Scottsdale
Apr 22, 12:43 PM
You don't think ? Seriously people, we had 1440x900 displays 10 years ago, on GPUs that had about 1% the graphics processing power of today and about a tenth of the RAM.
Heck, the 9400M could power external 30" monitors at their native resolution of 2560x1600 at the same time it powered in the laptop's internal display of 1280x800 without breaking a sweet.
What's so hard to grasp that the MBP's resolution staying at 1280x800 has nothing to do with the GPU in SB ? :confused:
Have you guys never used computers 10 years ago ? CRT monitors at 1600x1200 ring a bell to anyone but me here ?
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
Heck, the 9400M could power external 30" monitors at their native resolution of 2560x1600 at the same time it powered in the laptop's internal display of 1280x800 without breaking a sweet.
What's so hard to grasp that the MBP's resolution staying at 1280x800 has nothing to do with the GPU in SB ? :confused:
Have you guys never used computers 10 years ago ? CRT monitors at 1600x1200 ring a bell to anyone but me here ?
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
g4tom
Sep 26, 08:49 AM
The picture they are using as a mock up already is being sold, by LG. It is on the cover of October edition of "PC Magazine". Looks identical and has the slider hidden number pad.
aristotle
Nov 13, 11:56 PM
Come off it, cmaier has a darn good point. Apple is being utterly ridiculous in this debacle between themselves and Rogue Amoeba. There was no reason at all that such a debate should have evolved into a 3 month conflict, nor was it that it should have ended with Rogue Amoeba having to indulge their customers in a battle with Apple over icons. Having user interface unity is something Apple strives for in all of their products. By giving 3rd party developers the ninth degree over something so ingrained in this product is simply stupid. It does nothing to help the end user, ingrain the confidence of developers, or aid Apple. It just brings out end users and developers with grievances and sharpened pitchforks.
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
Dude. You have a double standard. If Apple were to infringe on the copyright of someone else, you would be here pitchfork in hand screaming for blood.
If you look on other sites like macnn, you will see that the airfoil app does not only display Apple icons but rather the icon of whatever browser is configured as the main browser. They cannot make the claim that they have to right to use the Firefox, Camino or Omniweb icon in their app. It is not "streaming" the icon data, it is copied over and displayed superimposed on another icon which is presumably an internal OS X bundle. The audio is streamed but those icons are copied over and superimposed on each other on the phone. That is a clear violation of the IP of other programs in a manner that is not consistent with use on the mac it was pulled from.
MikeMc
Nov 14, 10:05 AM
I'm just a regular iPhone user...not a developer. I just want my phone work. And I want the apps to be fully vetted and tested before they are available for download. RA's action doesn't make me dislike the iPhone, Mac computers, or Apple. In fact, quite the opposite. It makes RA look childish. I say...good riddance. Oh, and I'm also now less likely to purchase other software from RA. Just sayin'
dizastor
Aug 23, 06:53 PM
$100 million doesn't put a dent in Apple's reserves. It's best to just get this crap out of the way.
Seems like Creative should retire now, just make iPod accessories and license their interface.
Seems like Creative should retire now, just make iPod accessories and license their interface.
Patch^
Sep 10, 06:41 PM
For the last few days there has been a lot of adverts of iTunes and the Nano on TV, like the city one "This ain't the first time!". So Apple I think is already promoting them a bit more :) Perhaps we will see an updated Nano, iPod, Music/Movie store and stuff :)
(sorry if something has been mention, I can't be arsed to read all 10 pages :P )
(sorry if something has been mention, I can't be arsed to read all 10 pages :P )
toddybody
Mar 30, 11:50 AM
FAIL Apple. First of all, "app" is generic. Secondly, as iOS apps need to be bought and synced through iTunes...youre not going to lose sales to an Amazon/Microsoft/Google "app store". Grow up.
weg
Aug 28, 01:03 PM
not that it really matters. but they stole apples thunder.
