Unorthodox
Aug 2, 03:59 PM
How can we get a hold of that keynote that Macrummors said will cover?
The main page transforms, via dark magic, into a of constantly updated text portal.
Legend has it that one MR member gets sucked into the swirling portal of dark magic and is trapped in a parallel universe for eternity.
This happens once per keynote.
The main page transforms, via dark magic, into a of constantly updated text portal.
Legend has it that one MR member gets sucked into the swirling portal of dark magic and is trapped in a parallel universe for eternity.
This happens once per keynote.
charlituna
Apr 7, 01:09 PM
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
And for some reason you think that monopolies are bad for consumers.
They are not. At least not 100%. Just like they are not 100% good.
What is good or bad is how the companies got to that monopoly and what they do with it.
Apple has a monopoly on consumer tablets simply because they are the only ones to release a tablet that folks want to buy. Nothing bad about that.
Now if it is found that they are using that monopoly to strong arm component suppliers with tactics like demanding they accept way under value prices or can't ever do business with other companies, then you have a 'bad' monopoly. Or say they decide to hell with any support for non Mac computers and if you want to use an iOS device you must get a Mac computer, that's a 'bad' monopoly. And so on
And for some reason you think that monopolies are bad for consumers.
They are not. At least not 100%. Just like they are not 100% good.
What is good or bad is how the companies got to that monopoly and what they do with it.
Apple has a monopoly on consumer tablets simply because they are the only ones to release a tablet that folks want to buy. Nothing bad about that.
Now if it is found that they are using that monopoly to strong arm component suppliers with tactics like demanding they accept way under value prices or can't ever do business with other companies, then you have a 'bad' monopoly. Or say they decide to hell with any support for non Mac computers and if you want to use an iOS device you must get a Mac computer, that's a 'bad' monopoly. And so on
Eidorian
Jul 21, 02:03 PM
Sheesh. This is a 180 from waiting for G5 updates.They're much more predictable with Intel's roadmap.
-aggie-
May 4, 03:54 PM
I'd say go ahead, but I'm somewhat confused in what the villain can do. He gets to see our moves, so he can just put a trap anywhere?
I'm against splitting until we level up.
I'm against splitting until we level up.
jaxstate
Aug 4, 08:38 AM
How do you know this. Are you some type of design tester for intel?
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 07:35 AM
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower.
Apple wasn't the first to break from the Beige box syndrome. ;) In fact, I think I know where they got the idea for the Blue G3 case :
http://blakespot.com/sgi/images/sgi_open1.jpg
Apple wasn't the first to break from the Beige box syndrome. ;) In fact, I think I know where they got the idea for the Blue G3 case :
http://blakespot.com/sgi/images/sgi_open1.jpg
darrens
Aug 4, 07:42 AM
I did not think that Intel has released
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
the general availablity for the merom and woodcrest chips yet??
Woodcrest was announced at least two weeks before Conroe. Woodcrest is supposedly available now - Apple's just waiting for WWDC...
Xeon (Woodcrest) chips are not generally used by PC manufacturers for desktops, so Apple doesn't have the same level of pressure to release a Mac Pro based on it. At least in my opinion.
Tommyg117
Jul 30, 08:07 PM
Verizon has the "in" network though. Everyone that I talk to has verizon, so I get to talk to them for free. Come on Apple for Verizon.
superleccy
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MBP updates? About time too!
shawnce
Aug 4, 02:22 PM
64bit OS & software on a 64 bit processor (especially a dual core) is much better at multitasking, for one.
64 bit has nothing to do with multitasking.
64 bit has nothing to do with multitasking.
mscriv
May 4, 01:10 PM
Laugh while you still can my naive foes. Death is coming for you and it is fleet of foot.
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Everyone%20Else/images-3/Angel-of-Death.jpg
http://scrapetv.com/News/News%20Pages/Everyone%20Else/images-3/Angel-of-Death.jpg
danielwsmithee
Aug 4, 11:03 AM
How many people plan to dump their Core Duo Macs for Core 2 Duo Macs? I don't plan on dumping my 20" iMac Core Duo until some other new feature are added besides just a processor upgrade. Specifically I would like to see 802.11n, Firewire 800 and Possibly a TV Tuner (Elgato's products are pretty good already so I can live without that feature). What would make me jump immediately is a 23" iMac with 2.66 Ghz Conroe and a X1800 or X1900 Video card. Of course the thing would cost $2999.
dgree03
Mar 29, 01:08 PM
That reads quite a bit different from Amazon's "... or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service ..."
Yes amazons is more transparent and to the point. Apples is more vague. Ill take transparent over vague "in my interpretation" any day.
Yes amazons is more transparent and to the point. Apples is more vague. Ill take transparent over vague "in my interpretation" any day.
jcampa
Aug 11, 09:05 AM
I hope next month means the first 10 days of september, I'll be in NYC and I want to buy a lot of things besides a new MBP!!
Because if they were preparing the MBP for the WWDC, it means they're almost ready, don't you think? Ready in terms of volume.
