danielwsmithee
Aug 3, 11:37 PM
are people not expecting merom to go immediately into the macbook as well? i don't see a reason for apple to purposely gimp their best-selling notebook when a merom chip is supposed to cost the same as its yonah counterpart.I think the very last machine to get it will be the bottom end MacBook and slowest Mac Mini. There is no reason why they could not offer both Yonah and Merom in the same systems since they are the same sockets. With the discounted Yonah or Core Solo they could hit there $499 price point on the mini and $899 for the Core Duo white MacBook. The Black MacBook will see Merom near the same time as MBP. They may wait 3 weaks or so to see if the Merom supply can meet demand.
funnypicture1
Jan 24, 06:58 PM
Thread over, tstreete wins.
Congf You.
Congf You.
JeffLebowski41
Apr 5, 01:18 PM
Don't give in Toyota!
Its our devices, and if we want to modify them for our own use, so be it.
That's not going to change. I'm fairly sure Apple wouldn't give a rip if some random Joe made a Scion theme. It's the fact that it's advertising that Apple won't get any part of. Certainly understandable that they would take this action. I really couldn't care less either way, though.
Its our devices, and if we want to modify them for our own use, so be it.
That's not going to change. I'm fairly sure Apple wouldn't give a rip if some random Joe made a Scion theme. It's the fact that it's advertising that Apple won't get any part of. Certainly understandable that they would take this action. I really couldn't care less either way, though.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 04:48 AM
Retina is clearly defined by minimum 300 px/in resolution, so distance from monitor there is nothing to do with. Sitting 10 meters from monitor don't transform your monitor to hiperRetina. Please...
Hum, no it's not. Read the article I linked to and go back to the intro of the iPhone 4. It's 300 PPI at a normal viewing distance for a phone (12 inches). Otherwise it makes no sense. The size of a pixel is relative to its distance from your eye. The further away something it is, the smaller it becomes relatively and thus your eye has more trouble seeing it. Sitting further from your monitor can make the pixels iPhone 4 size in no time at all.
Hum, no it's not. Read the article I linked to and go back to the intro of the iPhone 4. It's 300 PPI at a normal viewing distance for a phone (12 inches). Otherwise it makes no sense. The size of a pixel is relative to its distance from your eye. The further away something it is, the smaller it becomes relatively and thus your eye has more trouble seeing it. Sitting further from your monitor can make the pixels iPhone 4 size in no time at all.
cadillac1234
Mar 29, 08:56 AM
Amazon is a very smart company. They are setting themselves up to be the defacto content provider for Android which every other company seemed adverse to doing.
I'm sure Apple will respond with an iOS solution but syncing has not been a strong point for Apple at all. Hopefully we'll see the improved MobileMe Mr Jobs had spoke of last year.
All that being said, there is heavy pressure from the ISPs to throttle data and start placing data caps on end users. Opinions on why they are doing it vary (IMHO they are protecting their outdated content distribution models) but we are soon going to see a manufactured bandwidth crisis esp with all the cloud storage and streaming options that are becoming commonplace
I'm sure Apple will respond with an iOS solution but syncing has not been a strong point for Apple at all. Hopefully we'll see the improved MobileMe Mr Jobs had spoke of last year.
All that being said, there is heavy pressure from the ISPs to throttle data and start placing data caps on end users. Opinions on why they are doing it vary (IMHO they are protecting their outdated content distribution models) but we are soon going to see a manufactured bandwidth crisis esp with all the cloud storage and streaming options that are becoming commonplace
Ommid
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Very good news!:apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::apple::D:D:D:D:D:D
Love that top picture! Its all about Retina!!
Love that top picture! Its all about Retina!!
Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 08:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
The jailbreak haters make me laugh. My phone works just fine and while I do use a bit more memory, it's perfectly stable and I get a phone with far more utility. Any resultant perfomance issues are so negligible stock is not even competition.
I understand some people bite off more than they can chew when they JB. I also know that scenario doesn't apply to everyone.
