ChickenSwartz
Aug 11, 09:20 AM
It would be cool for them to keep the yonah in the low-end MacBook. That way with the price drop they could get back to a $999 entry-level notebook.
Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.
Great News! Still hoping for a case redesign in the MBP for mine. :)
small front yard landscaping
front yard landscaping ideas
Front yard veggie garden
front yard landscaping ideas
-4-home-small-front-yard-
small front yard landscaping
small front yard landscaping
front yard landscaping ideas
Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.
Great News! Still hoping for a case redesign in the MBP for mine. :)
Am3822
Sep 11, 05:59 AM
It would be one of them movie/media thingies, so my pessimistic newb bones inform me.
isomorphic
May 6, 12:31 AM
Wild speculation: It's possible that, for the short term, Apple might have both Intel and ARM processors in some of its machines. Think GPU or co-processor. This would allow a "Mac" to run iOS apps at full speed without processor emulation (albeit some chipset/environmental emulation).
I use Mac in quotes because such a hybrid monstrosity may in fact be iOS first, Mac second. Somewhere between an iPad and a MacBook Air.
It seems obvious that Apple wants this sort of blending, so why not do it in hardware?
I use Mac in quotes because such a hybrid monstrosity may in fact be iOS first, Mac second. Somewhere between an iPad and a MacBook Air.
It seems obvious that Apple wants this sort of blending, so why not do it in hardware?
LobsterDK
Apr 24, 02:04 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Desktop rendering performance at a retina display resolution would not be an issue with any modern Mac that shipped with a retina display. As for games, you do not have to render the game at the native screen resolution. The OS X implementation will almost certainly be the same as the iOS implementation. That is, a doubling of the vertical and horizontal resolution.
A game running on a 3840x2160 retina display can render at 1920x1080. No filtering need be applied by the monitor as it is an exact multiple in each direction. A 1920x1080 output resolution from a game would look exactly the same on a 3840x2160 display as it would on a 1920x1080 display. Every 1 pixel in the rendered image would take up 4 pixels on the higher res display. You can test this out on your Mac now with any game that allows you to select a resolution that is half the vertical/horizontal resolution of your current monitor. That is assuming the display is not stupid enough to filter resolutions that are an even division of it's native resolution. Most won't apply any filtering in those cases.
SuperBrown
May 3, 01:23 AM
SI is superior in conversions only
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Yes, let's not change it because YOU actually have a feel for the numbers.
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Yes, let's not change it because YOU actually have a feel for the numbers.
Piggie
Apr 23, 04:52 PM
What is the point in this?
For a phone and an iPad which has fixed resolution graphics, yes fine, but on a computer desktop which just scales to whatever resolution you have?
I don't get it?
Sure, yes, increase the resolution, but why not increase it to an industry standard instead?
We have 1920x1080 for many widescreen monitors these days.
We also have 1920x1200 for a bit more height.
In the future we will be moving to 4K resolutions for video & computer graphics.
4K http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution
Then one day we can dream about 8K ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8K_Video_Format
For a phone and an iPad which has fixed resolution graphics, yes fine, but on a computer desktop which just scales to whatever resolution you have?
I don't get it?
Sure, yes, increase the resolution, but why not increase it to an industry standard instead?
We have 1920x1080 for many widescreen monitors these days.
We also have 1920x1200 for a bit more height.
In the future we will be moving to 4K resolutions for video & computer graphics.
4K http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/4K_resolution
Then one day we can dream about 8K ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/8K_Video_Format
ender land
Apr 14, 11:08 AM
So we have websites that allow us to track where a dollar goes, how about letting us see where all the money the government spends is going
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?
ghostlines
Mar 27, 03:57 AM
I think this implies that they'll be spending more time on Lion. Which they should now focus on in my opinion. I know it's a large company but sometimes you need to dedicate some yourself to one thing at a time. Especially if they want Lion to live up to it's name.
Sijmen
Aug 2, 01:45 PM
I'm pretty sure it's time for the Mac Pro. Alongside, something should happen to the Cinema Display.
The current models are
front yard landscaping ideas
Frontyard Landscaping
front yard landscaping ideas
front yard landscaping ideas
The current models are
BRLawyer
Sep 16, 12:38 PM
That would be nice, but it seems unlikely. Apple seem to consider the black MacBook the small "professional" laptop. Maybe it'll get a descrete GPU though, that would be pretty good, no?