Because if they were preparing the MBP for the WWDC, it means they're almost ready, don't you think? Ready in terms of volume.
jvmxtra
Mar 29, 12:22 PM
Going further on infancy stage of cloud as far as main stream consumers are concerned -- Only way they can drive people to it right now would be if it was all free.
Nobody in right mind would pay money to store their own files somewhere else which they already have on their computer.
Cloud storage can work for things that people do not own: software that they rent, movies and such.
Storing music on cloud is just simply stupid idea as it doesn't take up lot of space on your device and music is something you want to listen over and over again if it's your favorite(do you really want to having to connect to internet to get your fav music?)
Nobody in right mind would pay money to store their own files somewhere else which they already have on their computer.
Cloud storage can work for things that people do not own: software that they rent, movies and such.
Storing music on cloud is just simply stupid idea as it doesn't take up lot of space on your device and music is something you want to listen over and over again if it's your favorite(do you really want to having to connect to internet to get your fav music?)
diamond.g
Mar 28, 11:46 AM
Dude... your contract is only there to cover the subsidized cost of your phone. You don't have to sign a new contract to keep your pricing. Just let it go and all will be the same until you upgrade. There is no price changes because your contract is up.
The downside is you are giving them "free" money since you are paying the subsidized price for your contract, but no longer using a subsidized phone. It would be nice if after your contract is over with your bill goes down (removing the subsidy payment). I think it would allow people to divorce the contract price versus the phone price.
The downside is you are giving them "free" money since you are paying the subsidized price for your contract, but no longer using a subsidized phone. It would be nice if after your contract is over with your bill goes down (removing the subsidy payment). I think it would allow people to divorce the contract price versus the phone price.
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 03:06 PM
.........................................3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
MattInOz
Nov 27, 06:28 PM
The original article here is based on this smarthouse article, and has a link to it :) So unfortunately, the plot stays the same :)
What the hell do any of us know :). Interesting to speculate though.
I'll have to ask my partner about the graphics stuff - she's a high end graphic designer and a painter. My first thought is "the touch screen can't mimic her hand tools"... I figure that the accuracy of where she's touching the screen, the pressure she's exerting etc, will not be enough for real work
Yep a normal touch screen is limited, but then agian Apple have that patent application for a screen with camera pixels interlaced with normal pixels. If they have a screen close to production then a touch screen based on this would not only to do multi-touch control but could see the shape of the tool on the screen. Instead of using pressure to guess the shape the tool has made.
Then again that just makes for another missing piece of the tech puzzle to make a device like this work well.
There seems to be a couple of tech levels for such a device leading to the whole is it a iPod / PDA / laptop replacement. On the plus side i think most people given a quality device would prefer something touch based, pens brushes what ever they feel like.
I think we'll see a new family of devices rolled out over a couple of years as the tech comes online. Much the same way the iPod grew.
What the hell do any of us know :). Interesting to speculate though.
I'll have to ask my partner about the graphics stuff - she's a high end graphic designer and a painter. My first thought is "the touch screen can't mimic her hand tools"... I figure that the accuracy of where she's touching the screen, the pressure she's exerting etc, will not be enough for real work
Yep a normal touch screen is limited, but then agian Apple have that patent application for a screen with camera pixels interlaced with normal pixels. If they have a screen close to production then a touch screen based on this would not only to do multi-touch control but could see the shape of the tool on the screen. Instead of using pressure to guess the shape the tool has made.
Then again that just makes for another missing piece of the tech puzzle to make a device like this work well.
There seems to be a couple of tech levels for such a device leading to the whole is it a iPod / PDA / laptop replacement. On the plus side i think most people given a quality device would prefer something touch based, pens brushes what ever they feel like.
I think we'll see a new family of devices rolled out over a couple of years as the tech comes online. Much the same way the iPod grew.
alphaod
Apr 26, 02:41 PM
I zillion Android devices and only threee current iOS devices. Not surprising.
And does this chart account for folks that have a phone on each platform? :p
And does this chart account for folks that have a phone on each platform? :p
KindredMAC
May 7, 01:13 PM
I've had the service for over 4 years and I have never paid full price.
I would not mind if they lowered the price to say $49/annually or even tiered pricing, but all out free scares me a little.
I would not mind if they lowered the price to say $49/annually or even tiered pricing, but all out free scares me a little.
jav6454
Mar 28, 09:59 AM
Every year we get people saying we are and we are not getting new hardware updates.
Like an arrow shot in the air, the target is always a hit and miss.
Like an arrow shot in the air, the target is always a hit and miss.
jace88
Jan 12, 05:56 AM
Ouch that sounds bad but good thing I don't use Time Machine. I'm thinking of downloading/installing this on my MBA! Reviews on the net (e.g. CNET) make it sound quite good.
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
cvaldes
Mar 30, 05:49 PM
So I guess that Gold Master rumor was wrong.
Unsurprising.
At least 95% of rumors posted here and other Apple-related forums end up being wrong.
Unsurprising.
At least 95% of rumors posted here and other Apple-related forums end up being wrong.
