roocka
Apr 30, 08:09 PM
Here come the "My iMac's overheating" threads.
Apple has been working on a method of spraying Liquidmetal to be used as a thermal component on the insides of the iMacs. Check out the link if you don't believe me.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/11/apple-wins-patents-relating-to-multi-touch-liquid-metal.html#more
Apple has been working on a method of spraying Liquidmetal to be used as a thermal component on the insides of the iMacs. Check out the link if you don't believe me.
http://www.patentlyapple.com/patently-apple/2010/11/apple-wins-patents-relating-to-multi-touch-liquid-metal.html#more
Surely
Apr 20, 10:08 AM
It *is* private now. This information isn't broadcast anywhere but your own personal computer in the form of an encrypted backup file. The information won't go anywhere but with you and your property.
However, if your iphone gets stolen, the GPS log is likely the least private thing you need to worry about. The thief will have access to your entire contact list, browsing history, etc..
The backup file isn't encrypted unless you select that option.
This database of your locations is stored on your iPhone as well as in any of the automatic backups that are made when you sync it with iTunes. One thing that will help is choosing encrypted backups, since that will prevent other users or programs on your machine from viewing the data, but there will still be a copy on your device.
from: http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/
The data is actually collected by cell tower triangulation, not GPS.
The data appears to come from cell tower triangulation, rather than the GPS chip from: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/20/your-iphone-is-silently-and-constantly-logging-your-location/
However, if your iphone gets stolen, the GPS log is likely the least private thing you need to worry about. The thief will have access to your entire contact list, browsing history, etc..
The backup file isn't encrypted unless you select that option.
This database of your locations is stored on your iPhone as well as in any of the automatic backups that are made when you sync it with iTunes. One thing that will help is choosing encrypted backups, since that will prevent other users or programs on your machine from viewing the data, but there will still be a copy on your device.
from: http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/
The data is actually collected by cell tower triangulation, not GPS.
The data appears to come from cell tower triangulation, rather than the GPS chip from: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/20/your-iphone-is-silently-and-constantly-logging-your-location/
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 12:23 AM
she had to veer off of the road to avoid hitting me.
What if she had decided to not swerve off the road and instead run into the back of your car. When the insurance companies and police look at it, she'd be in the right (and be covered) and you'd be in the wrong with a screwed over car.
What if she had decided to not swerve off the road and instead run into the back of your car. When the insurance companies and police look at it, she'd be in the right (and be covered) and you'd be in the wrong with a screwed over car.
Full of Win
Apr 25, 02:51 PM
For those wanting retina displays:
No modern GPU can display anything past 2560x1600 on a single screen.
Please :rolleyes:
Do you mean they lack the power or that its not a selectable option? They have the power, have had it for years. Dual 2560x1600 screen setups off one graphics card is easily attainable.
No modern GPU can display anything past 2560x1600 on a single screen.
Please :rolleyes:
Do you mean they lack the power or that its not a selectable option? They have the power, have had it for years. Dual 2560x1600 screen setups off one graphics card is easily attainable.
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:45 PM
I thought this was an FCC mandate (to track GPS information for cellphones) after 9/11. The real issue is that this is not encrypted in anyway so anybody can get the information if they have access to the file.
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
mkjellman
Aug 29, 08:22 AM
nice apple, common i really need a new computer, i feel like the original powerbook g4 al waiting game all over again!
extraextra
Oct 27, 10:38 AM
They must be from California, lots of smugg Greenpeace hippies hanging around there.
Apple is from California too though! And were not all hippies over here, for the record.
Apple is from California too though! And were not all hippies over here, for the record.
EagerDragon
Sep 4, 07:15 PM
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
Maybe I am dense, but why stream it to the TV wen a mini can connect to the TV after downloading the show? Maybe to send it to multiple TVs in the house at the same time? Sounds expensive and short lived.
Need hear more, a single device and movie downloads seem to be only part of the picture.
Maybe I am dense, but why stream it to the TV wen a mini can connect to the TV after downloading the show? Maybe to send it to multiple TVs in the house at the same time? Sounds expensive and short lived.
Need hear more, a single device and movie downloads seem to be only part of the picture.
bokdol
Sep 12, 02:18 PM
80GB iPod seems like the only model with good value/price ratio. :D The home sync feature is an especially nice touch, something people predicted since the 2G iPods.
what do you man by home sync... i missed lot of info. and i could not find anything on that...
what do you man by home sync... i missed lot of info. and i could not find anything on that...
RodThePlod
Oct 12, 05:01 PM
Yeah, I posted that earlier - I want the proper matte anodised finish. But RED, not that trendy pinkish colour that's going around at the moment. Proper, primary RED.