This could happen, too...a new MB with better GPU for the "quasi-pro" users...the rest is OK with the MB, I think...but with backlit keyboard would be even better.
This could happen, too...a new MB with better GPU for the "quasi-pro" users...the rest is OK with the MB, I think...but with backlit keyboard would be even better.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 08:28 AM
I think the iphone 5 will be a minor upgrade. If you are fine with the processor in iphone 4 and in the middle of a contact, then its probably better to wait for iphone 6.
coffey7
Jul 21, 09:32 PM
now if apple can build a laptop that won't give me a first degree burn we're in business :cool:
Tell me about it!
Tell me about it!
n00bst3r
Sep 11, 03:25 AM
n00bst3r predicts:
1. Movie Store
small front yard landscaping
small front yard landscaping
Small yard landscaping
small front yard landscaping
front yard landscaping ideas
front yard landscaping ideas
1. Movie Store
mcrain
Apr 15, 01:43 PM
I hate to pull this card, but my livelihood depends on trading and investing. I'm a small time player, so I can't afford to make mistakes. I have over 95% of my money "in the game" at any time. I can tell you that based on my experience, most of what you described simply isn't true. I don't know how else to say it. If I tried to respond point by point, it would take all day to explain all the concepts clearly.
Which "game"? Are you "trading and investing" in companies by purchasing shares in IPOs, or are you "trading and investing" on Wall St.? If it is the latter, then basically you are buying and selling ownership interests in companies, which has almost no affect on underlying companies.
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
Higher taxes does not spur innovation. If anything, it would spur more risk taking because hedge fund and the like would have to make up for that difference in revenue.
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Which "game"? Are you "trading and investing" in companies by purchasing shares in IPOs, or are you "trading and investing" on Wall St.? If it is the latter, then basically you are buying and selling ownership interests in companies, which has almost no affect on underlying companies.
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
Higher taxes does not spur innovation. If anything, it would spur more risk taking because hedge fund and the like would have to make up for that difference in revenue.
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Rayd5365
Mar 29, 02:27 PM
Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
Yep, In the case of this Amazon app/offering, that's exactly what iOS is.
The Amazon Android app lets you:
a. stream music from the cloud
b. using the mobile app, purchase music from the amazon mp3 store and
c. download that purchased music to your local android devices music library.
You simply cannot replicate that functionality with an ios app and get it approved by Apple.
There's one Apple approved way to get music onto your iPhone/Pod/Pad's local music library. Itunes.
Now I buy all my online music from Amazon and it get's into iTunes and onto my iPhone, iPad and various iPod's just fine. But only by using a computer and then syncing over the wire.
Wouldn't it be so much easier if I could just buy the damned music from Amazon ON my iPhone and have it sync BACK to iTunes and then onto my other devices, wirelessly.
Would Amazon jump at the chance to offer me that ability?
They most certainly would.
Would Apple aapprove that app?
Not a chance.
Yep, In the case of this Amazon app/offering, that's exactly what iOS is.
The Amazon Android app lets you:
a. stream music from the cloud
b. using the mobile app, purchase music from the amazon mp3 store and
c. download that purchased music to your local android devices music library.
You simply cannot replicate that functionality with an ios app and get it approved by Apple.
There's one Apple approved way to get music onto your iPhone/Pod/Pad's local music library. Itunes.
Now I buy all my online music from Amazon and it get's into iTunes and onto my iPhone, iPad and various iPod's just fine. But only by using a computer and then syncing over the wire.
Wouldn't it be so much easier if I could just buy the damned music from Amazon ON my iPhone and have it sync BACK to iTunes and then onto my other devices, wirelessly.
Would Amazon jump at the chance to offer me that ability?
They most certainly would.
Would Apple aapprove that app?
Not a chance.
Stevamundo
Nov 26, 05:30 PM
I can't believe all of the arrogant Mac users! �The mighty OSX never gets viruses therefore I'm not going to use that garbage.� Just keep that attitude up, it'll bite you in the ass eventually.
In the meantime, as the Mac user we have some responsibility not to spread Windows viruses to PCs when technology is there.
I use this and I like it. It doesn't slow down my Mac a bit.
In the meantime, as the Mac user we have some responsibility not to spread Windows viruses to PCs when technology is there.
