MikhailT
Mar 30, 10:44 PM
I don't know why but my MBP 13 i7 2011 is showing "Intel HD Graphics 3000 512 MB graphics" on the About this mac screen on Display tab.:eek:
BTW I'm using an External Display.
That's the graphic core onboard the Core i7 die. It doesn't change to ATi graphics when you use something graphically intensive?
BTW I'm using an External Display.
That's the graphic core onboard the Core i7 die. It doesn't change to ATi graphics when you use something graphically intensive?
amols
Aug 4, 12:32 PM
A chip update has NOTHING to do with any outstanding issues, sorry...Apple is fully capable of fixing those (if any) with a better design AND a better chip.
real madrid copa del rey final
real madrid 2011 copa del rey
Real Madrid players celebrate
real madrid 2011 copa del rey.
real madrid 2011 copa del rey
real madrid 2011 copa del rey
QCassidy352
Jul 21, 02:45 PM
I 2nd this.
Why not update them too? I understand that the MBP is PRO but still. What would the MB's be getting then as far as an update at some point?
oh, the MB will get Merom, probably just not for a little while. The MBP has been shipping for 6 months, the MB for only 2. The MBP looks a little weak on price/performance compared to similar PC laptops; the MB holds up very well in price/performance comparisons. The MB is still selling so well apple can hardly keep the white models in stock, whereas demand for the MBP is much lower.
So rest assured, the MB will see Merom, but the MBP will see it first. Probably soon. :)
Why not update them too? I understand that the MBP is PRO but still. What would the MB's be getting then as far as an update at some point?
oh, the MB will get Merom, probably just not for a little while. The MBP has been shipping for 6 months, the MB for only 2. The MBP looks a little weak on price/performance compared to similar PC laptops; the MB holds up very well in price/performance comparisons. The MB is still selling so well apple can hardly keep the white models in stock, whereas demand for the MBP is much lower.
So rest assured, the MB will see Merom, but the MBP will see it first. Probably soon. :)
citizenzen
Apr 16, 12:41 PM
I doubt you can even explain what it is I'm doing.
To some extent I can because I looked it up last night. Now I'm an expert. ;)
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
To some extent I can because I looked it up last night. Now I'm an expert. ;)
The simplified version ...
You're buying and selling options which have a set value and an expiration date. If the set value doesn't meet the market value by the expiration date then those options are worthless. Options that have more time before their expiration date have more value than options near that date because there is more time for the market to go up and reach that value. The value of these options decay as they approach their expiration date, with the greatest rate of decay occurring in the few weeks before that date arrives.
So now that I have a bit of an understanding about what you do, here are a few thoughts ...
"Siphoning" was a poor choice of words. And for that I apologize. "Wagering" would more accurately describe what is happening here. The option has been given a value and if the market reaches that value then the option is worth something, if not, it is worthless. Value can also be achieved by selling the option to someone before the expiration date. So you are betting on, buying and/or selling a financial product.
Anyway, the principle (there's that word again) point that I'd like to express is that your chosen way of making an income effects your perspective on the issue of capital gains. The money you make in these transactions is considered a capital gain, so it's no wonder that you would be against a capital gains tax and cast it in a negative light.
I'm really not trying to get personal here. I don't know you. You might be the nicest person in the world. But when it comes to the issue of taxing capital gains you have a huge vested interest that is bound to color your views and leave me to question your objectivity on this matter.
lkrupp
Apr 7, 10:24 AM
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point... 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock'.
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point... 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock'.
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
-aggie-
May 3, 02:29 PM
I suppose we'll know who the villain is?
iMacZealot
Jul 31, 03:38 AM
CHECK OUT THESE STRINGS I FOUND IN iPOD UPDATER!!!
