cincoaranas
May 6, 08:12 AM
Moving away from Intel in their notebooks and desktops would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion. Intel is the big dog and they have the resources to keep innovating. I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
I think they can pull it off. I watched as they went from Motorola 680X0, to PowerPC (which was huge) and then to Intel (hell froze over!) So this happening would not be the least bit surprising or concerning.
I think they can pull it off. I watched as they went from Motorola 680X0, to PowerPC (which was huge) and then to Intel (hell froze over!) So this happening would not be the least bit surprising or concerning.
MacNut
May 3, 06:57 PM
I don't see us ever switching.
anonalidall
May 7, 11:44 AM
Point taken but what kind of FOOL am I to trade my privacy to Google for a paltry $6 at any level?
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
First, it's the very nature of capitalism that provides you with the ability to pick and choose the best service/company that meets your needs.
Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements." If you mean that we should get free Cloud services without ads then I think you're completely wrong and I'm most worried about sites that provide free services and have absolutely nothing but VC cash to pay for it. And if you mean we should have the option of paying for Cloud services to avoid ads, then fine, but you can do that with Gmail, so I don't see why you think MobileMe is any better than Gmail (from the privacy perspective).
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
Where you go, who you speak to and how you communicate is of tremendous value and I recommend that people think about actual value. We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements.
Google and Facebook have both come out with disturbing revelations about how they feel about consumer privacy. I think the beauty of the web is that no company is irreplaceable. I could continue to get email, online calendar, pictures, documents and more without Google and that's a great feeling.
First, it's the very nature of capitalism that provides you with the ability to pick and choose the best service/company that meets your needs.
Second, I'm not sure what you mean by "We're moving from this era where the expectation should be that Cloud services at a basic level should be incorporated into the product without the vendor resorting to advertisements." If you mean that we should get free Cloud services without ads then I think you're completely wrong and I'm most worried about sites that provide free services and have absolutely nothing but VC cash to pay for it. And if you mean we should have the option of paying for Cloud services to avoid ads, then fine, but you can do that with Gmail, so I don't see why you think MobileMe is any better than Gmail (from the privacy perspective).
Lastly, I wouldn't lump Google and Facebook together when it comes to privacy. Sergey Brin and Larry Page have made very strong statements about their respect for their users and they understand that without the users they'd have no company. Eric has made a lame-brained comment or two, and Google Buzz screwed up, but they fixed it (and at least when you signed into Gmail they had the option to opt out of it).
Facebook is a whole different story. Their whole exec branch seems to disregard privacy and they've been rolling out auto-opt-in feature after feature that removes your privacy.
anonalidall
May 7, 12:11 PM
Eric Schmidt's comments about privacy are disconcerting to me
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
In the interest of winding this down (and allowing this thread to get back on track :-) I'll concede that Google has made more concerning statements about privacy than Apple (and as you note, information is much more directly related to their bottom line than it is to Apple's). However, I think these are only our perceptions about the situation. I think the reality is that regardless of whether you go with Google's for-pay or Apple's for-pay cloud services you're putting yourself in another companies hands. And I think the differences between how these large companies treat their users vs. how that relates to their income is extremely small. I think it's splitting hairs to differentiate between the privacy of their Cloud offerings (Facebook being an exception).
If you want real privacy there are better ways to obtain it. I use GnuPG when I want more privacy and less convenience, otherwise anything that's unencrypted that I send out or store on the Internet I treat (somewhat) as out of my hands. Obviously I have different expectations for Gmail vs my Tweets, but I still understand the hazards of storing any unencrypted information with any company, Google or Apple.
http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/70000/4000/100/74150/74150.strip.gif
This is after the whole Google Buzz fiasco. There's money in trying to convince people to be open. Facebook and Google data mine consumer behavior to make money and consumers need to act like they got a good education and understand where they are being used.
The assumption that those that want privacy are doing something illegal is asinine.
Zuckerberg (Facebook) on privacy (http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebooks_zuckerberg_says_the_age_of_privacy_is_ov.php)
Privacy is a lot like Laws. You give it up it's hard to get back.
Hey it's not a choice for everyone. I'm just at a point in my life where $6 and some change is going to put me out especially when my online data is not being mined for profit. I've been happier than I though I would with my MobileMe account. I'm on the west coast so i'm assuming my data center is in Cali and performance has been fine.
In the interest of winding this down (and allowing this thread to get back on track :-) I'll concede that Google has made more concerning statements about privacy than Apple (and as you note, information is much more directly related to their bottom line than it is to Apple's). However, I think these are only our perceptions about the situation. I think the reality is that regardless of whether you go with Google's for-pay or Apple's for-pay cloud services you're putting yourself in another companies hands. And I think the differences between how these large companies treat their users vs. how that relates to their income is extremely small. I think it's splitting hairs to differentiate between the privacy of their Cloud offerings (Facebook being an exception).
If you want real privacy there are better ways to obtain it. I use GnuPG when I want more privacy and less convenience, otherwise anything that's unencrypted that I send out or store on the Internet I treat (somewhat) as out of my hands. Obviously I have different expectations for Gmail vs my Tweets, but I still understand the hazards of storing any unencrypted information with any company, Google or Apple.
http://www.dilbert.com/dyn/str_strip/000000000/00000000/0000000/000000/70000/4000/100/74150/74150.strip.gif
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.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:14 PM
I wouldn't mind having Apple sell them (and I'm guessing they will to some degree), but we also have to think in terms of the market as is. If I can get a free phone through my provider every x years, I'm going to do that instead of buying outside the company (even if it is crap). If I can get an upgrade for between $50 and $300, I might consider it when I'm in the store renewing my plan. Apple can gain presence only by going through established channels; it's not to say that you won't be able to buy one in an Apple store, just that consumers who like to do comparison shopping when they get their phones might like to see an iPhone in a TMobile/Verizon/3rd party carrier store.
I'm of two minds on this. First, I think Apple would have a problem with cell phone providers who wouldn't want to extend service to hardware not purchased through them. Why should they? They're not getting a kickback on the phone. And besides, these people buying their phones from outside sources are just a minority of users, anyhow. A minority they may feel fully capable and even justified in ignoring.
The second thought is: how many people here remember when car dealerships were exclusive dealerships? That is, a Pontiac dealer only sold Pontiacs, a Mercury dealer only sold Mercurys, a Ford dealership only sold Fords, etc. All of that began to fade away in the mid-1980s. Now you have dealerships that sell multiple brands. My point here being that this whole "exclusive" and "main squeeze" rationale used in the cell phone industry is just as carved in stone as the car dealership thing "was".
I'm of two minds on this. First, I think Apple would have a problem with cell phone providers who wouldn't want to extend service to hardware not purchased through them. Why should they? They're not getting a kickback on the phone. And besides, these people buying their phones from outside sources are just a minority of users, anyhow. A minority they may feel fully capable and even justified in ignoring.
The second thought is: how many people here remember when car dealerships were exclusive dealerships? That is, a Pontiac dealer only sold Pontiacs, a Mercury dealer only sold Mercurys, a Ford dealership only sold Fords, etc. All of that began to fade away in the mid-1980s. Now you have dealerships that sell multiple brands. My point here being that this whole "exclusive" and "main squeeze" rationale used in the cell phone industry is just as carved in stone as the car dealership thing "was".
Spoony
Apr 18, 03:25 PM
One more thing. I'm not sure you guys know how Samsung works or really know how Big Samsung is.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
It is the world's largest private conglomerage by Revenue. Annual Revenue of over 170Billion.
Apple Inc. (2nd largest market cap, pretty massive company) Over 65B of sales.
Samsung is almost 3X bigger in terms of Sales.
My point being that Samung phones and Samsung component makers are pretty much two separate companies that consolidate together. I'd bet that Samung Components treats Samsung phones just like any other vendor.
Apple suing the phone arm of samsung probably has zero impact on the component piece. Different entities almost with different relationships etc.. Samsung definitely values the apple relationship. It's the phone arm that ripped off apple's design and funtionality.
-aggie-
May 3, 01:41 PM
Uh, a hero dies once all of his HP is gone.