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
I think that Apple shouldn't enter that race.. their products are distinguished by other features than mere processing power (as soon as this changes: goodbye Apple), and coming out with new models every few months will probably just piss off Apple customers (so far, it's pretty easy to know ALL current laptop models that Apple offers - can you say that for Dell, too?).
gugy
Aug 31, 11:41 AM
If there is a Special Event then we might see the new Ipod Video and maybe the Itunes Movie Store.
To go a little crazy, maybe the Media Center.
Updates for MacMini and Laptops at this time will be a simple Tuesday update on Apple's site. I see no reason to have an Special Event for that.
To go a little crazy, maybe the Media Center.
Updates for MacMini and Laptops at this time will be a simple Tuesday update on Apple's site. I see no reason to have an Special Event for that.
Cjm1
Apr 25, 06:08 PM
Yes. Time for a new change in the design. I am a small majority who really hate the current design due to high prices in repairs. Carbon fiber would be a good addition instead of the aluminium :apple:
kjs862
Apr 11, 01:51 AM
I had recently purchased Airfoil and the app works great. I also just recently purchased an Airport Express since I didn't want to use my iPhone as a receiver all the time.
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 01:50 AM
Thank god in New Zealand you can't get sued for car accidents that *******s like the OP cause :D
greenstork
Jul 17, 03:54 PM
I'd bet it all that the iMac gets an Allendale with maybe a Conroe top-end option.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
That makes sense, it offers some product differentiation, and saves Apple a few pennies allowing them to offer a lower priced consumer desktop. Mac Pros will likely get at least one Woodcrest dualie model on the top end and perhaps a Conroe on the bottom but it is entirely possible that it will be Woodcrest across the board, to achieve economies of scale both in purchase power and motherboard engineering.
Could someone answer me this, who actually understands the Core Microarchitecture. Is the Conroe extreme edition (2.93 GHz) a better high end gaming chip than a quad woodcrest setup, say at 2.66 GHz? I've heard more than a couple comments that the Conroe is better suited for gamers than a Woodcrest but this makes no sense to me. Again please, no fanboy speculators answering this, I'd really like to know the rationale using some expert technological analysis. What makes the conroe EE so expensive? At a higher cost than the 3.0 GHz Woodcrest, it must excel in some regard.
FX120
Apr 16, 12:50 PM
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
You have a fundamental misunderstanding of how those adapters work. Going from thunderbolt to USB 3 would require active electronics embedded in the adapter. The $6 MDP to HDMI adapter is just copper internally because the signaling is compatible from the source.
LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
Again, you have a fundamental flaw in your argument that you're not addressing. It doesn't matter if the bus is capable of delivering massive speed when the source is incapable of serving data fast enough. Any single-drive enclosure that is currently available will be incapable of maxing out a USB 3 connection.
Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
When they contain active electronics, they get expensive. Apple's own MDP to dual-link DVI adapter is a great example, at $99.00. USB 3 and Thunderbolt are not electrically compatible, and therefore it is impossible to have a simple copper-only dongle that has a TB port on one end, and USB on the other.
Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
Then why do you keep pointing to that article as proof that USB 3 is incapable of reaching it's theoretical maximum?
I never said it would go away. It said it will be used for the same things USB 2 is used for which is low bandwidth peripherals like mice which you don't need USB 3 for which is why it is essentially a useless upgrade.
USB 2 is the universal standard for high speed devices. If you think otherwise, you must have never used a USB thumb drive.
Yes, believe it or not we are talking about the future and the future for Thunderbolt looks a hell of a lot better than the future of USB 3 since it isn't locked at a certain bandwidth. Technology moves fast. The reason Intel decided to support USB 3 is simply because it is (as they said) complimentary to Thunderbolt. Once again you use Thunderbolt for things that need the speed and you use USB for low bandwidth peripherals.
Thunderbolt in a copper implementation is capped at 10Gbs. For higher speeds, the physical connections become impractical for "normal" devices, which is why Intel designed TB as a transport bus, say for a single cable between a tower and a monitor, which would then break the TB bus back into it's component protocols, including USB 3.