I use this and I like it. It doesn't slow down my Mac a bit.
maclaptop
Apr 20, 08:10 AM
I wonder how many of these they'll sale? If it's not due out until September, but everything still points to a summer release of the iPhone 6, which is supposed to be a redesign, then why not wait six more months? I'm due for a new phone this June and if the iPhone is delayed til September I will certainly wait six more months and get the redesigned one. I'm not crazy about this form factor anyway.
You and I are thinking alike.
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
You and I are thinking alike.
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
roadbloc
Apr 8, 06:22 PM
Don't apply the phone dynamic to Tablets. Android is not likely to take a lead in tablet market share for a long time if forever.
I disagree. The OS on the most number of devices always ends up "winning" (for a lack of a better word.) It has happened time and time again. Windows beat MacOS after a few years due to it being on a wider range of hardware. The same happened with Android on phones. It will most defiantly happen again; if not with Android, defiantly with an OS which works on the same business model and is not tied to specific hardware.
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
I disagree. The OS on the most number of devices always ends up "winning" (for a lack of a better word.) It has happened time and time again. Windows beat MacOS after a few years due to it being on a wider range of hardware. The same happened with Android on phones. It will most defiantly happen again; if not with Android, defiantly with an OS which works on the same business model and is not tied to specific hardware.
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
itcheroni
Apr 19, 10:36 AM
But, it can be income right? So, why does this *possible* income get such a different relationship? As citizenzen said, I'm willing to be convinced, I'm just not sure I buy that because capital gains can rise or fall based on vagaries such as inflation, that it remains fundamentally different than other forms of income.
What does "willing to be convinced" mean? Will you read Human Action by Mises? It's a thousand pages of thoroughly explained economics. You don't have to read the whole thing, just the sections pertaining to monetary policy and taxes.
If you are waiting for a super intelligent, eloquent, and succinct guy to spend a lot of time convincing people on message boards in order to be convinced of anything you don't already believe, you'll never change your mind about anything. From my end, I don't have the wherewithal or inclination to spend more than a few minutes on a post. So you're really only doing yourself a disservice by passively waiting for someone with all the answers- someone who is also willing to spend as much time as necessary to convince a complete stranger who completely disagrees with him.
What does "willing to be convinced" mean? Will you read Human Action by Mises? It's a thousand pages of thoroughly explained economics. You don't have to read the whole thing, just the sections pertaining to monetary policy and taxes.
If you are waiting for a super intelligent, eloquent, and succinct guy to spend a lot of time convincing people on message boards in order to be convinced of anything you don't already believe, you'll never change your mind about anything. From my end, I don't have the wherewithal or inclination to spend more than a few minutes on a post. So you're really only doing yourself a disservice by passively waiting for someone with all the answers- someone who is also willing to spend as much time as necessary to convince a complete stranger who completely disagrees with him.
ECUpirate44
Apr 9, 06:21 PM
Official Google answer.
280546
280546
bloodycape
Apr 18, 04:31 PM
I hope what comes out of this is Samsung is forced to use standard android interface(which is alright), which would lead to faster software updates on a phone with pretty competitive hardware.
Isn't Samsung making the cpus to iphone and ipad? If this turns sour could this mean, maybe Apple will go with upcoming Tegra 3 cpu(which has rumors of a quad core version), or TI with their nice hardware?
Isn't Samsung making the cpus to iphone and ipad? If this turns sour could this mean, maybe Apple will go with upcoming Tegra 3 cpu(which has rumors of a quad core version), or TI with their nice hardware?
dontwalkhand
Apr 20, 01:32 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone : Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
Please! Make the damn phone bigger! Oh no, it may weigh a few more grams. Currently, the iphone4 is a tiny phone. For us adults, please increase the screen size, and probably, the width.
iPhone Pro ?
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
Please! Make the damn phone bigger! Oh no, it may weigh a few more grams. Currently, the iphone4 is a tiny phone. For us adults, please increase the screen size, and probably, the width.
iPhone Pro ?
eh270
Apr 26, 02:22 PM
For once, I'd like to see a pie chart that includes iPod Touch and iPad, which also run iOS. What's the Android device equivalent of the iPod touch?
Thataboy
Aug 7, 03:30 PM
There are many of you I want to beat with a spiky stick right now. Let's consolidate you into one bullet-point list of whiners:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment