the new iMacs can't address more than 3Gb of memory and are therefore operating on a 32bit logic-board makes me doubtful as to whether or not these systems are really 64-bit capable... It seems like some kind of hybrid 32/64bit system.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
Will the C2D iMacs be able to run 64bit code, despite not having the 64bit address space (and being able to access over 4Gb or RAM)?
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I'm hoping by the time I'm after an iMac, it will take at least 4GB, have Blu-Ray as an option, (although I may opt for standard Superdrive if it is an option and buy a Mac compatible external later), include bigger hard drives and stick to a similar price point to now.
I'm tempted by the 20" now, but am not buying yet and would want about 320-400GB in there for the same price, perhaps even 2GB RAM. I've got time to wait however.
SBacklin
Apr 22, 10:08 AM
If the cloud is left as just an option, then i'm all for it. So long as the iTunes store also exists in the format it is today. I have a massive music collection currently sitting at around 140GB and constantly growing. I like owning copies of the music. Not to do anything illegal with, but I like being responsible for the music. I can already take my music collection with my wherever I go. It's called my iPod Classic. I already have my entire iTunes library backed up. It's called Time Machine. I think SYNCHING via the cloud and having it there as just an option is a great idea, for people who want it, but if they made it cloud only, and took away the ability to download then that would only increase the level of piracy in time. Very much like DRM did. Record companies thought this was a great idea to restrict usage and prevent piracy. Turned out more people were turning to pirated music because of the restrictions that had been placed on them.
To sum up. The cloud should be an OPTION, not compulsory.
Exactly. If its an option and not local storage replacement...then hey to each his own. We will just have to wait and see what Apple does. With that said, I'm off to get ready for the day. TTYL everyone.
To sum up. The cloud should be an OPTION, not compulsory.
Exactly. If its an option and not local storage replacement...then hey to each his own. We will just have to wait and see what Apple does. With that said, I'm off to get ready for the day. TTYL everyone.
Zadillo
Aug 31, 03:26 PM
Back to the issue of PDA hardware options, does anyone have a clue whether it makes ANY sense to invest in Palm OS based PDA devices (like the Palm TX)? Is the Palm OS going to disappear? I'm holding out on a new PDA for fear that something directly from Apple will hit the market soon. I hate the thought of buying a Pocket PC device, and I would LOVE it if the next gen. video iPod had a boatload of PDA type features- which only makes sense given the rumored larger screen size.
The Palm OS as we currently know it (the one you will find on Palm OS-powered Treos, the Palm TX, etc.) is basically dead. PalmSource is doing no further development to it, and PalmSource was acquired by Access, which is creating the Access Linux Platform as a successor to the Palm OS (it will include Palm emulation to run Palm apps, etc.).
It's not to say that it's compeltely worthless to have a Palm-based system. Plenty of people still do have Palm OS Treos and other Palm OS PDA's, and there's still plenty of people using it and developing software for it. I personally have a Treo 650 and it's still working great for me.
Hopefully Palm will license the Access Linux Platform and use that so that the "Palm OS" stays alive, but so far Palm hasn't committed to it. It's entirely possible that Palm could end up just making Windows Mobile devices.
If you want a platform that definitely has support behind it, you're basically stuck with a PocketPC. There's also Symbian and some other stuff, but PocketPC is definitely sort of repeating the "success" of Windows in the PDA world.
-Zadillo
The Palm OS as we currently know it (the one you will find on Palm OS-powered Treos, the Palm TX, etc.) is basically dead. PalmSource is doing no further development to it, and PalmSource was acquired by Access, which is creating the Access Linux Platform as a successor to the Palm OS (it will include Palm emulation to run Palm apps, etc.).
It's not to say that it's compeltely worthless to have a Palm-based system. Plenty of people still do have Palm OS Treos and other Palm OS PDA's, and there's still plenty of people using it and developing software for it. I personally have a Treo 650 and it's still working great for me.
Hopefully Palm will license the Access Linux Platform and use that so that the "Palm OS" stays alive, but so far Palm hasn't committed to it. It's entirely possible that Palm could end up just making Windows Mobile devices.
