uv23
Sep 4, 07:28 PM
I predict a more powerful, larger storage, video iPod with a dock that has component/hdmi/whatever video and optical audio outs. No big deal. It's a natural progression from what's available today.
Cybix
Sep 13, 10:17 PM
thats not an artist rendition.. it's a very very poor photochop job. poorly aligned, among other things.... urgh..
Yankee617
Apr 20, 12:26 PM
WOW this is a major privacy breach.
With any cell phone (smart or otherwise) the telephone networks have been able to track your movements. All you need to do is to keep it turned on. Not much you can do about this, except hope they don't exercise that ability. Turning the device off frequently can help somewhat... they don't know where you've been (or where your device has been) when the device is turned off.
So I'm going to buy an iPad (Wi-Fi only). I'll either turn it off or close the cover (putting it to sleep) when I'm not using it. I would like to see old location data automatically deleted and to have the option of not backing up location data.
Does the MBP have anything similar inside? No reason why it couldn't.
With any cell phone (smart or otherwise) the telephone networks have been able to track your movements. All you need to do is to keep it turned on. Not much you can do about this, except hope they don't exercise that ability. Turning the device off frequently can help somewhat... they don't know where you've been (or where your device has been) when the device is turned off.
So I'm going to buy an iPad (Wi-Fi only). I'll either turn it off or close the cover (putting it to sleep) when I'm not using it. I would like to see old location data automatically deleted and to have the option of not backing up location data.
Does the MBP have anything similar inside? No reason why it couldn't.
mdntcallr
Aug 23, 10:47 PM
yeah, but it isn't a bad deal. hell creative could have pulled a lawsuit, much like the lawsuit which almost shut down blackberry.
so... this is good. a win win. scenario. apple gets another big time vendor to sell products that accessorize apple's IPOD.
so... this is good. a win win. scenario. apple gets another big time vendor to sell products that accessorize apple's IPOD.
cmaier
Nov 13, 05:49 PM
I'm not missing the point. You are. They have a right to determine how their trademarks are to be used and if they did not vigourously defend them, you would see MSFT stealing even icons from OS X.
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
You say you're not missing the point, but your response immediately jumped back to "they have a right."
yes, we know. We aren't arguing what they have a right to do.
We are arguing about how stupid and arbitrary it is to enforce that right.
And your argument about the icons in the last paragraph makes no sense - why would someone want to use an image of a mac to represent a non-OS X box?
And, you still haven't addressed the fact that there is no solution for the developer other than making their software significantly worse - they can't use their own icons that depict the machine being connected to, they can't necessarily use the NAME of the machine being connected to - what is it they are supposed to do? List the machines by ip address?
Warbrain
Sep 26, 08:25 AM
I call up Verizon and tell them I have a problem, on last thursday, I talk to a supervisor and we get the issue worked out. She asked me when I would like my credit applied, as soon as possible or on my next billing cycle. I told her as soon as possible, I had my credit applied to my account saturday.
I know this got a off topic, but switching back to a crap company like Cingular is not in my future, no matter if they call me up and offer me a free iPhone to come back to them.
Christopher
You got customer service from Verizon? Is this before or after they tacked on the taxes that aren't being collected anymore? Or crippled the Bluetooth on their phones? Or put a terrible GUI on their phones? Or any other number of things that they've done that are anti-consumer?
I know this got a off topic, but switching back to a crap company like Cingular is not in my future, no matter if they call me up and offer me a free iPhone to come back to them.
Christopher
You got customer service from Verizon? Is this before or after they tacked on the taxes that aren't being collected anymore? Or crippled the Bluetooth on their phones? Or put a terrible GUI on their phones? Or any other number of things that they've done that are anti-consumer?
Lollypop
Sep 9, 02:20 AM
I guess I've got mind whip lash from the transition to Intel. It's still kinda hard to wrap the mind around these speed improvments. I'm still used to the very modest speed bumps from the PPC days.
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
Its nice to see all these speed improvements, but at some point its going to end, Apple chose to transition at a very interesting time, Intel wont be releaing new chips like this all the time... but at least we can compare apples to apples now! :eek:
How wonderfully refreshing it is to see these leaps in speed with each product update. I hope this pace keeps up. Some may disagree, but I think it's spectacular compared to what we used to get from Moto/Freescale/IBM.