That should've be more clear. Basically I'm just stating *why* the villain is at level 16. It's not an arbitrary number - it's the number of players multiplied by two. # of players (8) multiplied by 2 = villain's level (16). That's all.
Okay, but we start with only 1 HP. So, a number of us could die in the first round?
The villain's level doesn't matter, right? He either kills all or he loses.
That should've be more clear. Basically I'm just stating *why* the villain is at level 16. It's not an arbitrary number - it's the number of players multiplied by two. # of players (8) multiplied by 2 = villain's level (16). That's all.
Okay, but we start with only 1 HP. So, a number of us could die in the first round?
The villain's level doesn't matter, right? He either kills all or he loses.
LOLaMac
Apr 26, 02:46 PM
Wow. A platform that is available on all four major carriers and has dozens of phones, passed the iPhone (which *just* became available on its second carrier) in overall usage. So I guess Google should be patting themselves on the back for this historic achievement.
Except that each and every single person who has purchased an Android phone could have purchased an iPhone instead. The fact there is one Android phone or ten Android phones is irrelevant. Every one of those people could have chose to buy an iPhone. They didn't.
Except that each and every single person who has purchased an Android phone could have purchased an iPhone instead. The fact there is one Android phone or ten Android phones is irrelevant. Every one of those people could have chose to buy an iPhone. They didn't.
balamw
Apr 9, 06:34 PM
Official Google answer.
280546
Wolfram Alpha concurs.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
B
280546
Wolfram Alpha concurs.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
B
2 Replies
Apr 26, 02:42 PM
Once again, the seperating into 'smartphone' and 'tablet' markets makes little sense.
As the capabilities of both devices grow we'll soon find that the only difference between the two is screen size.
Do we consider the 13" Macbook to be in a different market than the 15" Macbook Pro? No, they're both laptops.
And thus, everyone will soon wake up and realize that ALL iOS devices should be compared against ALL Android devices. These 'smartphone only' lists may still make sense in but in 2 or 3 years these kind of measurements will be seen as worthless.
Your argument is so inane it's barely worth a reply.
You do realize that not all tablets require a contract, right?
When it comes to laptops, the only thing that's different between a 13" and a 15" will be the screen size. But a tablet and a phone are INHERENTLY different.
My android tablet is wifi only and serves a totally separate function from my iPhone, my windows laptop, my linux server-cluster or my HTPC.
So why should tablets be dumped into the same category as mobile phones? Just because they share a slightly similar form-factor?
What if the next trend in smart phones is a clam-shell form-factor? Or a wearable hud? Or some implantable device?
Similar form factor does not mean their sales figures can, or should be compared.
Apple's to f'n oranges.
You're basically saying ... meh, they're both round and edible so they're the same.
As the capabilities of both devices grow we'll soon find that the only difference between the two is screen size.
Do we consider the 13" Macbook to be in a different market than the 15" Macbook Pro? No, they're both laptops.
And thus, everyone will soon wake up and realize that ALL iOS devices should be compared against ALL Android devices. These 'smartphone only' lists may still make sense in but in 2 or 3 years these kind of measurements will be seen as worthless.
Your argument is so inane it's barely worth a reply.
You do realize that not all tablets require a contract, right?
When it comes to laptops, the only thing that's different between a 13" and a 15" will be the screen size. But a tablet and a phone are INHERENTLY different.
My android tablet is wifi only and serves a totally separate function from my iPhone, my windows laptop, my linux server-cluster or my HTPC.
So why should tablets be dumped into the same category as mobile phones? Just because they share a slightly similar form-factor?
What if the next trend in smart phones is a clam-shell form-factor? Or a wearable hud? Or some implantable device?
Similar form factor does not mean their sales figures can, or should be compared.
Apple's to f'n oranges.
You're basically saying ... meh, they're both round and edible so they're the same.
mr.barkan
Aug 12, 10:31 AM
I think we will see the upgrade the Tuesday after they have enough supply to meet the demand. These laptops are selling great and they don't want to have to interrupt the supply. I think this is especially true at the stores.