If you want a platform that definitely has support behind it, you're basically stuck with a PocketPC. There's also Symbian and some other stuff, but PocketPC is definitely sort of repeating the "success" of Windows in the PDA world.
-Zadillo
trip1ex
Mar 22, 04:45 PM
4 core i5 and HD3000 integrated graphics on the low-end?
Mydriasis
Sep 14, 08:08 AM
I will be going to the Photokina, I live like 30min away. Maybe I can go to the special event too :D
I'll see if I need a ticket/invitation (probably not, I am not getting my hopes up yet)
I'll see if I need a ticket/invitation (probably not, I am not getting my hopes up yet)
sal
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Had this security guard done nothing and instead hide in a corner somewhere like most of you would, I could only imagine some of the comments you guys would post.
security guards in general get so much heat from the general population. Armed guards are there to protect life and property. they don't respond like they should in these situations, they aren't doing their job. Most guards, don't do their job and this is why they get ridiculed. this guard does his job and you get people saying things like "security guards shouldn't carry guns, OMG"
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
pretty amazing huh? I use to do armed security. Sometimes when I do duty without a gun, I'd get all kinds of wise-ass side remarks about being a rent a cop. when I carried my gun, I got nothing but respect. the "rent-a-cop" remarks stopped. or maybe they just said it very low so I couldn't hear. Not sure why, I am not going to shoot anyone for an insult :D
and yes, if my life or those I am working to protect are threatened by you, this "rent-a-cop" would shoot you in order to save my life or those around me. No questions asked.
How sad,
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life.
when you take your permit to carry a gun, they make it a point NOT to get your permit if you are not emotionally capable of handling taking someone's life. You don't wear a gun for show, you wear it for protection. if you come from the mentality that you could never shoot someone, even if your own life or those around you in is in danger, then leave your gun at home and pick a different job.
I'm sorry but those guys deserved it. Why should the mall guard have to wait until his life in in danger before putting someone else's life in danger?
it's the law, otherwise you open up yourself to be thrown in jail or face a civil lawsuit. the judge has to see that without a reasonable doubt, your life was in danger and you did what was needed in order to protect it or protect the life of those around you.
it's a judgement call you have to make and sometimes it's not an easy one to make because there are so many variables. Having an adrenaline rush and chaos all around you, makes it very easy to make mistakes. such as shooting a suspect as he is running away. missing shots and hitting bystanders. Pulling the trigger preemptively and killing someone without a "real" threat.
the messed part is that armed security guards, don't get the same type of protection police get. Had this been a police shooting, I bet half of these responses would be different.
security guards in general get so much heat from the general population. Armed guards are there to protect life and property. they don't respond like they should in these situations, they aren't doing their job. Most guards, don't do their job and this is why they get ridiculed. this guard does his job and you get people saying things like "security guards shouldn't carry guns, OMG"
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
pretty amazing huh? I use to do armed security. Sometimes when I do duty without a gun, I'd get all kinds of wise-ass side remarks about being a rent a cop. when I carried my gun, I got nothing but respect. the "rent-a-cop" remarks stopped. or maybe they just said it very low so I couldn't hear. Not sure why, I am not going to shoot anyone for an insult :D
and yes, if my life or those I am working to protect are threatened by you, this "rent-a-cop" would shoot you in order to save my life or those around me. No questions asked.
How sad,
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life.
when you take your permit to carry a gun, they make it a point NOT to get your permit if you are not emotionally capable of handling taking someone's life. You don't wear a gun for show, you wear it for protection. if you come from the mentality that you could never shoot someone, even if your own life or those around you in is in danger, then leave your gun at home and pick a different job.
I'm sorry but those guys deserved it. Why should the mall guard have to wait until his life in in danger before putting someone else's life in danger?
it's the law, otherwise you open up yourself to be thrown in jail or face a civil lawsuit. the judge has to see that without a reasonable doubt, your life was in danger and you did what was needed in order to protect it or protect the life of those around you.
it's a judgement call you have to make and sometimes it's not an easy one to make because there are so many variables. Having an adrenaline rush and chaos all around you, makes it very easy to make mistakes. such as shooting a suspect as he is running away. missing shots and hitting bystanders. Pulling the trigger preemptively and killing someone without a "real" threat.