strings "iPod Updater 2006-06-28.exe" | grep -i FEATURE
t_hw_feature_
t_hw_feature_
t_feature_
t_feature_app_A_CRAPPY_MACRUMOR
t_feature_app_THAT_HAS_BEEN_GOING
t_feature_app_ON_FOR_NEARLY_A_YEAR
t_feature_app_I_WILL_BELIEVE_IT
t_feature_app_WHEN_I_SEE_IT
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_SCREW_THE_PHONE
t_feature_app_STICK_TO_COMPUTERS
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_BRING BACK THE NEWTON_APP
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_PLEASE_APP
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_PREDICTING_AN_IPHONE
t_feature_app_IS_LIKE_PREDICTING_FASTER
t_feature_app_PROCESSORS_AND_MONITORS
t_feature_app_WITH_BETTER_RESOLUTION
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_LOOKING_FORWARD_TO_AUGUST
t_feature_app_SO_YOU_ARE_ALL_DISAPPOINTED
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_VIDEO_APP <---VIDEO CHAT WITH SKYPE???? WOOO HOO
t_feature_app_RADIO_APP
t_feature_app_RADIO_MOREREGIONS
t_feature_app_RADIO_SCANSUPPORT
t_feature_app_RADIO_DISPLAYFADED
t_feature_app_EAPPSHELL
t_feature_app_PHONE_APP <---------IT MUST MEAN AN iPHONE (HA HA HA)
t_feature_app_MESSENGER_APP
t_feature_app_CAL_APP
t_feature_app_TRAINER_APP
t_feature_app_SEARCH_APP
t_feature_SHUFFLESONGS
t_feature_READING_SPEED
t_feature_MULTIPLE_OTG
t_feature_PODCASTS
t_feature_LYRICS <----------KARAOKE FEATURE?
t_feature_CLOCK
t_feature_WORLD_CLOCK
t_feature_UNIT_TESTS
t_feature_FONT_MENU
t_feature_EXPANDED_FONT_CHOICES <-----MORE THAN ONE FONT???? WOW
t_feature_SHOWSETTINGVALUE
t_feature_ALBUM_ARTWORK
t_feature_EXTRAS_CACHE
t_feature_app_LOCK_APP
t_feature_ALARMS
t_feature_SPEAKERS
t_feature_CARDREADER_SUPPORTED
t_feature_iMA_TestImageFolder
t_feature_view_GRAPHICEQ
t_feature_view_INDICATOR
t_feature_view_OVERLAY
t_feature_view_APPLETALKBALLOON
t_feature_view_APPLEKEYBOARD
t_feature_graphics_COLOR
t_feature_APPEARANCE_CHOICES
t_feature_TIER3_LANGUAGES
t_feature_ALBUMART_BROWSE
t_feature_MENU_BACKGROUND
t_feature_STARTUP_PHOTO
t_feature_EXTRA_REMOTE_COMMANDS
t_feature_LOCK_ORIGINAL
t_feature_QUICKFIND
t_feature_CONTEXTUAL_MENUS
t_feature_BRIGHTNESS_CONTROL
t_feature_TIMEBOMB <---------CAREFUL WITH THIS ONE!!!!
__USE_ORIGINALLY_PLANNED_FEATURES___
I'm just as amazed as the rest of you!
See you on the 7th!
Wow. That must've wasted a ton of your time.
I don't believe this rumour to be honest, but it's fun to spectulate.
strings "iPod Updater 2006-06-28.exe" | grep -i FEATURE
t_hw_feature_
t_hw_feature_
t_feature_
t_feature_app_A_CRAPPY_MACRUMOR
t_feature_app_THAT_HAS_BEEN_GOING
t_feature_app_ON_FOR_NEARLY_A_YEAR
t_feature_app_I_WILL_BELIEVE_IT
t_feature_app_WHEN_I_SEE_IT
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_SCREW_THE_PHONE
t_feature_app_STICK_TO_COMPUTERS
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_BRING BACK THE NEWTON_APP
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_PLEASE_APP
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_PREDICTING_AN_IPHONE
t_feature_app_IS_LIKE_PREDICTING_FASTER
t_feature_app_PROCESSORS_AND_MONITORS
t_feature_app_WITH_BETTER_RESOLUTION
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_LOOKING_FORWARD_TO_AUGUST
t_feature_app_SO_YOU_ARE_ALL_DISAPPOINTED
t_feature_app_
t_feature_app_VIDEO_APP <---VIDEO CHAT WITH SKYPE???? WOOO HOO
t_feature_app_RADIO_APP
t_feature_app_RADIO_MOREREGIONS
t_feature_app_RADIO_SCANSUPPORT
t_feature_app_RADIO_DISPLAYFADED
t_feature_app_EAPPSHELL
t_feature_app_PHONE_APP <---------IT MUST MEAN AN iPHONE (HA HA HA)
t_feature_app_MESSENGER_APP
t_feature_app_CAL_APP
t_feature_app_TRAINER_APP
t_feature_app_SEARCH_APP
t_feature_SHUFFLESONGS
t_feature_READING_SPEED
t_feature_MULTIPLE_OTG
t_feature_PODCASTS
t_feature_LYRICS <----------KARAOKE FEATURE?
t_feature_CLOCK
t_feature_WORLD_CLOCK
t_feature_UNIT_TESTS
t_feature_FONT_MENU
t_feature_EXPANDED_FONT_CHOICES <-----MORE THAN ONE FONT???? WOW
t_feature_SHOWSETTINGVALUE
t_feature_ALBUM_ARTWORK
t_feature_EXTRAS_CACHE
t_feature_app_LOCK_APP
t_feature_ALARMS
t_feature_SPEAKERS
t_feature_CARDREADER_SUPPORTED
t_feature_iMA_TestImageFolder
t_feature_view_GRAPHICEQ
t_feature_view_INDICATOR
t_feature_view_OVERLAY
t_feature_view_APPLETALKBALLOON
t_feature_view_APPLEKEYBOARD
t_feature_graphics_COLOR
t_feature_APPEARANCE_CHOICES
t_feature_TIER3_LANGUAGES
t_feature_ALBUMART_BROWSE
t_feature_MENU_BACKGROUND
t_feature_STARTUP_PHOTO
t_feature_EXTRA_REMOTE_COMMANDS
t_feature_LOCK_ORIGINAL
t_feature_QUICKFIND
t_feature_CONTEXTUAL_MENUS
t_feature_BRIGHTNESS_CONTROL
t_feature_TIMEBOMB <---------CAREFUL WITH THIS ONE!!!!
__USE_ORIGINALLY_PLANNED_FEATURES___
I'm just as amazed as the rest of you!
See you on the 7th!
Wow. That must've wasted a ton of your time.
I don't believe this rumour to be honest, but it's fun to spectulate.
BC2009
Apr 26, 03:04 PM
There are phone models that run some variant of Android from ultra-cheap to ultra-high-end. That clearly makes Android-based phones applicable to a wider audience. But what's more is that some manufacturers have developed their own operating systems based on Android source code without the Google services -- basically using Google's code as their own jumpstart. All these phones are counted as "Android" -- the sheer size of the umbrella that is known as "Android" clearly makes this the new defacto standard for any manufacturer other than Apple, Nokia or HP.
The problem with these statistics is that they make the assumption that there is an "Android Experience" and an "iOS Experience" -- this is hardly the case since the Android experience is varied, and Google does not benefit from every Android device sale, where Apple does benefit from every iOS device sale.
Certainly, one can cite the fact that every manufacturer puts their own spin on "Android" and they run a specific version with a specific UI overlay and they have a specific set of supported resolutions with a specific set of apps that will work for that device (hardly the Microsoft Windows scenario of the 1990s). These manufacturers will likely be falling in line with Google's new rules with regards to timely access to the latest Android version and will continue to produce good and better phones with less-varied experiences.
But looking further than that, Android (pre-Honeycomb) is open source and many have taken the opportunity to force Google completely out of the Android equation.
AP Photo - Real Madrid players
Copa del Rey Final 2011
real madrid copa del rey 2011
Spanish Copa del Rey Final
real madrid vs barcelona 2011
copa del rey. real madrid
Copa del Rey Final. Real
Real Madrid v Barcelona - Copa
real madrid vs barcelona copa
on April 20, 2011. Iker
2011. Barcelona Vs Real
The problem with these statistics is that they make the assumption that there is an "Android Experience" and an "iOS Experience" -- this is hardly the case since the Android experience is varied, and Google does not benefit from every Android device sale, where Apple does benefit from every iOS device sale.
Certainly, one can cite the fact that every manufacturer puts their own spin on "Android" and they run a specific version with a specific UI overlay and they have a specific set of supported resolutions with a specific set of apps that will work for that device (hardly the Microsoft Windows scenario of the 1990s). These manufacturers will likely be falling in line with Google's new rules with regards to timely access to the latest Android version and will continue to produce good and better phones with less-varied experiences.
But looking further than that, Android (pre-Honeycomb) is open source and many have taken the opportunity to force Google completely out of the Android equation.
Detlev
Jul 30, 08:38 AM
- The obvious untapped area is integration of VoIP, 3G, & video - but all the big companies are looking at that. The other thing that most mobile companies are having trouble with is the killer app - so many phones have data connectivity, and people just don't know what to do with it. If Apple can make a compelling product there the phone companies will want to sell it.
ps. Apple might choose to make a phone with no music capability... just to delineate the product. That gives people something to understand... and then they can release the combo products.
Exactly. How could a non-player break open the market without the big companies support and infrastructure? It's not a computer that people want to carry around. It is an extremely simple to use, not bulky, communication device.
Using VoIP and 3G technology would be great but what service is ready to provide it in the U.S.? Apple is not going to sell cell phones to a few hundred people in three or four U.S. metropolitan markets and make money on it unless there is a way to open up the VoIP market BUT VoIP is going to get smothered in Washington politics soon enough so don't plan on that being free or useful (especially if NET NEUTRALITY is eliminated). A 3G phone would spark interest only from the standpoint that none of the networks could provide national (never mind international) service. It is a loosing proposition but I agree, they would have to differentiate it from other products (if it were real). Again the supposed photographer did not say it was an iPod phone. S/he would have made that observation.
Another thing about this mystery phone. Have there been any licenses pulled by Apple for telecommunications devices? There have been patents for all sorts of neat things but this would fall into a new category for them, would it not. Therefore there would be a rash of legal moves going on.
I'm skeptical of the whole cell phone idea. Would there be more use for a home phone or walkie talkie type radio, satellite, a computer phone accessory, or something else? I just don't see Apple providing hardware that gets limited distribution, where you would have to sign up for a two or three year service plan with yet another unreliable service provider that within a year or two will be merged into yet another, and a .Mac account if you do not have it yet, and the possibility that you have to cancel an existing contract with penalty. It just doesn't add up. It would be the most expensive cell phone/package on the market.
ps. Apple might choose to make a phone with no music capability... just to delineate the product. That gives people something to understand... and then they can release the combo products.
Exactly. How could a non-player break open the market without the big companies support and infrastructure? It's not a computer that people want to carry around. It is an extremely simple to use, not bulky, communication device.
Using VoIP and 3G technology would be great but what service is ready to provide it in the U.S.? Apple is not going to sell cell phones to a few hundred people in three or four U.S. metropolitan markets and make money on it unless there is a way to open up the VoIP market BUT VoIP is going to get smothered in Washington politics soon enough so don't plan on that being free or useful (especially if NET NEUTRALITY is eliminated). A 3G phone would spark interest only from the standpoint that none of the networks could provide national (never mind international) service. It is a loosing proposition but I agree, they would have to differentiate it from other products (if it were real). Again the supposed photographer did not say it was an iPod phone. S/he would have made that observation.
Another thing about this mystery phone. Have there been any licenses pulled by Apple for telecommunications devices? There have been patents for all sorts of neat things but this would fall into a new category for them, would it not. Therefore there would be a rash of legal moves going on.
I'm skeptical of the whole cell phone idea. Would there be more use for a home phone or walkie talkie type radio, satellite, a computer phone accessory, or something else? I just don't see Apple providing hardware that gets limited distribution, where you would have to sign up for a two or three year service plan with yet another unreliable service provider that within a year or two will be merged into yet another, and a .Mac account if you do not have it yet, and the possibility that you have to cancel an existing contract with penalty. It just doesn't add up. It would be the most expensive cell phone/package on the market.
BC2009
Apr 7, 11:46 AM
If the demand for touch panels increases then the manufacturers of touch panels will rejoice and expand their business thus increasing the supply. The real problem here is that RIM probably wants terms on touch panel production that are not all-too-inspiring to the manufacturers to warrant expansion. For example, Apple is confident that they will sell X units of iPads in Y units in 2012, and so on. So Apple prepays for what they need.
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
EDIT: I failed to make it clear, but I do hope that touch panel production expands for RIM and others to get the supply they need. I like Apple having competitors because Apple tends to take the good things competition comes up with and add them as line items to their proactive project plans. I don't believe that competition drives Apple (certainly not in the way that Apple's actions or Apple's critics are basically driving the competitions plans). Apple is a bit more proactive, but when they have a worthy competitor, Apple certainly picks up on any "good" ideas the competition has had that happen to fit with their long-term plans. I also applaud RIM and HP for not going the "me-too" Android/Honeycomb route. There is something to be said for not selling out to a third-party on software.
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
EDIT: I failed to make it clear, but I do hope that touch panel production expands for RIM and others to get the supply they need. I like Apple having competitors because Apple tends to take the good things competition comes up with and add them as line items to their proactive project plans. I don't believe that competition drives Apple (certainly not in the way that Apple's actions or Apple's critics are basically driving the competitions plans). Apple is a bit more proactive, but when they have a worthy competitor, Apple certainly picks up on any "good" ideas the competition has had that happen to fit with their long-term plans. I also applaud RIM and HP for not going the "me-too" Android/Honeycomb route. There is something to be said for not selling out to a third-party on software.
derbothaus
Apr 28, 11:54 AM
Wow. You brought actual stats to the table. I stand corrected on the melting bit:o
citizenzen
Apr 14, 05:23 PM
I think we can all agree that there is a lot of waste in government. The fact is, a lot of it is hard to find.
I'd try to take the time to find it.
There are people who specialize in that.
Let them loose. See what they find.
I'd try to take the time to find it.
There are people who specialize in that.
Let them loose. See what they find.
Multimedia
Aug 3, 01:18 AM
But it's perfectly acceptable to round 1.67 down too, it's half way between 1.5 and 2. Also depends on the price of a Sidcrome socket set.
I'll believe this 2x battery life bollocks when I see the results from the labs, not some chintzy marketing ploy by Intel.It's not a "chintzy marketing ploy by Intel". It's a scientific test conducted by two Intel Marketing engineers which I always believe because Intel employees are honest people with families and friends who love them. :)
I'll believe this 2x battery life bollocks when I see the results from the labs, not some chintzy marketing ploy by Intel.It's not a "chintzy marketing ploy by Intel". It's a scientific test conducted by two Intel Marketing engineers which I always believe because Intel employees are honest people with families and friends who love them. :)
mdlooker
Apr 7, 12:13 PM
Though competition is a desired aspect in any market, from a buyers standpoint, there is still that demand variable.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
I believe that even if Apple takes total market consumption, because it seems to be going that way, the price will dictate how sturdy the dominance will be. So long as they keep the prices affordable, they will have no problems.
Same applies with with their Macs. If they were to lower the prices, the profit margin would take a big hit but a slow market saturation would occur.
We need innovation and great experiences, but price moves that demand curve.
bobber205
Apr 16, 08:55 PM
Is there any good real evidence to support the right's theory that lowering taxes on rich actually DOES anything except create a bigger deficit from lost revenue?
Hattig
Aug 4, 09:44 AM
I guess that all of Apple's current Yonah based systems will migrate over to Merom or Conroe in the next few months - I believe that Intel will be switching production over to these processors rather than Yonah quite quickly.
The MacBook will change last, IMO, say in three or four months time. MacBook Pro and iMac will get upgrades quite quickly though.
The MacBook will change last, IMO, say in three or four months time. MacBook Pro and iMac will get upgrades quite quickly though.
bloodycape
Apr 18, 04:12 PM
Didn't the touchwiz ui first get introduced in around the same time the iphone was first introduced in their P2 video player and their Symbian based phones? Not really sure if they look like they do know, but I know that branding has been around for a while.
Susurs
May 6, 04:23 AM
My subjective view is that it's a 'special message' to the Intel as latter lately imposes it's rules on using cpu's ... no Nvidia chips for example ...
mcrain
Apr 18, 11:59 AM
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
Vegasman
Apr 24, 10:08 AM
All very nice and I'm fully supportive of more high resolution graphics as soon as possible. It's a shame they don't believe in supporting the millions of Blu-ray discs being sold though, and trying to convince people that 720p iTunes content is good enough for TVs that are bigger than any of the displays they've ever sold, whilst planning for smaller but higher resolution screens that they must apparently believe makes a difference.
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
newbididewbidie
Apr 20, 12:23 AM
New processor...same package. Works for me!
virus1
Nov 24, 11:36 AM
hahahaa... ROFL...
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
SiliconAddict
Nov 26, 02:56 PM
I think such a device would fit nicely between the iPod with video and full blown laptops. If you couple this with an e-book reader. *coughs*ereader.com*coughs* I wouldn't run to the Apple store. I'd physically smash through the mall doors with my car and drive up to the store.
jonnysods
Mar 28, 10:21 AM
Wow, I can't see this happening. There is too much momentum for them to wait 2 years in between phones. They will release a 4GS!