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
Joshuarocks
Apr 21, 09:31 PM
doubtful, this is a key switcher market... it would be crazy to axe the very thing that will continue to switch the PC builders/gamers over the next 5 years... this is a key ingredient to apple taking the industry over with time.
I think the iMac will take care of gamers and builders.. the mac pro is NOT a gaming device, it is a high class workstation that is designed for use with using and manipulating multi-threaded pro and audio apps.. Personally, I could care less about a new case design.. right now I just care that I can prolong the 6-core machine I have now.. and for my purposes, which are far and few between, the 6 core does everything I throw at it for a DAILY, email based machine.. I use it for dvd encoding, NO VIDEO EDITING(this area does not interest me one iota). If anything, i would use it for photography and everyday stuff, such as internet surfing, researching, writing books, etc.
I only got this for its expandability, as I despise an all in one machine like the iMac - if the screen goes, the whole thing needs to be replaced or repaired.. all in one desktops such as the imac are a dead end as one can't upgrade the processor easily if not at all..
Everyone please excuse me for my attitudes, I am going through a real tough time right now and have 103 temperature at the moment.
I think the iMac will take care of gamers and builders.. the mac pro is NOT a gaming device, it is a high class workstation that is designed for use with using and manipulating multi-threaded pro and audio apps.. Personally, I could care less about a new case design.. right now I just care that I can prolong the 6-core machine I have now.. and for my purposes, which are far and few between, the 6 core does everything I throw at it for a DAILY, email based machine.. I use it for dvd encoding, NO VIDEO EDITING(this area does not interest me one iota). If anything, i would use it for photography and everyday stuff, such as internet surfing, researching, writing books, etc.
I only got this for its expandability, as I despise an all in one machine like the iMac - if the screen goes, the whole thing needs to be replaced or repaired.. all in one desktops such as the imac are a dead end as one can't upgrade the processor easily if not at all..
Everyone please excuse me for my attitudes, I am going through a real tough time right now and have 103 temperature at the moment.
Eye4Desyn
Mar 28, 10:29 AM
Think about it...
Appl introduced a new Verizon iPhone 4 in January of this year and it only launched last month (February).
Apple is also expected to release a white version of the iPhone 4 next month.
These two iPhone 4 upgrades seem to allow Apple to push back the launch of their next-generation handset. Afterall, how could they release updated iPhone 4s in February and April then a whole new device in June?
+1. My thoughts exactly. September = iPhone 4S/5 release.
Appl introduced a new Verizon iPhone 4 in January of this year and it only launched last month (February).
Apple is also expected to release a white version of the iPhone 4 next month.
These two iPhone 4 upgrades seem to allow Apple to push back the launch of their next-generation handset. Afterall, how could they release updated iPhone 4s in February and April then a whole new device in June?
+1. My thoughts exactly. September = iPhone 4S/5 release.
Tomtomnovice
Jan 25, 01:04 PM
I asked Tomtom support about leaving the iPhone car kit in the car at night in the winter (I live in Ohio). Here is the answer I got.
The operating and storage temperatures for the TomTom devices are as follows:
-4�F to +140�F / -20�C to +60�C
So it can withstand the extreme temperatures inside the car. The only recommendation we would like to make is to keep the LCD screen of the device away from the direct sunlight, as it might damage the LCD screen.
The operating and storage temperatures for the TomTom devices are as follows:
-4�F to +140�F / -20�C to +60�C
So it can withstand the extreme temperatures inside the car. The only recommendation we would like to make is to keep the LCD screen of the device away from the direct sunlight, as it might damage the LCD screen.
Ori
Apr 18, 04:32 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
The car industry isn't a good one to look at actually. A new top end S Class merc has hundreds of new patents with every modem revamp it does. Car companies constantly pay royalties to each other to use tech. Especially safety tech.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
The car industry isn't a good one to look at actually. A new top end S Class merc has hundreds of new patents with every modem revamp it does. Car companies constantly pay royalties to each other to use tech. Especially safety tech.
modul8tr
Mar 27, 04:28 PM
In this "Guess" Gruber is flat out wrong and just speculating. I think other journalist agree that there will most likely NOT be another iPad release in 2011.
A real journalist, of which there seems so few these days, would have to ask: "Who manufactures these displays." "Are they able to manufacture enough to meet current demand and future orders for this product?" "Can existing production lines be converted easily to manufacture new products without impacting existing lines?" "Are there any manufacturers ramping for an unannounced product, especially if Apple is its customer?" "Who would be the display manufacturers suppliers of parts that might also indicate a shift in production to a new product?" "How Might the global economy and events in Japan impact supply?" "How long does it take to build the product and in sufficient number meeting QC and then ship it an assembly plant?" "Where is the assembly plant for the product and is there unusual activity at the plant?" "Has anyone actually TALKED to someone who works at these facilities?"
There are people in the Apple Rumors blogosphere asking those questions. I think most of the larger players in that world, including Gruber, are up on the leaks/rumors coming out of Apple's manufacturing pipeline and factor that into their speculation. Outside of that, unless you're Tim Cook or Steve Jobs, no one knows with absolute certainty the answers to your questions.
As far as news that could point to mass Retina Display production, there's the $7.8 billion display/component deal with Samsung that had everyone buzzing earlier this year, and the $1.9 billion Retina Display factory they are building with Toshiba. The factory will build around 17 million displays a month and is expected to go online in the second half of 2011.
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Again, I have to wonder, what does this mean for the 2012 iPad? Assuming the Retina Display is the iPad 2 HD's main selling point, will next years iPad revision lack the Retina Display that all other iOS devices have? Or will they go with a "lower quality" (looks great to me) Retina like the iPod Touch?
Why would Apple release such an expensive iPad during the Q1 holiday season? Would they really expect an iPad at that price point to spur holiday sales?
If an "additional" iPad debuts in September, I think it will be something priced to set the holiday season on fire. Subsidised $199 3G iPads? Or a 7 inch iPad with Retina Display at a lower price point?
A real journalist, of which there seems so few these days, would have to ask: "Who manufactures these displays." "Are they able to manufacture enough to meet current demand and future orders for this product?" "Can existing production lines be converted easily to manufacture new products without impacting existing lines?" "Are there any manufacturers ramping for an unannounced product, especially if Apple is its customer?" "Who would be the display manufacturers suppliers of parts that might also indicate a shift in production to a new product?" "How Might the global economy and events in Japan impact supply?" "How long does it take to build the product and in sufficient number meeting QC and then ship it an assembly plant?" "Where is the assembly plant for the product and is there unusual activity at the plant?" "Has anyone actually TALKED to someone who works at these facilities?"
There are people in the Apple Rumors blogosphere asking those questions. I think most of the larger players in that world, including Gruber, are up on the leaks/rumors coming out of Apple's manufacturing pipeline and factor that into their speculation. Outside of that, unless you're Tim Cook or Steve Jobs, no one knows with absolute certainty the answers to your questions.
As far as news that could point to mass Retina Display production, there's the $7.8 billion display/component deal with Samsung that had everyone buzzing earlier this year, and the $1.9 billion Retina Display factory they are building with Toshiba. The factory will build around 17 million displays a month and is expected to go online in the second half of 2011.
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Again, I have to wonder, what does this mean for the 2012 iPad? Assuming the Retina Display is the iPad 2 HD's main selling point, will next years iPad revision lack the Retina Display that all other iOS devices have? Or will they go with a "lower quality" (looks great to me) Retina like the iPod Touch?
Why would Apple release such an expensive iPad during the Q1 holiday season? Would they really expect an iPad at that price point to spur holiday sales?
If an "additional" iPad debuts in September, I think it will be something priced to set the holiday season on fire. Subsidised $199 3G iPads? Or a 7 inch iPad with Retina Display at a lower price point?
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 09:46 PM
Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up. :)
Nothing wrong with a fun disagreement, though! Time to hit the hay, have a good night!
Nothing wrong with a fun disagreement, though! Time to hit the hay, have a good night!
georgethomas
Apr 5, 09:17 PM
well it is a part of marketing ad gone wrong. Nevertheless, it was creative though! Toyota should be applaud for creativity and humbleness to remove the ad in order to maintain the relationship.
ovrlrd
Mar 30, 07:17 PM
Anyone downloading and installing on an MBA?
