123orion
Sep 15, 05:21 PM
This (http://switchtoamac.com/site/apple-will-soon-announce-a-macbook-pro-revison-heres-why.html) an a good read on why we may see a MacBook Pro revision very soon.
Makes sense to me
Makes sense to me
bananaboi
May 6, 12:15 AM
it's unnecessary rumors like these that make the market overreact and force intel stock prices to fall..
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
Icaras
Apr 21, 02:37 PM
Very interesting....
peharri
Nov 26, 08:41 PM
NEWS:
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
All it says is that cellphone owners can break the locks. It doesn't say cellphone operators have to help them. It also refers to specific instances where the software itself has to be modified to unlock a phone. It is already legal, because it's not a copyright violation, to unlock, for example, Nokia phones, whose locking code is actually algorithmically generated and therefore requires no copyright violation to use.
Truth is, most countries have no laws against breaking SP locks, and many countries, notably most in Europe, have laws forcing operators to unlock phones on demand. And yet most countries still have operators that sell subsidized phones in exchange for contracts. SP locks are there not so much because the phone is subsidized so much as to help enforce the contract, and reduce churn by making it more expensive to switch carrier.
So no, this change will make no difference as far as subsidized handsets go.
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
All it says is that cellphone owners can break the locks. It doesn't say cellphone operators have to help them. It also refers to specific instances where the software itself has to be modified to unlock a phone. It is already legal, because it's not a copyright violation, to unlock, for example, Nokia phones, whose locking code is actually algorithmically generated and therefore requires no copyright violation to use.
Truth is, most countries have no laws against breaking SP locks, and many countries, notably most in Europe, have laws forcing operators to unlock phones on demand. And yet most countries still have operators that sell subsidized phones in exchange for contracts. SP locks are there not so much because the phone is subsidized so much as to help enforce the contract, and reduce churn by making it more expensive to switch carrier.
So no, this change will make no difference as far as subsidized handsets go.
AidenShaw
Aug 4, 05:28 PM
Yes - both AMD 64 and Intel EM64T are 64 bit extensions to the 32 bit x86 processor.
From what I understand the registers are still 32 bit, but the chips have a 64 bit address space and more registers.
In 64-bit mode, the integer registers can be used as 8/16/32/64 bit wide integers (just like the PPC970).
Floating registers are 32-bit or 64-bit wide, on both 32-bit x86 and 64-bit x64. 64-bit floats have always been there in 32-bit x86.
No-one has the need for a truly 64 bit machine at this point - just machines that can address more RAM. The 4GB RAM limit on 32 bit processors is beginning to be an issue for pro users.
Considering that 32-bit x86 chips have been able to address 64 GiB of RAM for many years - if your statement is correct then there would be no need for x64 at all.
In other words, lots of people need 64-bit for the addressing PER PROCESS, not per system (processor) as you say. (Actually, there's no "per processor" limit - a 2-way can't address more RAM than a 1-way.)
From what I understand the registers are still 32 bit, but the chips have a 64 bit address space and more registers.
In 64-bit mode, the integer registers can be used as 8/16/32/64 bit wide integers (just like the PPC970).
Floating registers are 32-bit or 64-bit wide, on both 32-bit x86 and 64-bit x64. 64-bit floats have always been there in 32-bit x86.
No-one has the need for a truly 64 bit machine at this point - just machines that can address more RAM. The 4GB RAM limit on 32 bit processors is beginning to be an issue for pro users.
Considering that 32-bit x86 chips have been able to address 64 GiB of RAM for many years - if your statement is correct then there would be no need for x64 at all.
In other words, lots of people need 64-bit for the addressing PER PROCESS, not per system (processor) as you say. (Actually, there's no "per processor" limit - a 2-way can't address more RAM than a 1-way.)
maflynn
May 4, 02:46 PM
That makes sense, while not incredibly expensive, the cost of manufacturing is still overhead if they can reduce it by providing a mechanism for the consumer to d/l it why not.
Cue
Sep 11, 08:42 AM
It's funny to see that people have completely forgotten about the Apple Expo in Paris, also tomorrow :D.
To me it is kinda strange that the expo starts 7 hours prior to the media event. Are they going to keep those black curtains (assuming there are some) during the complete 1st day of the event?
Are there any guarded stands whatsoever in the expo? Is anyone going there tomorrow to report? :)
To me it is kinda strange that the expo starts 7 hours prior to the media event. Are they going to keep those black curtains (assuming there are some) during the complete 1st day of the event?
