rdrr
Sep 15, 06:00 PM
I think the iPhone is going to beat out G5 powerbooks for the most annoying front page rumor.
HA! :p
No the iPhone posts/rumors, will have to go on for at least another six months before it reaches that status. This is still in the Apple tablet stratusphere. :D
HA! :p
No the iPhone posts/rumors, will have to go on for at least another six months before it reaches that status. This is still in the Apple tablet stratusphere. :D
Maddix
Apr 22, 06:45 PM
I would also prefer AMD, but I don't think there will be Llanos low-powered enough for the MBA.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
AMD would be producing better CPU's via increased profits if Apple chose them over Intel from the start.
w00master
Nov 13, 04:01 PM
Because they are NO LONGER USING THE API! They give the rights to use the API to call and display the image. It doesn't give them the right to take that image and use it for something else outside of the context it was meant to be used.
Let me quote Gruber on this very issue:
"Point 1 is simply wrong; the Airfoil Speakers Touch iPhone app does not contain any of these images. It contains no pictures of Apple computers. It contains no icons of Apple applications. It displays these images after they are sent across the network by Airfoil for Mac. Airfoil for Mac reads these images using public official Mac OS X APIs. I.e. Airfoil Speakers Touch can only show a picture of the Mac it is connected to because the image is sent from the Mac it is connected to."
http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation
Quit apologizing for Apple.
w00master
Let me quote Gruber on this very issue:
"Point 1 is simply wrong; the Airfoil Speakers Touch iPhone app does not contain any of these images. It contains no pictures of Apple computers. It contains no icons of Apple applications. It displays these images after they are sent across the network by Airfoil for Mac. Airfoil for Mac reads these images using public official Mac OS X APIs. I.e. Airfoil Speakers Touch can only show a picture of the Mac it is connected to because the image is sent from the Mac it is connected to."
http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation
Quit apologizing for Apple.
w00master
Clive At Five
Sep 26, 09:18 AM
Hoboy....
Let me just say that even though I am a cingular customer, I don't like the sound of this.
1) Previous reports told us that Apple relinquished developing the "hardware" and settled for common components
2) This report tells us that Apple has settled for a carrier.
What is left for Apple to do? The body and the interface (and let me tell you, only one of those two is really important). And even though Apple will control the interface, they will not control any sort of mobile -> internet interaction, i.e. iTunes. Remember when Apple wanted to allow pseudo-iPhone mobile users to be able to d/l from the iT(M)S for identical prices but carriers wouldn't allow that because it severely undercut their pricing structure (download premiums). I would only assume that mobile downloading from iTS (if possible w/ the iPhone) will be more expensive than d/l-ing from home due to the carrier's resrictions.
*sigh* I guess I'm very skeptical, suddenly, that this iPhone will be worth all the attention it's getting. Maybe the interface will be so outstanding that it'll blow everyone's mind... but I'm not holding my breath.
-Clive
Let me just say that even though I am a cingular customer, I don't like the sound of this.
1) Previous reports told us that Apple relinquished developing the "hardware" and settled for common components
2) This report tells us that Apple has settled for a carrier.
What is left for Apple to do? The body and the interface (and let me tell you, only one of those two is really important). And even though Apple will control the interface, they will not control any sort of mobile -> internet interaction, i.e. iTunes. Remember when Apple wanted to allow pseudo-iPhone mobile users to be able to d/l from the iT(M)S for identical prices but carriers wouldn't allow that because it severely undercut their pricing structure (download premiums). I would only assume that mobile downloading from iTS (if possible w/ the iPhone) will be more expensive than d/l-ing from home due to the carrier's resrictions.
*sigh* I guess I'm very skeptical, suddenly, that this iPhone will be worth all the attention it's getting. Maybe the interface will be so outstanding that it'll blow everyone's mind... but I'm not holding my breath.
-Clive
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:08 PM
Nobody wants the 24". That's why they stopped making it. It was useless.
24 inch useless? Thanks god, for telling us what's what.
24 inch useless? Thanks god, for telling us what's what.
ChickenSwartz
Sep 2, 04:55 PM
Multimedia:
You seem to know your facts. I'd like to get your opinion:
When do you think C2D will be in MBPs? On the 5th? 12th?
I too hope there is an user removable HD.
What are the odds that they will give us a 12'' option?
I am asking all this becasue I would like a 12'', removable HD, C2D MBP before the free iPod offer expires. A 15'' would be fine too.
You seem to know your facts. I'd like to get your opinion:
When do you think C2D will be in MBPs? On the 5th? 12th?
I too hope there is an user removable HD.
What are the odds that they will give us a 12'' option?
I am asking all this becasue I would like a 12'', removable HD, C2D MBP before the free iPod offer expires. A 15'' would be fine too.
technicolor
Sep 12, 03:11 PM
I am so glad that I didnt sell my ipod. I would really be kicking myself if I had of jumped the gun....taking a hit on the price plus having to pony up money to essentially buy back the same ipod.
*whew wipes sweat
*whew wipes sweat
asdf542
Apr 14, 12:35 PM
First, no I made no such claim. I responded to one. And the claim wasn't that it will be restricted to being Mac only, but that it will end up being Mac only, in the same sense that FW is. Some PC ship with FW, but not many. It is considered a Mac only interface. The gist is that TB may as well, if history repeats. You didn't prove anything. You see many PC's shipping with TB right now? How many PC vendors have announces support for TB? The unfortunate fact is that consumers know the USB brand, so the vendors will support it. TB might be in Intel's spec, but that doesn't mean every system will support it nor that many drive vendors will either. No. The claim simply stated 'Mac only'. Nothing more and nothing less and you agreed with said two word claim. Thunderbolt will be integrated into every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0. It's not the same situation as FireWire in the slightest. Not only is it faster than USB 3.0 but it also works with USB via adapters as well as almost any other IO on the planet. FireWire worked only with FireWire devices.
See econgeek's post. It explains is pretty well.
You mean the one right above your post that proves you wrong? Funny stuff.
See econgeek's post. It explains is pretty well.
You mean the one right above your post that proves you wrong? Funny stuff.
ChrisA
Nov 13, 07:05 PM
Why does Apple think it's okay to continually alienate and turn away developers?? :confused: Why do fanboys continue to excuse such incidences? Why aren't people SICK of this kind of behavior from Apple? :mad:
This will continue until the Google Android threatens the iPhone. Then Apple will change their policy. Right now Apple simply does not have to care.
This will continue until the Google Android threatens the iPhone. Then Apple will change their policy. Right now Apple simply does not have to care.
EagerDragon
Sep 4, 08:16 PM
If you're like me, you don't have your Mac right next to your TV. Not only would I have to string a DVI/HDMI cable aaaall the way across the room, I would also have to get an equally long digital audio cable. Probably end up costing about the same as a video AirPort Express (if they keep the prices the same) but with the added hassle of getting those cables across the room.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
I see your point but I do not yet see HD over 802.11g. Maybe with some new codex and some decoding on the device, but I still don't think so. Come on Apple make a believer out of me.
This would be a lot less expensive than buying a Mac mini, especially if you already have a powerful desktop just waiting to play some HD videos...
I see your point but I do not yet see HD over 802.11g. Maybe with some new codex and some decoding on the device, but I still don't think so. Come on Apple make a believer out of me.
vvswarup
Apr 29, 12:46 AM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Your remark reminds me of a conversation I had with my brother. He was talking about starting a business. Now, to preface my next statement, let me offer a little background. A while ago, I suggested to my brother that he invest in stocks and he was not ready to take on the risk of it, so he refused to invest. So, when he said he wanted to start a business, my response was something like: "So you don't want to invest in stocks because it's too risky but you don't mind starting a business."
His response was: "Stocks have no value to society. With this business that I start, I would be able to make something of value to society."
I did not respond to it then, but after thinking about that remark, my response should have been that if the intention is create a for-profit business, an activity to make money for oneself, the value that the product adds to society is irrelevant. Also, companies use the cash from stock investors to fund capital expenditures. So the argument can be made that stocks indirectly add value to society because companies use the cash from stock investors to make more things that people can consume.