Wondering about trim support.
TRIM support was in the previous build as well so there is no reason for it not to be there still unless there was a major bug (doubt it).
Wondering about trim support.
TRIM support was in the previous build as well so there is no reason for it not to be there still unless there was a major bug (doubt it).
Chupa Chupa
May 4, 02:56 PM
I would get a new iMac now if I knew that Lion would run SL pricing at $29. Otherwise I will wait for a preload. But obviously pricing and a release date won't be forthcoming prior to WWDC at the earliest. Guess we will know more in about 5 weeks.
On yesterday's MacBreak Weekly they were talking about this. The consensus was that the d/l version will be ultra cheap similar to SL b/c Apple wants people to migrate quickly. And then there will be a retail box that will sell for more for those who either can't or don't want to d/l. There is a patter of this in iLife, iWork, Aperture, etc., where the d/l version is much less expensive than the retail box.
On yesterday's MacBreak Weekly they were talking about this. The consensus was that the d/l version will be ultra cheap similar to SL b/c Apple wants people to migrate quickly. And then there will be a retail box that will sell for more for those who either can't or don't want to d/l. There is a patter of this in iLife, iWork, Aperture, etc., where the d/l version is much less expensive than the retail box.
damson34
May 8, 12:07 AM
I guess I am the only one that remembers that it started out as a free service. Before it was .Mac it was called iTools and it was free. It was a benefit of being a part of the Mac community. It certainly was much more basic back then, but I have been using it since. The remote wipe for iPhone and other added features keep it worth the family pac price for this household even if it doesn't go back to being a free service.
I remember good old iTools, in fact, you didnt even have to have a mac to use the email if I remember right. There was a huge uproar when a Jaguar update started branding it .mac and would began charging. The good old days! It's kinda a sucker punch to all of us who paid when it was .mac. The only benefits of .mac were iDisk, ecards and backup really. $99 for that compared to mobileMe, makes mobileMe a bargain, lol.
I remember good old iTools, in fact, you didnt even have to have a mac to use the email if I remember right. There was a huge uproar when a Jaguar update started branding it .mac and would began charging. The good old days! It's kinda a sucker punch to all of us who paid when it was .mac. The only benefits of .mac were iDisk, ecards and backup really. $99 for that compared to mobileMe, makes mobileMe a bargain, lol.
Torrijos
May 6, 02:56 AM
BS to the power of FUD ^^
The thing is although ARM chips are pretty good in the low power range right now, nothing says that they will perfectly scale in power for a higher performance range.
Every major player in the chips industry started seeing more and more problems when they started reaching the manufacturing processes ARM will only reach in a couple of years (currently A15 -> 45nm).
High performance is where Intel is very good at, and their announcement of 3D transistor in Ivy Bridge already will only make them way better in performance and power consumption, and all that as soon as the end of this year (first machines probably next year).
Now transition from a software standpoint would be painful, but maybe not horrible...
Apple's compiler already manages ARM architecture, and part of the interest in LLVM is the possibility of JIT compilation.
But a switch of architecture right now would need Apple to ask devs to re-compile their software, and maybe a change from some libraries, all that for an uncertain gain right now and improbable gain in the future (Intel will remain the master in high performance computing).
The thing is although ARM chips are pretty good in the low power range right now, nothing says that they will perfectly scale in power for a higher performance range.
Every major player in the chips industry started seeing more and more problems when they started reaching the manufacturing processes ARM will only reach in a couple of years (currently A15 -> 45nm).
High performance is where Intel is very good at, and their announcement of 3D transistor in Ivy Bridge already will only make them way better in performance and power consumption, and all that as soon as the end of this year (first machines probably next year).
Now transition from a software standpoint would be painful, but maybe not horrible...
Apple's compiler already manages ARM architecture, and part of the interest in LLVM is the possibility of JIT compilation.
But a switch of architecture right now would need Apple to ask devs to re-compile their software, and maybe a change from some libraries, all that for an uncertain gain right now and improbable gain in the future (Intel will remain the master in high performance computing).
hyperpasta
Aug 2, 11:42 AM
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
No comments:
Post a Comment