It has USB compatibility, hell it has compatibility with pretty much any IO on the planet. The connector is simply a means to an end and it scales much better for the future when said port is smaller.
Which as I said above, makes it practical for a transport bus. For replacing USB? Not so much. Backwards compatibility alone will likely dictate the continual presence of USB 3 ports on virtually every computer for years to come.
callme
Mar 29, 12:59 PM
Considering that, when the iPhone was first announced, Jobs stated he would be happy with a 1% share of the market, Apple isn't doing too badly. If MS gets their act together with the Windows phone, I can see it getting a larger share. I guess how big a share depends on how Apple and Google respond with their own innovations.
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
Alcibar
Apr 23, 09:08 AM
Back lit keyboards are great for long flights where they turn out the lights.
k2director
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
Humans are pre-programmed to take such an action hard. Some don't, usually as a result of contemplation and training before such an incident. It is, however, natural to react that way. Best for all to recognize different people may take such a grave matter very differently, and that's ok.
Personally, if humans were pre-programmed to take killing another human so hard, I think we'd see a lot less senseless murder in the world.
Personally, if humans were pre-programmed to take killing another human so hard, I think we'd see a lot less senseless murder in the world.
MacRumors
Sep 4, 06:49 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016) that Apple is ready to introduce the iTunes Movie Store at the upcoming September 12th Media Event.
They expect that Jobs will announce that movies from at least one major studio will be available at $9.99/download with additional studies following. Appleinsider, however, also claims that Apple has been working on their next killer device. Instead of a video iPod device to drive movie sales, they believe a video streaming device is in the works:
in Boost Mobile#39;s Galaxy
Appleinsider reports (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2016) that Apple is ready to introduce the iTunes Movie Store at the upcoming September 12th Media Event.
They expect that Jobs will announce that movies from at least one major studio will be available at $9.99/download with additional studies following. Appleinsider, however, also claims that Apple has been working on their next killer device. Instead of a video iPod device to drive movie sales, they believe a video streaming device is in the works:
milo
Aug 28, 03:06 PM
Can the current imacs support a 24" Dell widescreen in dual monitor mode?
Why don't you just look it up on the apple and dell sites?
It will, the imac will drive up to 1920 x 1200, which is what the dell 24 is.
Still, my point is that Apple isn't trying to remain competitive in regards to grabbing sales or going outside of their niche market. Apple has diehard fans that will purchase whatever they sell, no matter what. They don't need to attempt to go outside of that faction because they'll have a hard time swaying general computer users who are used to Windows already or don't want to pay the premium price.
I don't know that I'd agree with that either. The macbook and pro are pretty competitive, and the imac and mini offer some fairly reasonable machines. I'd agree that a midtower would be a great addition to their line and appeal to more untapped potential buyers, but apple is appealing to PC switchers already, as evidenced by their increasing market share and the number of consumers buying a mac for the first time. They *are* trying to remain competitive, and are succeeding in some cases, they just aren't 100% competitive in every part of the computer market.
Why don't you just look it up on the apple and dell sites?
It will, the imac will drive up to 1920 x 1200, which is what the dell 24 is.
Still, my point is that Apple isn't trying to remain competitive in regards to grabbing sales or going outside of their niche market. Apple has diehard fans that will purchase whatever they sell, no matter what. They don't need to attempt to go outside of that faction because they'll have a hard time swaying general computer users who are used to Windows already or don't want to pay the premium price.
I don't know that I'd agree with that either. The macbook and pro are pretty competitive, and the imac and mini offer some fairly reasonable machines. I'd agree that a midtower would be a great addition to their line and appeal to more untapped potential buyers, but apple is appealing to PC switchers already, as evidenced by their increasing market share and the number of consumers buying a mac for the first time. They *are* trying to remain competitive, and are succeeding in some cases, they just aren't 100% competitive in every part of the computer market.
appleguy123
Apr 22, 01:40 AM
Other songs from their hard drives. That would be truly awesome! I do hope that that makes it into the final product.
rtkane
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
This is a silly debate here. Having known trained officers and military people and being related to some I can tell you one thing: they are taught to neutralize the threat. They certainly don't want to but if you hesitate you die. Chest shots are preferable because it's easier to target but head shots sometimes happen. People should be thinking about the guard who will undoubtedly need time to work through this ordeal.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
As a former police officer, I can verify what you're saying--police are trained to "shoot to stop" not shoot to kill and always shoot for center-mass--the largest part of the body (the torso) which provides you the greatest likelihood of hitting your target and stopping the threat. I can almost guarantee that this guy did not fire off a purposeful headshot and everyone playing Monday morning quarterback judging this guy's actions has NEVER been in a situation like it. You don't understand it until you're in it and unfortunately the milliseconds you have to make your decision affect you for the rest of your life.
wazgilbert
Apr 28, 04:29 PM
Yes I am. And fairly new to Apple (switched to Mac in 2006 and iPhone in 2007).
Does being new here mean that I have to learn how a corporation that just recorded at record net income of $5.23 billion is "DEAD"? If so, please enlighten me.
I have worked in finance for 35 years and only hold a Bachelors degree in Buisiness, but I'm sure from your response that you (and others here) know more about business than me. So please explain how the earnings report is an indication of impeding doom.... I'm always willing to learn from a group of experts!
Typical Arts student! come back when you're qualified in Science or Engineering and tell us how manufacturing products that are worth selling works.
Even the MBA crowd are appalling at their supposed specialty subject of business - that's just a euphemism for people who don't want to add value to something, but are skilled at counting the cost and value of things and are second only to accountants at removing the soul of a business in the name of making money.
Oh yeah - you said it - qualified in "buisiness" [sic] but works in finance - surely that should read - holds some form of accountancy degree and is an accountant? No? under-qualified then. (or clerk)
Does being new here mean that I have to learn how a corporation that just recorded at record net income of $5.23 billion is "DEAD"? If so, please enlighten me.
I have worked in finance for 35 years and only hold a Bachelors degree in Buisiness, but I'm sure from your response that you (and others here) know more about business than me. So please explain how the earnings report is an indication of impeding doom.... I'm always willing to learn from a group of experts!
Typical Arts student! come back when you're qualified in Science or Engineering and tell us how manufacturing products that are worth selling works.
Even the MBA crowd are appalling at their supposed specialty subject of business - that's just a euphemism for people who don't want to add value to something, but are skilled at counting the cost and value of things and are second only to accountants at removing the soul of a business in the name of making money.
Oh yeah - you said it - qualified in "buisiness" [sic] but works in finance - surely that should read - holds some form of accountancy degree and is an accountant? No? under-qualified then. (or clerk)
BornAgainMac
May 3, 12:45 PM
I bet the future dedicated display will be Thunderbolt driven only. It would reduce the number of wires from 3 to 2. It would be nice if power can be drawn from the monitor to power the laptop and just dock it with a single wire.
The monitor would still have USB ports just not feed from the USB port on the Mac.
The monitor would still have USB ports just not feed from the USB port on the Mac.
KnightWRX
Mar 30, 01:40 PM
I agree that app store is a very generic term, but in order to avoid all the legal troubles and the money and time lost, why not just create your own name?
Microsoft has their own name. I guess they are just trying to protect the descriptive nature of the term. "Microsoft Marketplace, the app store for Windows Phone 7".
Microsoft does not intend to use the trademark.
I don't get why Apple filed for such a descriptive mark anyway. iTunes App Store was what they called it at first, what was wrong with that ? iOS App Store would also save all these legal troubles. Apple App Store another that's perfectly fine.
Microsoft has their own name. I guess they are just trying to protect the descriptive nature of the term. "Microsoft Marketplace, the app store for Windows Phone 7".
Microsoft does not intend to use the trademark.
I don't get why Apple filed for such a descriptive mark anyway. iTunes App Store was what they called it at first, what was wrong with that ? iOS App Store would also save all these legal troubles. Apple App Store another that's perfectly fine.