While I am not a jailbreak hater (do as you please:-), I am wondering why people buy a product that is not perfect for them and then change it.
My point is that if it works fine, but if it doesn't work don't go and blame Apple or use their services for FREE to restore your messed up device.
I have been able to help people restore several JB ipods (kids in school).
Most of these were about eye candy or screen looks, wallpapers.
Something I don't need, but to each her/his own.
I liken JB to somebody buying a car and then going under the hood and change things in the way the motor works, so they can add boosters, compression changers, modify valves and ignition features or similar stuff.
When it then croaks out they blame the car manufacturer.
Always blaming somebody else seems to be the norm a lot these days.
Luckily JB people can restore their devices. If that was not possible JB would not be happening.
Maybe Apple should be looking into blocking restoring? I am sure they can come up with a way that JB would be recognized.
The jailbreak haters make me laugh. My phone works just fine and while I do use a bit more memory, it's perfectly stable and I get a phone with far more utility. Any resultant perfomance issues are so negligible stock is not even competition.
I understand some people bite off more than they can chew when they JB. I also know that scenario doesn't apply to everyone.
While I am not a jailbreak hater (do as you please:-), I am wondering why people buy a product that is not perfect for them and then change it.
My point is that if it works fine, but if it doesn't work don't go and blame Apple or use their services for FREE to restore your messed up device.
I have been able to help people restore several JB ipods (kids in school).
Most of these were about eye candy or screen looks, wallpapers.
Something I don't need, but to each her/his own.
I liken JB to somebody buying a car and then going under the hood and change things in the way the motor works, so they can add boosters, compression changers, modify valves and ignition features or similar stuff.
When it then croaks out they blame the car manufacturer.
Always blaming somebody else seems to be the norm a lot these days.
Luckily JB people can restore their devices. If that was not possible JB would not be happening.
Maybe Apple should be looking into blocking restoring? I am sure they can come up with a way that JB would be recognized.
aldejesus
Mar 30, 08:50 PM
Installed fine on mine.
Thanks, will install as soon as the download finish.
Thanks, will install as soon as the download finish.
boodyup
Mar 26, 09:58 PM
I just forked over 750 dollars for an ipad 2 and ipad 3 is coming out? Ouch!!! I already want it.
fupresti
Apr 26, 04:13 PM
iOS isn't losing market you morons, the market is simply expanding and Android is better positioned in their product lineup to attract a wider variety of consumer. You can buy Android phones on all four major carriers and also with companies like Boost and Cricket. We are not slicing up the same size pie, the pie is getting bigger.
I agree Apple needs to revamp iOS, but this survey doesn't indicate Apple is failing, it simply shows that more and more people are moving from feature phones to smart phones.
Quit with the fan boy tirades.
I agree Apple needs to revamp iOS, but this survey doesn't indicate Apple is failing, it simply shows that more and more people are moving from feature phones to smart phones.
Quit with the fan boy tirades.
dr Dunkel
Apr 24, 12:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
3200x2000 sounds great!
Now, just give us the hardware to run at least last year's games at more than mediocre settings.
3200x2000 sounds great!
Now, just give us the hardware to run at least last year's games at more than mediocre settings.
hehe299792458
Apr 10, 07:00 AM
This is the longest thread I've seen on this forum that's arguing over a matter of style... I'm sad
johnnyturbouk
Apr 10, 10:10 AM
am�big�u�ous/amˈbigyo͞oəs/Adjective
1. (of language) Open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning.
2. Unclear or inexact because a choice between alternatives has not been made.
The problem may be confusing to some; it certainly is not ambiguous. There are rules in math, if you follow them, there is only one answer. Period.
i agree and disagree!
I believe the problem stated was ambiguous since he/she did not express the equation with parentheses that would have helped to expound the problem in a more accurate manner!
