inkswamp
Sep 11, 04:43 AM
Round wheels on those wheelbarrows? You were lucky!
We only 'ad square wheels on our wheelbarrows an' they were made out of lead...
Ooooh... how we used to dream of wheels made out of lead. Ours were made of depleted uranium. :eek:
We only 'ad square wheels on our wheelbarrows an' they were made out of lead...
Ooooh... how we used to dream of wheels made out of lead. Ours were made of depleted uranium. :eek:
adztaylor
Apr 25, 11:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Absolutely 100% in agreement.
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Absolutely 100% in agreement.
Tsurisuto
Apr 21, 02:32 PM
Yes, but where is my Sandy Bridge Mac mini?!
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 09:35 AM
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
GoodWatch
Apr 5, 02:06 PM
Apple is a business whose mission is to sell phones, computers, and software. You as a customer buy those products, but they are designed by Apple. If you have a problem with Apple establishing a standard across its products to ensure quality, then you can just stop using them. That easy, just stop buying Apple products and stop using them, period.
Apple sells me their products at a phenomenal margin but after that I'm the owner. If I want to throw my iPhone into a lake, it's up to me. (Bar the environmental issues). If I want to jailbreak, it's up to me. If I want to apply a theme made by a car manufacturer it's up to me. So please stop using those dogmas. Every time something like this is reported, fanboys start using those wafer thin arguments. We aren't brainwashed drones, are we?
Apple sells me their products at a phenomenal margin but after that I'm the owner. If I want to throw my iPhone into a lake, it's up to me. (Bar the environmental issues). If I want to jailbreak, it's up to me. If I want to apply a theme made by a car manufacturer it's up to me. So please stop using those dogmas. Every time something like this is reported, fanboys start using those wafer thin arguments. We aren't brainwashed drones, are we?
*LTD*
Apr 23, 05:07 PM
Apple's problem is that they put "Looks" before performance.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
And today they are the Gold Standard for consumer tech.
OS X runs very well on Apple hardware. OS X apps run very well on Apple hardware. Not sure what the problem with performance is.
Those "laptops on a stand" are selling in record numbers while the rest of the computer industry is in a sharp downturn.
They've got the future of gaming all locked up nice and tight on iOS, not on PCs as we know them but on mobile devices which keep getting more powerful and which as we know, are the future of computing.
Your anecdotal opinion is cool and all, but perspective please!
Apple has been completely and unequivocally unaffected by conceding the gaming market to someone else. Instead, they've revisited it and have created a new standard. if that's what "losing" means then I'm damned impressed.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
And today they are the Gold Standard for consumer tech.
OS X runs very well on Apple hardware. OS X apps run very well on Apple hardware. Not sure what the problem with performance is.
Those "laptops on a stand" are selling in record numbers while the rest of the computer industry is in a sharp downturn.
They've got the future of gaming all locked up nice and tight on iOS, not on PCs as we know them but on mobile devices which keep getting more powerful and which as we know, are the future of computing.
Your anecdotal opinion is cool and all, but perspective please!
Apple has been completely and unequivocally unaffected by conceding the gaming market to someone else. Instead, they've revisited it and have created a new standard. if that's what "losing" means then I'm damned impressed.
ravenvii
May 3, 10:37 AM
I barely meet the minimum qualifications, so in deference go other more skilled players, make me the eighth person if sign-ups (and interest) appear to stall.
Game sounds intriguing, very D&D-like.
Nah, you played 3 games, so you're eligible. No question. You're in.
Don't panic's Questions:
- secret powers: other than not knowing who is what, do we know what the secret powers are and how they work?
No, only the person who has the power know.
- monsters/trap: do we know how many there are at the beginning? what is the range of their powers? why does the villain has two turns, isn't it the same as if he just gets 4 points in that double-turn? or does he get to move his minion. attack, heal, place new monsters/traps move monsters twice every round?
Treasure: no. Villain: He has two turns/two points. What I was basically saying is that the villain most likely will think of his turns as points. Nothing more. Two turns = two points.
For example: let's say a dragon costs 10 turns (or points). To be able to place the dragon on the map, the villain must forgo 10 turns. The fastest way to get the dragon is to skip both his turns for 5 rounds.
- moving: move to door means open the door and get into the next passage/room? can monsters move and open doors once they are placed?
Yes, No
- are attacks automatic? when do they occur in the turn?
Automatic - the heroes go into a room where the villain places the monster, the battle begins immediately.
- can the villain/monster fall into the traps?
Villain (a stupid one): yes, Monsters: No (since they don't move)
- how/how fast does the villain move?
Same way as the heroes. One turn per door.
- the villain stats are 16/16 plus 2/2 for each hero alive or 16/16 minus 2/2 for each hero dead?
The villain begins the game at level 16, with 16 HP and 16 AP. His stats does not change during the game.
- does the villain knows where the treasures are?
Yes, he has access to the same map the GMs does.
Game sounds intriguing, very D&D-like.
Nah, you played 3 games, so you're eligible. No question. You're in.
Don't panic's Questions:
- secret powers: other than not knowing who is what, do we know what the secret powers are and how they work?
No, only the person who has the power know.
- monsters/trap: do we know how many there are at the beginning? what is the range of their powers? why does the villain has two turns, isn't it the same as if he just gets 4 points in that double-turn? or does he get to move his minion. attack, heal, place new monsters/traps move monsters twice every round?
Treasure: no. Villain: He has two turns/two points. What I was basically saying is that the villain most likely will think of his turns as points. Nothing more. Two turns = two points.
For example: let's say a dragon costs 10 turns (or points). To be able to place the dragon on the map, the villain must forgo 10 turns. The fastest way to get the dragon is to skip both his turns for 5 rounds.
- moving: move to door means open the door and get into the next passage/room? can monsters move and open doors once they are placed?
Yes, No
- are attacks automatic? when do they occur in the turn?
Automatic - the heroes go into a room where the villain places the monster, the battle begins immediately.
- can the villain/monster fall into the traps?
Villain (a stupid one): yes, Monsters: No (since they don't move)
- how/how fast does the villain move?
Same way as the heroes. One turn per door.
- the villain stats are 16/16 plus 2/2 for each hero alive or 16/16 minus 2/2 for each hero dead?
The villain begins the game at level 16, with 16 HP and 16 AP. His stats does not change during the game.
- does the villain knows where the treasures are?
Yes, he has access to the same map the GMs does.
Multimedia
Sep 15, 10:24 PM
I can't see Blu-Ray at all.
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.Internal Sony 5.25" ATAPI EIDE Blu-ray Drives Cost $750 At Fry's. So an internal mobile Blue-ray probably cost over $1,000. Plus I agree with all of the above. It's too soon. Blu-ray blank media is incredibly expensive - Prohibitively so - almost $1/GB - IE about $50 per 50GB and $25 per 25GB Blu-ray blank.
Conventional Single Sided DVD blanks are down to about 5�/GB. I'd say that's a fairly large MEDIA COST GAP that only time will reduce. Until then, we've got quite a wait until the professionals drive up demand to the point where prosumers can rationalize a higher price of <20�/GB or so - IE where the $1.50 price of 8.5GB Dual Layer DVDs is now - about $10 per 50GB and $5 per 25GB Blu-ray blank. Make sense? Or do any of you see it another way?
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.Internal Sony 5.25" ATAPI EIDE Blu-ray Drives Cost $750 At Fry's. So an internal mobile Blue-ray probably cost over $1,000. Plus I agree with all of the above. It's too soon. Blu-ray blank media is incredibly expensive - Prohibitively so - almost $1/GB - IE about $50 per 50GB and $25 per 25GB Blu-ray blank.
Conventional Single Sided DVD blanks are down to about 5�/GB. I'd say that's a fairly large MEDIA COST GAP that only time will reduce. Until then, we've got quite a wait until the professionals drive up demand to the point where prosumers can rationalize a higher price of <20�/GB or so - IE where the $1.50 price of 8.5GB Dual Layer DVDs is now - about $10 per 50GB and $5 per 25GB Blu-ray blank. Make sense? Or do any of you see it another way?
spicyapple
Aug 7, 09:00 PM
The GeForce 7300GT is more than adequate to power a Final Cut edit session, edit multi-track audio, surf the web or email, while working on a 30" LCD and a 23" LCD.
Not everyone is going to use a powerful card for gaming, and I wouldn't want to pay more than I need for my uses.
Not everyone is going to use a powerful card for gaming, and I wouldn't want to pay more than I need for my uses.
jrtc27
Apr 18, 03:15 PM
You know what I think the Galaxy Line's UI does look a lot like iOS, but at the same time people follow good design standards.
Being a Web Designer, this type of things happens on websites all the time, you will find most websites that have very similar placement of things & even similar design, for example in the vast majority of websites you will find the navigation on top & sides, simply because we read top to bottom & left to right, have a look at - ign.com, gamespot.com or even apple.com & cnet.com..
You will see how they have many similarities, now this doesn't necessarily mean that they copied each other.. They are just following good design principles..
So to conclude Samsung is following good UI design.. Apple did an amazing job with it's UI on iOS.. So not surprised others are following it..
Anyway I don't think its a reason to sue, honestly Apple is doing really well in the tablet market, I don't know what they are worried about :P.. What Apple should focus on is enhancing its UI leaving others behind..
Forget suing :P
The difference here though is that nobody patented a website design where you have a navigation bar at the top and the sides etc, but Apple has patented its UI for iOS.
Being a Web Designer, this type of things happens on websites all the time, you will find most websites that have very similar placement of things & even similar design, for example in the vast majority of websites you will find the navigation on top & sides, simply because we read top to bottom & left to right, have a look at - ign.com, gamespot.com or even apple.com & cnet.com..
You will see how they have many similarities, now this doesn't necessarily mean that they copied each other.. They are just following good design principles..
So to conclude Samsung is following good UI design.. Apple did an amazing job with it's UI on iOS.. So not surprised others are following it..
Anyway I don't think its a reason to sue, honestly Apple is doing really well in the tablet market, I don't know what they are worried about :P.. What Apple should focus on is enhancing its UI leaving others behind..
Forget suing :P
The difference here though is that nobody patented a website design where you have a navigation bar at the top and the sides etc, but Apple has patented its UI for iOS.
flir67
Nov 26, 12:04 PM
I think you hit it right on the head, you got the same idea that I was thinking.
flash ram is cheaper now, but the hd size is not where it needs to be.
the processor must be at least 1.2ghz to make it a winner.
harddrive and ram would probably run off the same memory.
got to remember both would be flash. :)
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
flash ram is cheaper now, but the hd size is not where it needs to be.
the processor must be at least 1.2ghz to make it a winner.
harddrive and ram would probably run off the same memory.
got to remember both would be flash. :)
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
gavers
Mar 30, 09:48 PM
The main hallmark of a 64-bit filesystem is that you can have files that are larger than (4GiB-1) - or (2GiB-1) if the filesystem treats offsets as signed integers.
Another area where 64-bit filesystems show up is in the total volume size - if the filesystem uses 32-bits for sector addressing you'll have a maximum volume size of (2TiB-512).
If your filesystem has issues with files bigger than 4 GiB (or 2GiB), and has issues with volumes bigger than 2 TiB - you have some 32-bit issues in your filesystem.
This doesn't sound right. I have a single 60GB file on an HFS+ volume. I also have HFS+ volumes larger than 2TB. Wikipedia says HFS+ supports files and volumes up to 8 exabytes in size. NTFS is also 32-bit and supports files of 16TB and volumes of 256TB.
Another area where 64-bit filesystems show up is in the total volume size - if the filesystem uses 32-bits for sector addressing you'll have a maximum volume size of (2TiB-512).
If your filesystem has issues with files bigger than 4 GiB (or 2GiB), and has issues with volumes bigger than 2 TiB - you have some 32-bit issues in your filesystem.
This doesn't sound right. I have a single 60GB file on an HFS+ volume. I also have HFS+ volumes larger than 2TB. Wikipedia says HFS+ supports files and volumes up to 8 exabytes in size. NTFS is also 32-bit and supports files of 16TB and volumes of 256TB.
Object-X
Aug 4, 12:13 AM
I wondered, when Apple announced it was switching to Intel, if it would affect the upgrade cycle. Intel releases new chips often and companies like Dell ship them almost immediately. Apple has historically waited a long time before updating a product; but are they now going to be forced to keep pace to remain competitive? I think they will have to now. I expect speed bumps to their products to happen more frequently. It wouldn't surprise me to see the MBP get the new Core 2 Duo chips next week. (even though I just bought one last week :( )
b_scott
Apr 26, 02:55 PM
it's not surprising. There is one iPhone, and there is eleventy billion Android phone versions.
Popeye206
May 4, 05:26 PM
I'm guessing greedy Apple will probably keep 30% of the sales too! :rolleyes:
farmboy
Apr 18, 05:17 PM
So, are we talking about these patents?
What kind of BS is that? Perhaps it might qualify for a school project but a patent?
That is part of the disclosure, not part of the claims. The claims are what one enforces against infringers.
What kind of BS is that? Perhaps it might qualify for a school project but a patent?
That is part of the disclosure, not part of the claims. The claims are what one enforces against infringers.
Daveoc64
May 4, 02:44 PM
While I think Apple should make Mac OS X available as a download, I'd rather that it was done as a .iso that customers could burn to a DVD.
I don't like the idea of having to install Snow Leopard first before installing Lion in the event of needing to restore.
Putting it on the Mac App Store raises an interesting issue about licencing - they said that purchases could be used on any Mac that you use.
That opens them up to a lot of abuse.
I don't like the idea of having to install Snow Leopard first before installing Lion in the event of needing to restore.
Putting it on the Mac App Store raises an interesting issue about licencing - they said that purchases could be used on any Mac that you use.
That opens them up to a lot of abuse.
gramirez2012
Mar 28, 10:34 AM
Not cool. Coming from an iPhone 3GS, I seriously don't want to wait.
I'm still on the 3G! I really can't wait for the new iPhone! My contract is up in July.
I'm still on the 3G! I really can't wait for the new iPhone! My contract is up in July.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 2, 11:23 AM
I can't see the Cinema Displays having built in iSight. I mean sure, it's useful - but what about people who work in environments where you can't have cameras (i.e. some pros) what about people who have dual monitors etc...I can't see it being feasible.
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
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
MacRumors
Aug 11, 08:56 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reghardware claims (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/11/apple_macbook_to_get_merom/) cites a Chinese language report that Apple is readying both of its laptop models for Core 2 Duo "Merom" CPU's, due next month. There had been some Page 2 rumors that Apple would update the MacBook pro to include Merom at WWDC which failed to materialize, but this is the first report that has indicated that Apple would also move its more consumer-oriented laptop model to Core 2 Duo that quickly. AppleInsider has previously suggested (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) that the MacBook would remain a Core Duo "Yonah" CPU for the time being.
While no hard insider information exists pointing to the specs of the new machines, currently Merom tops out at 2.33 GHz, so it is not unreasonable to believe that Apple will use the 2.33 GHz chip in its MacBook Pro, and slightly slower speeds in its MacBooks. Also of note, Merom being a Core 2 Duo chip has architectural advances over Core Duo ("Yonah") such as 64-bit support and a 4 MB L2 Cache in higher end models.
Reghardware claims (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/08/11/apple_macbook_to_get_merom/) cites a Chinese language report that Apple is readying both of its laptop models for Core 2 Duo "Merom" CPU's, due next month. There had been some Page 2 rumors that Apple would update the MacBook pro to include Merom at WWDC which failed to materialize, but this is the first report that has indicated that Apple would also move its more consumer-oriented laptop model to Core 2 Duo that quickly. AppleInsider has previously suggested (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060711225142.shtml) that the MacBook would remain a Core Duo "Yonah" CPU for the time being.
While no hard insider information exists pointing to the specs of the new machines, currently Merom tops out at 2.33 GHz, so it is not unreasonable to believe that Apple will use the 2.33 GHz chip in its MacBook Pro, and slightly slower speeds in its MacBooks. Also of note, Merom being a Core 2 Duo chip has architectural advances over Core Duo ("Yonah") such as 64-bit support and a 4 MB L2 Cache in higher end models.
TedSlawski
Aug 7, 02:25 PM
Well a really fast computer at a reasonable price that you don't have to wait months for? I'm pinching myself before I make the call and order one. The idea that this could be what the original dual 2gig G5 that I (and a lot of other people) waited months for and really was kind of a ho-hum experience updating from a dual 800 quicksilver. Just playing around with a dual core iMac and being impressed says "this has got to be the one". The promise that they made for the G5 and didn't come across with. I would really like to play around with one of thses and say WOW!, not try to remember if it opened Photoshop faster than my quicksilver or not. 4 X 2.66Ghz Woodcrest�oughta do it!
nagromme
Apr 23, 04:24 PM
This sounds like planning FAR ahead, but I like it!
My eyes! My EYES!!!
Retina display means the opposite of what you may fear: it doesn’t mean tiny menus and unreadable text, the way traditional computer displays look when tons of extra pixels are crammed in.
Instead, it means MORE readability: added sharpness of the same, nicely-readable, text sizes. Like an iPhone 3GS vs an iPhone 4.
My eyes! My EYES!!!
Retina display means the opposite of what you may fear: it doesn’t mean tiny menus and unreadable text, the way traditional computer displays look when tons of extra pixels are crammed in.
Instead, it means MORE readability: added sharpness of the same, nicely-readable, text sizes. Like an iPhone 3GS vs an iPhone 4.
AndyK
May 8, 03:09 AM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
This.
This.
No comments:
Post a Comment