Your left-handed remark about Apple R&D vs. MS R&D is baseless and irrelevant. MS is not a university. It's a business. Businesses exist to make money. Also, Bill Gates did not start MS out of some altruistic intention of doing good for people. He started it to make money. Same goes for Steve Jobs.
Don't blow smoke and make this more than it really is. You were replying to the OP who said that Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting its money's worth on R&D. Don't aggrandize it fact by saying that MS is "adding more better for society" and Apple is "only about profit." The OP is right. Microsoft is not getting its money's worth on its R&D expenditure. Something has to change.
MS is a public corporation. Its first duty is to its shareholders. If spending better on R&D in order to get more profit out of it will enhance shareholder value, then Microsoft has an obligation to do so.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Your remark reminds me of a conversation I had with my brother. He was talking about starting a business. Now, to preface my next statement, let me offer a little background. A while ago, I suggested to my brother that he invest in stocks and he was not ready to take on the risk of it, so he refused to invest. So, when he said he wanted to start a business, my response was something like: "So you don't want to invest in stocks because it's too risky but you don't mind starting a business."
His response was: "Stocks have no value to society. With this business that I start, I would be able to make something of value to society."
I did not respond to it then, but after thinking about that remark, my response should have been that if the intention is create a for-profit business, an activity to make money for oneself, the value that the product adds to society is irrelevant. Also, companies use the cash from stock investors to fund capital expenditures. So the argument can be made that stocks indirectly add value to society because companies use the cash from stock investors to make more things that people can consume.
Your left-handed remark about Apple R&D vs. MS R&D is baseless and irrelevant. MS is not a university. It's a business. Businesses exist to make money. Also, Bill Gates did not start MS out of some altruistic intention of doing good for people. He started it to make money. Same goes for Steve Jobs.
Don't blow smoke and make this more than it really is. You were replying to the OP who said that Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting its money's worth on R&D. Don't aggrandize it fact by saying that MS is "adding more better for society" and Apple is "only about profit." The OP is right. Microsoft is not getting its money's worth on its R&D expenditure. Something has to change.
MS is a public corporation. Its first duty is to its shareholders. If spending better on R&D in order to get more profit out of it will enhance shareholder value, then Microsoft has an obligation to do so.
JRM PowerPod
Sep 9, 09:01 AM
With the decent graphics and these C2D's they make the iMac a formiddable machine. Alot of PowerMac's are going to be replaced by these new iMac's i feel. Probably Apple's most impressive, solid and reliable machine at the moment
Spanky Deluxe
Sep 5, 12:05 PM
This sure does look interesting. I doubt an Airport replacement will be released just yet, not until the draft gets approved. Although it could explain the delayed Airport Express chips for the Mac Pros. An iTunes Movie service has been a definite since the big data centre was built a few months ago imo.
Funkymonk
Apr 28, 05:30 PM
Microsoft is DEAD. And so is Google.
GO APPLE!
why would you want that?:confused:
GO APPLE!
why would you want that?:confused:
freebooter
Sep 14, 12:16 PM
You need to stop capitalizing that "i". Seriously.
I hope that the "i" prefix drops from use all together.
I hope that the "i" prefix drops from use all together.
HiRez
Sep 19, 10:48 PM
Considering that they sold "010101010's", I think an extra $50M is extraordinary. Apple ripped 75 DVDs, made a few web pages and boom... $1M in 7 days! I don't know what you're talking about... you're thinking small... $50M/YR is JUST THE BEGINNING.I agree, consider that the Disney's cut of the $50 million is almost pure profit for them (very little overhead). They don't even have to pay bandwidth and infrastructure costs out of that, Apple does. More available movies and more people using the service can only mean bigger numbers. I've got some major issues with Apple's movie download service, and for now I won't be using it, but nonetheless I think the numbers will be even larger than Disney is projecting.
If somebody tells you "I'm going to start sending you some extra cash every month, you don't need to do anything to get it, just cash the checks", are you going to complain whether the amount is $50 million or $500 million?
If somebody tells you "I'm going to start sending you some extra cash every month, you don't need to do anything to get it, just cash the checks", are you going to complain whether the amount is $50 million or $500 million?
Gilj
May 3, 11:03 AM
This ruins my theory about smaller (24"?) ACD with daisy chain for multiple single-TB monitors...
Speedy2
Mar 29, 03:24 PM
Some people said the same thing back in 2009 when analysts said that Android would overtake the iPhone by 2012 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=662706). :D
Nobody said that back in because there were no Android phones to speak of. This of course changed in and pretty much everyone with half a brain knew that Android would overtake iOS in market share eventually through sheer availability of handsets and carriers. Maybe 3 people on this forum would deny it, but who cares about them.
Now this story is a bit different. Nokia WP7 handsets aren't even announced yet. Most likely they won't have one this year. Instead there are many things that can go wrong. So far, WP7 has been a let-down. And every day they don't catch up on the competition makes it less likely that the platform will succeed.
Nobody said that back in because there were no Android phones to speak of. This of course changed in and pretty much everyone with half a brain knew that Android would overtake iOS in market share eventually through sheer availability of handsets and carriers. Maybe 3 people on this forum would deny it, but who cares about them.
Now this story is a bit different. Nokia WP7 handsets aren't even announced yet. Most likely they won't have one this year. Instead there are many things that can go wrong. So far, WP7 has been a let-down. And every day they don't catch up on the competition makes it less likely that the platform will succeed.
eye
Mar 23, 06:25 PM
Pull them... As trauma surgeon I see the tragedies caused by drunk drivers EVERY Day. Whoever is on agreement to provide means to avoid check points is invited to my local trauma center to see the victims and their families. If we can save one life, one innocent student or parent, even someone who made the mistake of drinking and driving... I would consider this worth.
Besides, the cost of taking care of those who do not die, but spend weeks months or years in the hospital due to a drinking related accident is enormous.
Speed radars are another big issue. In my state, its ok to refuse a helmet while driving a donor-cycle, as we call them, yesterday alone, we lost one kid who is waiting for transplant procurement and half a dozen were admitted with severe injuries most of them traumatic brain injuries while driving motorcycles.
And what if the apps encourage people to not drink and and drive? You're basing this on nothing. No facts whatsoever on whether or not this will promote or make drunk driving easier. Please don't be my surgeon if you're not into facts.
Besides, the cost of taking care of those who do not die, but spend weeks months or years in the hospital due to a drinking related accident is enormous.
Speed radars are another big issue. In my state, its ok to refuse a helmet while driving a donor-cycle, as we call them, yesterday alone, we lost one kid who is waiting for transplant procurement and half a dozen were admitted with severe injuries most of them traumatic brain injuries while driving motorcycles.
And what if the apps encourage people to not drink and and drive? You're basing this on nothing. No facts whatsoever on whether or not this will promote or make drunk driving easier. Please don't be my surgeon if you're not into facts.
Thanatoast
Sep 15, 05:46 PM
Glad to hear that they're considering making 2 or 3 different phones. That way I can get my smartphone while others can get their regular phones.
ThaDoggg
Apr 25, 02:08 PM
Ahhh just as I bought a new MBP!!!!! Hopefully resale value won't take too big of a hit :(
entwife
Apr 4, 12:21 PM
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. All for what - some iToys? Doesn't seem worth it. :(
Exactly.
What a waste.
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. All for what - some iToys? Doesn't seem worth it. :(
Exactly.
What a waste.
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 15, 06:50 PM
Even USB 2.0 has a pathetic 50% effective utilization rate, while Firewire is ~95%. USB 2.0 is 480 Mb/s, which equals 60 MB/s, yet in real world speeds, you're lucky if you see 30 MB/s - HALF it's rated bandwidth. USB is just plain horrible for bulk data transfer, and the new 3.0 iteration is no different. The protocol overhead is atrocious.
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
twoodcc
Sep 11, 09:53 PM
Yes, the year when it can be proven that Macs are the same as the Dells and eMachines and Gateways and all the other systems from people who also glue Intel chips to a motherboard. :D
come on, you know that's going a little too far with that one. just b/c it's got an intel processor in it doesn't mean it's the same as everybody else
come on, you know that's going a little too far with that one. just b/c it's got an intel processor in it doesn't mean it's the same as everybody else