Are there any guarded stands whatsoever in the expo? Is anyone going there tomorrow to report? :)
adbe
Mar 29, 02:51 PM
I agree. Given the last Ford we purchased leaked and after 6 months of trying to fix it, the Ford dealer said "well, everything leaks" and said they'd give a good deal on it to trade it in if we wanted. And the last GM we had stalled every morning when you were pulling out on to the road and the dealer said that it was "just the way the car was made," and could never fix it I wouldn't buy an American made car unless they started getting good reports both for quality upfront (they just sound cheap compared to a Honda, Mercedes, Lexus, Porsche, or Toyota) and for quality over 5-6+ years of ownership. And the previous American made cars we had were of similar low quality.
To be fair (and way OT) Ford really do seem to have upped their game, and GM are at least trying.
I'm actually seriously considering the new 2012 Focus, or the Fiesta as a second car. I wouldn't even have looked in Ford's direction two years ago.
To be fair (and way OT) Ford really do seem to have upped their game, and GM are at least trying.
I'm actually seriously considering the new 2012 Focus, or the Fiesta as a second car. I wouldn't even have looked in Ford's direction two years ago.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 21, 03:37 PM
lol sorry... just saying that products dont necessarily have to wait the 6 month grace period before bein upgraded.
iMac was drastically upgraded from G5 to Core Duo after just 3 months.
Could be the same with the current line-up.
Yup. But it works the other wey too, look at the ACDs and Power Macs.
iMac was drastically upgraded from G5 to Core Duo after just 3 months.
Could be the same with the current line-up.
Yup. But it works the other wey too, look at the ACDs and Power Macs.
onemorething
Aug 6, 05:59 PM
anyone think apple will do anything to commemorate the 5 year anniversary of the ipod in october?
orthorim
Apr 25, 07:26 AM
It was inevitable that this would come as soon as the iPhone 4 was released. That screen looks sooooo much better than my computer's. At desktop size it's going to be mind-blowing.
The only question is when, and I assume it's primarily a matter of getting the hardware made. No one makes retina 13, 15, and 17" displays and Apple is going to need huge quantities.
Making OS X resolution independent is a pretty big task so doing the prepwork now could still mean it's years away. I hope not of course. If they come out with a retina MBP, I am going to be the first in line to get one.
The only question is when, and I assume it's primarily a matter of getting the hardware made. No one makes retina 13, 15, and 17" displays and Apple is going to need huge quantities.
Making OS X resolution independent is a pretty big task so doing the prepwork now could still mean it's years away. I hope not of course. If they come out with a retina MBP, I am going to be the first in line to get one.
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
This was inevitable given the number of phone models each OS is on. It was clear to see from way off. However if Apple are making more money than Google from these units it won't be anything for them to worry about.
It's much like Windows and OS X, there's the volume model (Windows) and the Apple model. I'm happy with my iPhone and I haven't met anyone who's been unhappy with theirs either, that said, I've also not spoken to any friends who are unhappy with Android.
Competition is good and while ever there is the competition then innovation will be driven more than if there was a monopoly, so this can't really be seen as a bad thing.
This Apple. They don't need competition to innovate or make their products better, it's in their DNA.
It's much like Windows and OS X, there's the volume model (Windows) and the Apple model. I'm happy with my iPhone and I haven't met anyone who's been unhappy with theirs either, that said, I've also not spoken to any friends who are unhappy with Android.
Competition is good and while ever there is the competition then innovation will be driven more than if there was a monopoly, so this can't really be seen as a bad thing.
This Apple. They don't need competition to innovate or make their products better, it's in their DNA.
mcmlxix
Apr 7, 10:53 AM
Maybe if enterprises really get on board, then sales will ramp up. But businesses are going to run three months of tests before they role out the big blackberries for the staff.
3 months? My company is *still* testing Windows 7. It *may* be rolled out the end of this year.
3 months? My company is *still* testing Windows 7. It *may* be rolled out the end of this year.
ticman
Nov 14, 06:27 PM
Great pictures, Tstreete! Where you mounted yours was exactly the area I was thinking for my ultimate mount. I just have to make sure there is enough clearance to swing into landscape mode. Thanks also for the "clips" info as that might be great for keeping some semblance of order the to cord issue.
Now one of the remaining issues would be after taking the iPhone out of the dock, do you just leave the dock or actually detach it and hide it in the console or glove compartment. i am betting that it just stays on the dash--a feature that might concern me give where I have to park from time to time and gps theft seems to be on the rise.
One final question, Tstreete and that is did you use the adhesive disk on the dash and then the suction dial mount? Just curious.
Thanks again,
Mike
Now one of the remaining issues would be after taking the iPhone out of the dock, do you just leave the dock or actually detach it and hide it in the console or glove compartment. i am betting that it just stays on the dash--a feature that might concern me give where I have to park from time to time and gps theft seems to be on the rise.
One final question, Tstreete and that is did you use the adhesive disk on the dash and then the suction dial mount? Just curious.
Thanks again,
Mike
craighc
May 7, 11:07 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I could see iAd playing a role in this decision. Apple
pays for it through ads. Makes sense.
I could see iAd playing a role in this decision. Apple
pays for it through ads. Makes sense.
smallduck
Nov 26, 06:01 PM
I always thought the direction Apple would go with a tablet was as a consumer device extension to iPhoto, almost how iPod extends iTunes. Like how iTV will wirelessly pull viedo from Macs in your household, this could have been doing the same with photos years ago. Although primarily a picture frame, it could have had a touch screen and perhaps running full (or limited) OS X and permitting additional functions that users come up with.
Before recently, its likely this would either been too expensive a product for someone using it as just a picture frame, either that or too limited for someone wanting other functions. But that's surely not as true anymore, seeing how small and cheap devices are getting so capable these days.
Before recently, its likely this would either been too expensive a product for someone using it as just a picture frame, either that or too limited for someone wanting other functions. But that's surely not as true anymore, seeing how small and cheap devices are getting so capable these days.
superleccy
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MBP updates? About time too!
gnasher729
Apr 7, 11:55 AM
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
ChazUK
Apr 18, 04:46 PM
Oh come on, we aren't really going to resort to the "there's only one way to design a mobile device" argument, are we? You're telling me the only way to design the Galaxy Tab was to make it look identical to the iPhone 3GS?
My iPhone 4 doesn't look anything like my wife's iPhone 3GS, so apparently there are at least two ways to design a mobile phone.
None of the other Android phones or tablets I've seen look like iPhones either. Only Samsung's.
The galaxy tab looks different to the phone 3gs from my experience with it.
It is lacking a chrome bezel & the sides are flattened, black matte plastic and lacks a physical "home" button.
They are similar but far from identical.
My iPhone 4 doesn't look anything like my wife's iPhone 3GS, so apparently there are at least two ways to design a mobile phone.
None of the other Android phones or tablets I've seen look like iPhones either. Only Samsung's.
The galaxy tab looks different to the phone 3gs from my experience with it.
It is lacking a chrome bezel & the sides are flattened, black matte plastic and lacks a physical "home" button.
They are similar but far from identical.
jmcrutch
Apr 18, 04:17 PM
While I don't care who sues who - in the end the laywers win. ....
Actually, YOU win. The United States provides for patents to "promote" and "further" advancements in the things that we all come here to discuss everyday. One can argue the merits of such a system but that is one of the purposes of the patent laws. Basically, incentive to make the world a better place for all.
Take away the incentive and there might not be as much innovation.
Actually, YOU win. The United States provides for patents to "promote" and "further" advancements in the things that we all come here to discuss everyday. One can argue the merits of such a system but that is one of the purposes of the patent laws. Basically, incentive to make the world a better place for all.
Take away the incentive and there might not be as much innovation.
Jett0516
Apr 26, 04:49 PM
you guys are still in denial.
the fact is...most people dont want an iphone. the reports says it and the sales numbers proves it. its not about the limit availability of the iphone or contract issues...its just doesn't appeal to most people.
the fact is...most people dont want an iphone. the reports says it and the sales numbers proves it. its not about the limit availability of the iphone or contract issues...its just doesn't appeal to most people.
Chundles
Aug 3, 08:58 AM
How You Do Dat? :eek:
Um, surely you're not that silly.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
Um, surely you're not that silly.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
hcho3
Apr 20, 07:21 AM
This update is not good enough, apple. Do more.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
64GB option
Dual core processor
Those updates are not good enough for a device that gets an update only once a year.
Not enough.
I am going to buy white iphone 4 for 99 dollars or 49 dollars this summer and skip the iPhone 5 on paying 199 dollars.
8 megapixel camera with 1080P recording.
64GB option
Dual core processor
Those updates are not good enough for a device that gets an update only once a year.
Not enough.
I am going to buy white iphone 4 for 99 dollars or 49 dollars this summer and skip the iPhone 5 on paying 199 dollars.
miamijim
Nov 10, 08:06 AM
I have installed this and am running it now but I do have 1.75 TB of data on my drives to go through, I will update this when the scan is complete.
It all looks nice and simple anyway so far.
:)
It all looks nice and simple anyway so far.
:)
No comments:
Post a Comment