I've got a special edition (RED) Motorola SLVR that you can see here: http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/red/
It appears to be made of the same anodised aluminium of the nanos and looks way cool. I love the way it looks - and yes, it's more of a burgundy that primary red. The darker colour grows on you, though - it's not garish but rather just understated.
Everyone comments on it - and it actually feels good to say that a percentage of my calls/text charges goes toward a worthwhile cause every month.
:)
I've got a special edition (RED) Motorola SLVR that you can see here: http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/red/
It appears to be made of the same anodised aluminium of the nanos and looks way cool. I love the way it looks - and yes, it's more of a burgundy that primary red. The darker colour grows on you, though - it's not garish but rather just understated.
Everyone comments on it - and it actually feels good to say that a percentage of my calls/text charges goes toward a worthwhile cause every month.
:)
mtrctyjoe
Aug 31, 12:52 PM
Apple Insider was saying the movie price would be $14.99 -I would not pay that much to watch a movie on a small screen... no way, unless I had a hour long commute to work on a train... can't believe there are that many people like that out there!
macbookproi7
Feb 27, 06:05 AM
I think McAfee is a virus itself, or just as bad. Steals heaps of processor and RAM just doing it's job. Maybe instead of combating 'threats' with other annoying programs, they could spend some time informing the general user on how to stay protected... other then just saying.. 'Don't give out your credit card info over the net'.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 10:35 AM
The 2.40 and 2.66 (which would be great for the imacs) use 114 Watts at idle and 158-162 at load (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=7). Here's info on power draw for original G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486), early 2005 G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302439), and late 2005 G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303540). I fail to see the problem. I'm not being flip - I really fail to see the problem. They fit G5s in to imacs, and those power draw numbers look worse than conroe's, unless I'm missing something.Thanks for the additional research. Still, you're taxing the current 180w power supply. I don't think the Power Mac G5 is a good example either. Are we expecting a redesign for Conroe? Not that I don't WANT Conroe in the iMac. It just seems a bit much.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/12/ibm_90nm_g5_chip/
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-powerenv/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/12/ibm_90nm_g5_chip/
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-powerenv/
CalfCanuck
Sep 14, 07:16 PM
That'd be very nice, but I think that's too niche for Apple to get into. Although Apple does take its photography seriously, it only really produces hardware that is versatile and can be used for many different tasks - i.e. although the Mac Pro is serious photograhpy equipment, it can also be serious movie editing or CAD equipment. Infact, I can't think of any hardware made by Apple that is specifically photography directed.
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
Then again, there's nothing to say they won't break the habit of a lifetime.
While I have nothing to back up this idea beyond wild speculation, it makes sense if you think about it for a while.
I used the name "Aperture.iPod" just for this thread. I think the APerture features would be targeted to special audience, but even the Photo uploading features (plus integration into iPhoto) would give it the broader appeal you correctly discuss.
Several reason why this might happen:
1. Apple has had a product called the Photo iPod since October 2004. The fact that few of it's users probably use it for Photos merely points out that it failed in it's targeted market for a number of reasons (probably lack of easy uploading from cameras when not at a computer, small screen, and lack of support for RAW).
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
So why will Apple start selling a video size that isn't designed for the current iPod? While it could be for the "iTV" device, I'd image that is a bit too small a resolution to get people excited about. And even if it is, why start selling it 6 months before the device ships?
3. If Apple was to introduce a new Video iPod with a larger screen, this new larger box would allow a number of things that can''t fit on a small iPod and are perfect for both video AND photography - a large 640 x 480 screen, FW or USB2 connections, and potentially CF/SD card slots (or at least an IO for a fast adapter via the USB2 connection.)
Hence my conclusion (based on pure speculation) - all these things point to a dual use device. Handheld, but larger than normal iPods, and suitable for both consumer video playback AND photography.
What better place to introduce this than the biggest consumer photo show in the world?
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:26 PM
Well that might a the case in your situation but it this case Rogue Amoeba is using Apple's own copyright images in a client server application where the API on OS X does not confer the right to use those images on other devices by third party developers.
You're missing the point. Yes, Apple, as the copyright holder, can define the extent of its license (assuming they haven't already waived the right to do so, which they may have, and assuming it isn't fair use, which it almost certainly is), and, yes, they can decide what goes into the app store, making the extent of the copyright license moot.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
You're missing the point. Yes, Apple, as the copyright holder, can define the extent of its license (assuming they haven't already waived the right to do so, which they may have, and assuming it isn't fair use, which it almost certainly is), and, yes, they can decide what goes into the app store, making the extent of the copyright license moot.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
runninmac
Oct 12, 08:04 PM
Dang they look good! I think the red is going to be a great hit especially in the high school crowd. Now if only I could justify one of these :)
*LTD*
Apr 29, 06:08 AM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
ncook06
Oct 27, 12:39 PM
I'm all for protecting the environment, but sometimes it gets out of hand. Greenpeace should be there, but it is evident that Apple is already working on being more environmentally friendly. Greenpeace should have been kicked out for violating their contract.