The equation should of been expressed as: (48/2) x (9+3)
Mathematics do have rules, and thus will almost certainly yield one answer, this only holds true if there was clear presentation of the facts stated, rather than the reader making inferences from the initial question: which in this case was poorly numbered (worded)
1. (of language) Open to more than one interpretation; having a double meaning.
2. Unclear or inexact because a choice between alternatives has not been made.
The problem may be confusing to some; it certainly is not ambiguous. There are rules in math, if you follow them, there is only one answer. Period.
i agree and disagree!
I believe the problem stated was ambiguous since he/she did not express the equation with parentheses that would have helped to expound the problem in a more accurate manner!
The equation should of been expressed as: (48/2) x (9+3)
Mathematics do have rules, and thus will almost certainly yield one answer, this only holds true if there was clear presentation of the facts stated, rather than the reader making inferences from the initial question: which in this case was poorly numbered (worded)
nmrrjw66
Apr 15, 07:17 PM
:mad::mad::mad: I am seriously starting to get pissed.
9 Things the Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes (http://www.wweek.com/portland/print-article-17350-print.html)
It's a long article so here are some excerpts;
3. In fact, the wealthy are paying less taxes.
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
4. Many of the very richest pay no current income taxes at all.
John Paulson, the most successful hedge-fund manager of all, bet against the mortgage market one year and then bet with Glenn Beck in the gold market the next. Paulson made himself $9 billion in fees in just two years. His current tax bill on that $9 billion? Zero.
Congress lets hedge-fund managers earn all they can now and pay their taxes years from now.
In Congress debated whether hedge-fund managers should pay the top tax rate that applies to wages, bonuses and other compensation for their labors, which is 35 percent. That tax rate starts at about $300,000 of taxable income�not even pocket change to Paulson, but almost 12 years of gross pay to the median-wage worker.
WTF does someone even do with 9 billion dollars?
9 Things the Rich Don't Want You To Know About Taxes (http://www.wweek.com/portland/print-article-17350-print.html)
It's a long article so here are some excerpts;
3. In fact, the wealthy are paying less taxes.
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
4. Many of the very richest pay no current income taxes at all.
John Paulson, the most successful hedge-fund manager of all, bet against the mortgage market one year and then bet with Glenn Beck in the gold market the next. Paulson made himself $9 billion in fees in just two years. His current tax bill on that $9 billion? Zero.
Congress lets hedge-fund managers earn all they can now and pay their taxes years from now.
In Congress debated whether hedge-fund managers should pay the top tax rate that applies to wages, bonuses and other compensation for their labors, which is 35 percent. That tax rate starts at about $300,000 of taxable income�not even pocket change to Paulson, but almost 12 years of gross pay to the median-wage worker.
WTF does someone even do with 9 billion dollars?
Ruhruh
Apr 26, 02:59 PM
Can someone post the updated chart on which OS is making more profit, not only for the company behind the OS, but for developers? :rolleyes:
As much as I want Android to succeed, being a google fan, the OS along with the app store(s) and apps are not on the same level as iOS.
As a consumer, I could careless if Android has 99% of the market, I want the best ecosystem.
Nokia/Symbian dominated the phone market, at least worldwide, they are doing what now? As they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Apple has been doing just fine for the last 10 years or so sticking to its devoted followers, they are not going to start releases 10 iPhone versions to compete to save their market share. But I'm going to guess they will continue to pull in the most cash.
As much as I want Android to succeed, being a google fan, the OS along with the app store(s) and apps are not on the same level as iOS.
As a consumer, I could careless if Android has 99% of the market, I want the best ecosystem.
Nokia/Symbian dominated the phone market, at least worldwide, they are doing what now? As they say, the bigger they are, the harder they fall.
Apple has been doing just fine for the last 10 years or so sticking to its devoted followers, they are not going to start releases 10 iPhone versions to compete to save their market share. But I'm going to guess they will continue to pull in the most cash.
Stridder44
May 6, 01:18 AM
No way. Intel is fantastic, their CPUs are nearly unmatched, and while Intel itself can be finicky sometimes, it's not worth the headache of transitioning again. Not unless ARM has some amazing crap up it's sleeve that will de-rail all of Intel's market share. This rumor makes sense on some low end laptops, maybe, but the entire lineup? Hell no. Plus I've gotten used to being able to run Windows in Boot Camp.
It's taken Apple over a decade to get where we are now. Why would they throw all that away? Not to mention that ARM has absolutely nothing that comes even slightly close to even mid-range Intel chips. And even in two years time, I'm very doubtful.
It's taken Apple over a decade to get where we are now. Why would they throw all that away? Not to mention that ARM has absolutely nothing that comes even slightly close to even mid-range Intel chips. And even in two years time, I'm very doubtful.
Jape
Dec 20, 09:17 PM
Ok, its the 20th...lets see what email we get next from BLT.
Well looks Like it didn't come again :(
Well looks Like it didn't come again :(
MacinDoc
Aug 4, 12:03 AM
Why not? They did it with the iBooks for quite some time...
Yes, but the G3 was a more power efficient chip than the G4, while the opposite is true of the Core vs the Core2. Apple should put Core2 chips in the MacBooks ASAP, if only for the power saving. And Apple should also try to maximize the percentage of its user base that is 64 bit capable prior to the release of OS X 10.5, which should be 64 bit.
Don't forget that when they ship, the Core2 chips will cost as much as the Core chips do now. So, if Apple doesn't upgrade the MacBooks to Core2 or drop their prices, it will start to look like it is less competitive in pricing again.
Yes, but the G3 was a more power efficient chip than the G4, while the opposite is true of the Core vs the Core2. Apple should put Core2 chips in the MacBooks ASAP, if only for the power saving. And Apple should also try to maximize the percentage of its user base that is 64 bit capable prior to the release of OS X 10.5, which should be 64 bit.
Don't forget that when they ship, the Core2 chips will cost as much as the Core chips do now. So, if Apple doesn't upgrade the MacBooks to Core2 or drop their prices, it will start to look like it is less competitive in pricing again.
justinLONG
Mar 29, 11:17 PM
and yes I would buy Quality american made products if a union was not involved, been in one. nothing but shysters. may be a reason why companies go overseas
conditionals
Sep 11, 03:12 AM
My brother lives in Woolongong and he gets good Broadband speeds, I think his with unwired. You could always go and hang around near the uni and bludge off there wireless network.
You could always go and hang around near Sydney uni and get some grammar lessons.
You could always go and hang around near Sydney uni and get some grammar lessons.
milozauckerman
Aug 7, 03:36 PM
1. You are going to spend thousands on a Mac PRO and you are going to pitch a fit over adding wireless for less than 80 bucks?
Yes. I bought a work truck for $15000 and made them give me a $100 bedliner free. The amount I'm spending has nothing to do with my desire to extract the most value for myself.
Apple ain't a charity, I want every last penny I can squeeze from our transactions.
Guess what, these are PROFESSIONAL WORKSTATIONS, not consumer internet computers. The target demographic of these computers is a wired-network setting. Obviously home users and others may have use for wireless in a Mac Pro, so that's why Apple OFFERS IT.
These are PROFESSIONAL WORKSTATIONS that LOOK an awful lot like DESKTOP COMPUTERS shockingly enough.
I hear you can even buy one if you've never worked in an office.
I hear Apple's popular among 'creative types' who might work independently, even from home.
Yes. I bought a work truck for $15000 and made them give me a $100 bedliner free. The amount I'm spending has nothing to do with my desire to extract the most value for myself.
Apple ain't a charity, I want every last penny I can squeeze from our transactions.
Guess what, these are PROFESSIONAL WORKSTATIONS, not consumer internet computers. The target demographic of these computers is a wired-network setting. Obviously home users and others may have use for wireless in a Mac Pro, so that's why Apple OFFERS IT.
These are PROFESSIONAL WORKSTATIONS that LOOK an awful lot like DESKTOP COMPUTERS shockingly enough.
I hear you can even buy one if you've never worked in an office.
I hear Apple's popular among 'creative types' who might work independently, even from home.
-aggie-
May 4, 12:11 PM
I updated the map, look at above post.
And nope, the healing treasure is gone forever. I put it there because I'm cruel. :D
Face my mighty wrath demon!!:mad:
And nope, the healing treasure is gone forever. I put it there because I'm cruel. :D
Face my mighty wrath demon!!:mad:
3CCD
Aug 12, 10:51 AM
I believe there's a an entirely new iMac in the works. The current design can't handle the heat Conroe will want to throw at it. And the Kentsfield 4-core processor will want even better cooling. Currently the iMac looks like it has a G5 inside. Apple doesn't like their Macs to look the same over too long a time.
Here's the Conroe processors I hope Apple will use in the all new iMac:
Core 2 Duo E6700 - 2.67 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB) 20 $1699 & 23" $1999
Core 2 Duo E6600 - 2.40 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB) 17" $1299
In January I hope they will offer a Kentsfield 4 core option in the 20 & 23" models - cause they are bigger and can cool Kentsfield much better than in the 17" enclosure - for an additional $500-$800 - pure guessing cause I don't know Kentsfield pricing yet.
Same is true for the MacBook Pro. It needs to go Black Anodized Aluminum with an easy HD swap out capability like the MacBook which is a radical redesign of the iBook. I think that the new iMac will follow on the heels of the MacBooks intro in September as well. Might even happen in Paris same day as MacBooks - September 12. :)
I feel so strongly about that MacBook Easy Switch HD feature, that I will not buy a MacBook Pro without it and may resort to the MacBook if they don't put that capability in the Pro model. That's a Pro feature in the MacBook. Makes the MacBook sort of a MacBook Pro Jr. Also note that the next MacBook will have a much better Integrated Graphics chipset that goes with Merom that can handle 3-D very well.
A newly redesigned iMac would be great. I agree 100% with you about the switchable HDs. I guess time will only tell. Hey how are those refurb Macs from the "save" page? Do all of Apple's warranties apply and does the unit come in a box as if a new one would come? Might not be a bad idea to save a few dollars and put the other amount towards a new display.
Here's the Conroe processors I hope Apple will use in the all new iMac:
Core 2 Duo E6700 - 2.67 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB) 20 $1699 & 23" $1999
Core 2 Duo E6600 - 2.40 GHz (4 MiB L2, 1066 MHz FSB) 17" $1299
In January I hope they will offer a Kentsfield 4 core option in the 20 & 23" models - cause they are bigger and can cool Kentsfield much better than in the 17" enclosure - for an additional $500-$800 - pure guessing cause I don't know Kentsfield pricing yet.
Same is true for the MacBook Pro. It needs to go Black Anodized Aluminum with an easy HD swap out capability like the MacBook which is a radical redesign of the iBook. I think that the new iMac will follow on the heels of the MacBooks intro in September as well. Might even happen in Paris same day as MacBooks - September 12. :)
I feel so strongly about that MacBook Easy Switch HD feature, that I will not buy a MacBook Pro without it and may resort to the MacBook if they don't put that capability in the Pro model. That's a Pro feature in the MacBook. Makes the MacBook sort of a MacBook Pro Jr. Also note that the next MacBook will have a much better Integrated Graphics chipset that goes with Merom that can handle 3-D very well.
A newly redesigned iMac would be great. I agree 100% with you about the switchable HDs. I guess time will only tell. Hey how are those refurb Macs from the "save" page? Do all of Apple's warranties apply and does the unit come in a box as if a new one would come? Might not be a bad idea to save a few dollars and put the other amount towards a new display.
jcgarza
Mar 29, 12:48 PM
Am I the only one who thinks that the fact that you can't use this service on iOS has more to do with Apple than it does with Amazon? (Remember lala.com?)
