VivaLaDricas
Apr 26, 02:53 PM
Don't see how this is news really. 2+2=4 webOS, Winmo7, etc.. whatever is on the sheer amount of devices Android is on will have larger numbers. Apple does things their way to make money on the hardware as well which = lower share.
Hopefully HP does something with webOS and MS makes strides in their mobile area so we have a lot of choice and not eventually 80%+ Android stuff.
Nothing against Android here, just saying most of this is obvious and a no sh** type of news.
Hopefully HP does something with webOS and MS makes strides in their mobile area so we have a lot of choice and not eventually 80%+ Android stuff.
Nothing against Android here, just saying most of this is obvious and a no sh** type of news.
jayducharme
Nov 2, 12:00 PM
Now Sophos can begin developing viruses against which their software can defend us.
Kensai
Apr 20, 08:40 AM
Three initials: NFC
Come on, Apple, reinvent the market yet again! :cool:
Come on, Apple, reinvent the market yet again! :cool:
0010101
Nov 24, 09:20 PM
For those of you who may have forgotten, or are too young to remember, Apple has had more than it's share of Cleveland Steamers.. and an iPhone would just be another turd in the punchbowl.
iPod was a hit because nobody at the time of iPods introduction made anything like it. Sure, there were other players out there, but nothing came even remotely close to the features, size, and ease of use.
The cellular phone market is a whole different playing field, with dozens of established manufacturers with a significant head start (decades) and an established user base.
Apple has about as good a chance of entering the cell phone market as LG does entering the MP3 player market.
While there are folks out there who would buy any piece of plastic that Steve Jobs wiped his rear with and stuck an 'i' in front of the name, in order for it to appeal to the masses, it's going to have to be cool looking, feature rich, and perhaps most importantly, widely available, and inexpensive.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well.. and 'playing with others' isn't one of their strengths, either. Both are requirements to enter an already highly competitive cell phone marketplace.
Apple needs to get back to what they do best, which is innovate in untapped or barely tapped markets where they really stand out and shine against the competition.. Apple II, Original Macintosh, iPod, etc. Not jump into an already saturated market with little to distinguish themselves between the competition but a pretty case.
iPod was a hit because nobody at the time of iPods introduction made anything like it. Sure, there were other players out there, but nothing came even remotely close to the features, size, and ease of use.
The cellular phone market is a whole different playing field, with dozens of established manufacturers with a significant head start (decades) and an established user base.
Apple has about as good a chance of entering the cell phone market as LG does entering the MP3 player market.
While there are folks out there who would buy any piece of plastic that Steve Jobs wiped his rear with and stuck an 'i' in front of the name, in order for it to appeal to the masses, it's going to have to be cool looking, feature rich, and perhaps most importantly, widely available, and inexpensive.
Apple doesn't do inexpensive very well.. and 'playing with others' isn't one of their strengths, either. Both are requirements to enter an already highly competitive cell phone marketplace.
Apple needs to get back to what they do best, which is innovate in untapped or barely tapped markets where they really stand out and shine against the competition.. Apple II, Original Macintosh, iPod, etc. Not jump into an already saturated market with little to distinguish themselves between the competition but a pretty case.
shawnce
Jul 21, 07:17 PM
plus with Core 2 chips being more expensive than Yonah...
T2600 (Yonah @ 2.16GHz) currently goes for $423 (trays of 1000)
T2500 (Yonah @ 2.00GHz) currently goes for $294 (trays of 1000)
T2400 (Yonah @ 1.83GHz) currently goes for $241 (trays of 1000)
T7600 (Merom @ 2.33GHz) is reported to go for $637 (trays of 1000)
T7400 (Merom @ 2.16GHz) is reported to go for $423 (trays of 1000)
T7200 (Merom @ 2.00GHz) is reported to go for $294 (trays of 1000)
...in other words it looks like the Yonah is either being replaced whole sale or is going to see further price drops when the Merom comes out. Of course I am still not 100% convinced the reported pricing for Merom is correct.
T2600 (Yonah @ 2.16GHz) currently goes for $423 (trays of 1000)
T2500 (Yonah @ 2.00GHz) currently goes for $294 (trays of 1000)
T2400 (Yonah @ 1.83GHz) currently goes for $241 (trays of 1000)
T7600 (Merom @ 2.33GHz) is reported to go for $637 (trays of 1000)
T7400 (Merom @ 2.16GHz) is reported to go for $423 (trays of 1000)
T7200 (Merom @ 2.00GHz) is reported to go for $294 (trays of 1000)
...in other words it looks like the Yonah is either being replaced whole sale or is going to see further price drops when the Merom comes out. Of course I am still not 100% convinced the reported pricing for Merom is correct.
SA22C
Nov 5, 06:54 AM
Every platform has issues and my guess is that Apple's less-than-stellar response time to exploits and the ever-rising Mac marketshare means that our time with no viruses/malware is going to come to an end. I'm glad there's a free solution out there and I'll be more than happy to try it out.
marvel2
Jan 20, 01:19 PM
Let me know how loud the volume is during a call conversation. If it is significantly louder than the TomTom, I may jump ship and get the Megellan unit.
My car has no sound dampening material :(
My car has no sound dampening material :(
repeters
May 4, 05:07 PM
It would be nice to know more details.
(1) How will users on other than FAST cable modems get Loin?
(2) How can we make emergency backups? I've been in a number of places were downloading gigabytes of data was not a viable option.
(3) Did this idea spring from the "mind" of the same genius who came up with the New and Improved Apple Discussion boards?
(1) How will users on other than FAST cable modems get Loin?
(2) How can we make emergency backups? I've been in a number of places were downloading gigabytes of data was not a viable option.
(3) Did this idea spring from the "mind" of the same genius who came up with the New and Improved Apple Discussion boards?
Starbuckfsd
Apr 25, 08:23 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171415-background.jpg)
A finding earlier this month (http://osxdaily.com/2011/04/02/new-mt-fuji-wallpaper-in-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) by OSXDaily has generated some speculation about Apple's plans for "Retina" display Macs. The Mac OS X Lion Developer Preview 2 released in late March (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/apple-releases-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) included an ultra-high resolution version of the background desktop image at a resolution of 3200x2000. A few observers noted (http://punchingin.com/chasing-the-6-4-megapixel-unicorn/) that this is higher than any Apple display has ever supported, generating speculation (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html) that Apple is preparing for "Retina" display Macs in the near future.
We had previously reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/mac-os-x-lion-building-in-support-for-super-high-resolution-retina-monitors/) that Mac OS X Lion has made some under-the-hood changes opening the door to such super-high resolution displays. Now, MacMagazine.com.br has found (http://macmagazine.com.br/2011/04/23/macs-com-telas-retina-nao-sao-duvida-quando-eles-chegarao-sim-ainda-e-uma-incognita/) that Apple is already starting to include other super high resolution artwork in Lion. They found several icons stored as 1024x1024 sizes, up from a previous maximum of 512x512.
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171147-23-lion_appstore.png)
Click for full-size
Of course, this support for super high resolution displays is only the first step, but suggests Apple is planning ahead when the hardware becomes available.
Article Link: Apple Including Ultra High Resolution Artwork in Lion for Possible Retina Displays? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Oh please. Give me a break! Do you nitwits HONESTLY think there will be retina display Macs in the near future? It's total BS. If they did, the cost of said Macs would be prohibitive to the general public. Why do you think there aren't retina display iPads? IT'S TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE! C'mon guys...you're beginning to sound like CNET
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171415-background.jpg)
A finding earlier this month (http://osxdaily.com/2011/04/02/new-mt-fuji-wallpaper-in-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) by OSXDaily has generated some speculation about Apple's plans for "Retina" display Macs. The Mac OS X Lion Developer Preview 2 released in late March (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/apple-releases-mac-os-x-lion-developer-preview-2/) included an ultra-high resolution version of the background desktop image at a resolution of 3200x2000. A few observers noted (http://punchingin.com/chasing-the-6-4-megapixel-unicorn/) that this is higher than any Apple display has ever supported, generating speculation (http://theelaborated.net/blog/2011/4/13/consider-the-retina-display.html) that Apple is preparing for "Retina" display Macs in the near future.
We had previously reported (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/mac-os-x-lion-building-in-support-for-super-high-resolution-retina-monitors/) that Mac OS X Lion has made some under-the-hood changes opening the door to such super-high resolution displays. Now, MacMagazine.com.br has found (http://macmagazine.com.br/2011/04/23/macs-com-telas-retina-nao-sao-duvida-quando-eles-chegarao-sim-ainda-e-uma-incognita/) that Apple is already starting to include other super high resolution artwork in Lion. They found several icons stored as 1024x1024 sizes, up from a previous maximum of 512x512.
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/23/171147-23-lion_appstore.png)
Click for full-size
Of course, this support for super high resolution displays is only the first step, but suggests Apple is planning ahead when the hardware becomes available.
Article Link: Apple Including Ultra High Resolution Artwork in Lion for Possible Retina Displays? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/23/apple-including-ultra-high-resolution-artwork-in-lion-for-possible-retina-displays/)
Oh please. Give me a break! Do you nitwits HONESTLY think there will be retina display Macs in the near future? It's total BS. If they did, the cost of said Macs would be prohibitive to the general public. Why do you think there aren't retina display iPads? IT'S TOO DAMN EXPENSIVE! C'mon guys...you're beginning to sound like CNET
wclyffe
Dec 26, 02:33 PM
Just confirmed it with BLT, there hasn't been a shipment come in.
Seems like they're offline until Monday....
Seems like they're offline until Monday....
cdallen
Mar 30, 11:23 AM
That seems quite rude. Wikipedia happens to have a wealth of base level knowledge. I understand that one should not cite it when doing in depth research but when looking for general knowledge it is a great source.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Thank you
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Thank you
Rocketman
Nov 26, 12:23 PM
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.
I think a successful device would need
0.7 GHz processor equivalent
16 GB flash
60 GB HD storage
4 hours of battery life playing an iTunes movie
12 hours as a remote
estimated cost to consumer:
included with iTV breakout box. $500
included with HDMI widescreenTV's $1500
separately as a "True video iPod" $300
Rocketman
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.
I think a successful device would need
0.7 GHz processor equivalent
16 GB flash
60 GB HD storage
4 hours of battery life playing an iTunes movie
12 hours as a remote
estimated cost to consumer:
included with iTV breakout box. $500
included with HDMI widescreenTV's $1500
separately as a "True video iPod" $300
Rocketman
fastlane1588
Aug 7, 02:01 PM
Now we enter the era of "Merom MacBook Pros next Tuesday!" rumors :p
Anything that wasn't mentioned today can still come at any time :)
USB CCD Barcode Scanner Bar
USB Laser Handheld Barcode
Barcode Scanner.RS232.USB.
USB Long Scan Laser Barcode
Scan Laser BARCODE SCANNER
BARCODE SCANNER MS7120 USB
Anything that wasn't mentioned today can still come at any time :)
42streetsdown
May 6, 02:50 AM
The headline is wrong.
The rumor is NOT that they would abandon Intel. The claim being made is that they would switch from x86 to ARM.
true intel could manufacture arm procs
The rumor is NOT that they would abandon Intel. The claim being made is that they would switch from x86 to ARM.
true intel could manufacture arm procs
toddybody
Apr 7, 11:33 AM
Every choice you make has consequences. If Apple were to put in a non integrated graphics card, they would have less battery life, their Macbooks would be bigger, weigh more and have greater trouble with disposal of heat.
This is not what Apple customers want.
If that were true then why does Apple bless the 15inch with a dedicated solution and not the 13? Battery life? Optimus switching (something they already tout), bigger? the 13" and 15" are the same thickness...the 17" is .02" thicker yet has the SAME spec options as the 15". Footprint is NOT the issue...its a simple price/feature model(want more? pay more). Personally, I think THAT is not what Apple customers want.
Now, I agree with you that they cant go slapping a GTX480m in there for the reasons you cited:)
PS: How did my earlier post imply that Apple should "give parts to companies"...etc ? Apple can do what they like, I just prefer that competition has a chance to push the envelope.
This is not what Apple customers want.
If that were true then why does Apple bless the 15inch with a dedicated solution and not the 13? Battery life? Optimus switching (something they already tout), bigger? the 13" and 15" are the same thickness...the 17" is .02" thicker yet has the SAME spec options as the 15". Footprint is NOT the issue...its a simple price/feature model(want more? pay more). Personally, I think THAT is not what Apple customers want.
Now, I agree with you that they cant go slapping a GTX480m in there for the reasons you cited:)
PS: How did my earlier post imply that Apple should "give parts to companies"...etc ? Apple can do what they like, I just prefer that competition has a chance to push the envelope.
rt_brained
Nov 22, 05:15 AM
From The Desk Of Steve Jobs:
Bonte
Aug 7, 05:39 PM
Are these specific Mac GPU's with Mac roms or can we finally use a selection of PC GPU's? If so then the base GPU isn't an issue, just use it for the second screen.
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
what will happen if I use bootcamp and put in a PC grafic card?
Interesting, if we get Windows to work with PC GPU cards then Apple has no other option than to support these cards also or at least try to. If these are normal PC cards then the MacPro wil be the coolest machine on earth in the hard core gaming community. :cool:
dom91932
May 8, 05:36 PM
This has never happened
I meant it might happen, it's just a thought.
I meant it might happen, it's just a thought.
-aggie-
May 4, 05:28 AM
DP is fine for a leader....for this first round. I'm not too sure about this splitting up though.
kugino
Sep 11, 12:58 AM
8GB metal nano. i'd pick one up immediately. otherwise i'll pick up a refurb 5G while waiting for the full-screen ipod next year...
~Shard~
Aug 11, 09:55 AM
I agree with many of the other posters here - if the MacBooks are going Core 2 Duo, then the iMac can't be far behind, especially since it's Apple's flagship consumer machine in many respects. I guess the only question will be whether the iMac receives a Merom chip as well, or Conroe. From a technical perspective, I do not believe there are any performance differences between the two architectures. Therefore, Apple could use either. Conroe is a desktop chip, so perhaps Apple will implement it in the iMac so that it can be similar to the corresponding Dell etc. machines which use it as well. On the other hand, Merom runs cooler, and with a confined, streamlined design such as the iMac's, it may make more sense to use Merom instead of Conroe. Merom will definitely be used in the Mac mini eventually IMO.
As for the MacBooks though (which I suppose is what this article is actually about!) this is great news. My wife is wanting a new MacBook and I told her to wait for these Core 2 Duo updates. Looks like she won't have as long to wait as I initially thought, which is great. :cool:
As for the MacBooks though (which I suppose is what this article is actually about!) this is great news. My wife is wanting a new MacBook and I told her to wait for these Core 2 Duo updates. Looks like she won't have as long to wait as I initially thought, which is great. :cool:
applefanDrew
Apr 25, 08:53 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.
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.
gnasher729
Apr 7, 11:55 AM
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
-aggie-
Apr 9, 06:31 PM
The answer is 288. CONFIRMED.