+1 for Apple
+1 for Apple
iMacZealot
Sep 17, 07:48 PM
OK. hang on. back the f&6king truck up.
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/servicePlansOptionsV2/FreeClearFairFlexiblePlans.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1436723&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_SCID=ECOMM&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_PCode=None&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_cartState=group
maybe we're backwards here. but i have NEVER, EVER heard of ANY kind of phone service where INCOMING calls are anything BUT free (excluding reverse-charge, obviously).
http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/servicePlansOptionsV2/FreeClearFairFlexiblePlans.jsp?FOLDER%3C%3Efolder_id=1436723&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_SCID=ECOMM&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_PCode=None&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_cartState=group
Alvi
May 3, 11:01 AM
That's nice from Apple, I personally find the Magic Mouse useless for what I do, it's just a nice toy. And a Trackpad would be more useful just for the Multitouch Gestures in combination with a Real Mouse
daneoni
Sep 14, 11:48 AM
But since everyone's discussing MBP's, I guess it fits.
I know the Merom chip is compatible with the current boards in the CD MBP, but I've never heard anyone actually say that a CD MBP can be upgraded by simply dropping in a Merom chip. Will this be possible?
No, the chip is soldiered onto the board and not socketed like desktops
I know the Merom chip is compatible with the current boards in the CD MBP, but I've never heard anyone actually say that a CD MBP can be upgraded by simply dropping in a Merom chip. Will this be possible?
No, the chip is soldiered onto the board and not socketed like desktops
MacNewsFix
Apr 19, 09:20 AM
Samsung also feels the need to depict its products just like Apple's, on a reflective white surface.
http://hopelesslyflawed.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/iphone-galaxy-s.jpg
I wonder how it feels to be a designer for Samsung where you are forced to emulate the competitor's work rather than implement your own vision.
Looking at that image now, I can't believe Samsung missed the opportunity to slap the silhouette of a half-eaten pear on the back. LOL
http://hopelesslyflawed.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/iphone-galaxy-s.jpg
I wonder how it feels to be a designer for Samsung where you are forced to emulate the competitor's work rather than implement your own vision.
Looking at that image now, I can't believe Samsung missed the opportunity to slap the silhouette of a half-eaten pear on the back. LOL
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:49 PM
Only on UNOPENED product. If you've opened it, you gotta pony up 10% restocking fee, if you bought from apple. They will refund money if there is a price drop in that timeframe, though.
o *****.... i knew for a fact that there was gonna be some sort of catch!!
but 10% restocking fee??? isn't that a bit too much?
so what do you think, is new ipod literally worth procuring with the sacrifice of 10% restocking fee, when the only difference is the brighter screen, 1.5 more hr of video play time, search function, ....etc??
i'm confsed!!
o *****.... i knew for a fact that there was gonna be some sort of catch!!
but 10% restocking fee??? isn't that a bit too much?
so what do you think, is new ipod literally worth procuring with the sacrifice of 10% restocking fee, when the only difference is the brighter screen, 1.5 more hr of video play time, search function, ....etc??
i'm confsed!!
gnasher729
Jul 20, 03:34 AM
Who is talking about low end Merom. I am talking about higher end with 4mb of Cache.
I highly doubt apple would use a low end merom, when they can go with a higher end.
The MacBook and MacBook Pro will both get 4mb Meroms.
Just FYI: It seems that Merom will ship at speeds from 1.66 to 2.33 GHz, the 1.66GHz and 1.83 GHz have 2 MB cache, and 2GHz and faster all have 4 MB cache. Prices seem to be identical to the current Yonah prices (except the 2.33; there is no 2.33 GHz Yonah). So I would expect that all Yonahs will be replaced with Merom at same clockspeed, and that means 4MB cache except for the low end MacBook and possibly MacMini.
I highly doubt apple would use a low end merom, when they can go with a higher end.
The MacBook and MacBook Pro will both get 4mb Meroms.
Just FYI: It seems that Merom will ship at speeds from 1.66 to 2.33 GHz, the 1.66GHz and 1.83 GHz have 2 MB cache, and 2GHz and faster all have 4 MB cache. Prices seem to be identical to the current Yonah prices (except the 2.33; there is no 2.33 GHz Yonah). So I would expect that all Yonahs will be replaced with Merom at same clockspeed, and that means 4MB cache except for the low end MacBook and possibly MacMini.