the messed part is that armed security guards, don't get the same type of protection police get. Had this been a police shooting, I bet half of these responses would be different.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
donlphi
Sep 5, 08:25 PM
I agree with everyone here who says that when Apple starts their own movie store they should also release a new Application along with it.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
They could call it iMovie... wait that won't work.
iFlix (too netflix-ee)? iPix(too pixarish)? iMedia (too micro$oftish)? nah.. just stick with iTunes... everybody knows how to use it, but fix the video playback.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
They could call it iMovie... wait that won't work.
iFlix (too netflix-ee)? iPix(too pixarish)? iMedia (too micro$oftish)? nah.. just stick with iTunes... everybody knows how to use it, but fix the video playback.
toddybody
May 3, 11:10 AM
Needs more Eyefinity.
I need more Eyefinity
http://thewebsite.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/cowbell_skit.jpg?w=347&h=312
I need more Eyefinity
http://thewebsite.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/cowbell_skit.jpg?w=347&h=312
jamesryanbell
Apr 25, 01:26 PM
That's why I've kept my late '08 MBP for as long as I have. I want a MAJOR step forward the next time I invest $2000+ on a primary machine. :)
In the meantime, I'll be just fine with what I have! ;)
In the meantime, I'll be just fine with what I have! ;)
macintel007
Aug 28, 01:41 PM
It's about time that Apple realize that people want to be in pairs with the rest of the PC world. To offer a 1,66GHz while PC computers are at 2GHz...well you know?
Come on Apple, don't let us begging :-))
Come on Apple, don't let us begging :-))
madmax_2069
Oct 27, 02:58 PM
im all for being green, but i cant stand what greenpeace stands for and there approach on getting people to be treehuggers. your not going to survive being a 100% treehugger in this world today. so i don't understand greenpeace. yea people can be less poluting (like burning trash and stuff) but stuff we cant help (farting) they are getting as bad as the animal rights group, they will let a human die to save a animal. im not going to wreck my car to keep from hitting a animal.
like what was said before you cant make a computer out of wood and grass. and no im not talking about the case im talking about the internal's. and even tho the case was made by wood people like greenpeace would still complain cause it killed a tree to make
like what was said before you cant make a computer out of wood and grass. and no im not talking about the case im talking about the internal's. and even tho the case was made by wood people like greenpeace would still complain cause it killed a tree to make
dudemac
Mar 23, 06:14 PM
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Freedom has a lot of risk involved. This does nothing more than negates the illegal check points. I don't care what the argument is. This is nothing more than an internal checkpoint that is illegal. If you are old enough to remember the 80's then you will probably recall how the eastern block communists countries were portrayed on TV. And we the good guys would never do things that they were doing "over there"! But alas there is no soviet union so I guess that makes it ok to do it now.
Just remember this safety while a concern can turn in to a prison that no one can get out of. Because the safest position is to have no choice. And without choice you are a slave. So enjoy your servitude.
Freedom has a lot of risk involved. This does nothing more than negates the illegal check points. I don't care what the argument is. This is nothing more than an internal checkpoint that is illegal. If you are old enough to remember the 80's then you will probably recall how the eastern block communists countries were portrayed on TV. And we the good guys would never do things that they were doing "over there"! But alas there is no soviet union so I guess that makes it ok to do it now.
Just remember this safety while a concern can turn in to a prison that no one can get out of. Because the safest position is to have no choice. And without choice you are a slave. So enjoy your servitude.
Silentwave
Jul 15, 04:28 PM
I know that it is a desktop chip but I would expect that a site like anandtech or tomshardware would check againt the core duo just to see how much the difference is between the two "core" CPU.
Why?
Mobile vs. desktop
32 bit vs. 64 bit
Pentium M architecture vs. Intel Core microarchitecture (yes, Yonah uses the latest version of the pentium M architecture, far more efficient than netburst)
and I doubt very much they have comparable Mobos/ machines to test them on.
Why?
Mobile vs. desktop
32 bit vs. 64 bit
Pentium M architecture vs. Intel Core microarchitecture (yes, Yonah uses the latest version of the pentium M architecture, far more efficient than netburst)
and I doubt very much they have comparable Mobos/ machines to test them on.