Its nice to see all these speed improvements, but at some point its going to end, Apple chose to transition at a very interesting time, Intel wont be releaing new chips like this all the time... but at least we can compare apples to apples now! :eek:
whooleytoo
Oct 12, 03:58 PM
Maybe because all across the globe, women and children are hugely disadvantaged economically and socially in comparison to men? People who need more help should get more help.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
Generally, that's a good point. But in this case I don't think it's significant: your average adult male in Africa is likely to be more affluent than the average adult female (or child), sure - but it's not as if he can afford quality healthcare either!
It's just people at two different levels of poverty, neither of whom can afford the healthcare they need.
Hattig
Mar 29, 01:05 PM
Actually there is still annoyances with that. While you can run two instances of Excel they still use a weird MDI interface if you are just double clicking to open files. A nightmare if you have dual monitors, and still not fixed in Office 2010.
That's just appalling, and a classic example of failing to provide a consistent user interface paradigm to users. In this case: a window == a document. It winds me up in Office 2003 and and to hear you still need to faff around opening with a new instance simply shocks me.
That's just appalling, and a classic example of failing to provide a consistent user interface paradigm to users. In this case: a window == a document. It winds me up in Office 2003 and and to hear you still need to faff around opening with a new instance simply shocks me.
KingCrimson
Apr 30, 04:44 PM
If you look closely though, Microsoft made LESS in revenue ($16billion to Apple's 20billion) but almost equally matches Apple in profit (5.3 billion to Apple's ~6billion). All things equal, Microsoft is still a better company in terms of profitability range due to their significant lower revenue but a close call on profit standards.
That's quite a spin. Almost a pure software company SHOULD have higher profit margins to a 50/50 hardware/software company. The fact is AAPL stock is so high because investors like that AAPL has many profit engines and a good history of bringing new ones online every year. MSFT has not had a real hit in forever.
That's quite a spin. Almost a pure software company SHOULD have higher profit margins to a 50/50 hardware/software company. The fact is AAPL stock is so high because investors like that AAPL has many profit engines and a good history of bringing new ones online every year. MSFT has not had a real hit in forever.
rdrr
Sep 15, 05:48 PM
I have posted this link before but with the latest news maybe they will tap Motorola shoulder again. Look at the Motorola e690, looks a lot like what people have been envisioning in an Apple phone.
http://board.phonehk.com/viewthread.php?tid=190533&extra=page%3D1
http://board.phonehk.com/viewthread.php?tid=190533&extra=page%3D1
pmz
Apr 22, 01:24 PM
The funny part is, no matter what Apple does to make this work, whether its really usable, or totally locked-in-worthless, it doesn't matter.
Streaming will never be as good as audio stored on your device. Not. Ever.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
I'll stick with syncing/file storage.
Streaming will never be as good as audio stored on your device. Not. Ever.
Not on 3G, not on 4G, and not even over WiFi. The software and streaming protocols are way too slow to offer even comparable performance.
I'll stick with syncing/file storage.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 26, 04:41 PM
Wrong. Cingular is rolling out 3.5G (HSDPA), and although they only have one phone that currently supports it (the LG CU500, http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phones/cell-phones.jsp?RFlow=A&source=INC230056&zip=10010&q_deviceId=cdsku9870167&WT.svl=dtl), reviewers have been wowed by the download speeds and smooth streaming video performance (download speeds are 1.8 Mbps).
All the networks are pretty good when you're the only one using it. As you mentioned, there's only one phone that can even use it now and the reviewers got access probably before most of those were even sold. We'll see how things are 2 years from now. Maybe it'll be great.
All the networks are pretty good when you're the only one using it. As you mentioned, there's only one phone that can even use it now and the reviewers got access probably before most of those were even sold. We'll see how things are 2 years from now. Maybe it'll be great.
davey-nb
Sep 15, 06:11 PM
the ipod wasn't a ground up design either.
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
...I think you'll find.
Yes, check Wiki...
now admittedly, it was apple, jobs and ives' that took a good idea and refined it to being the great product introduced in '03, but the ipod was an interesting break from apple's NIH syndrome. so much so that i question the TS report about apple going for a ground up design.
...I think you'll find.
Yes, check Wiki...
BenRoethig
Sep 1, 11:40 AM
wow. would that be the biggest mainstream desktop around?
Biggest, yes. Mainstream, not even close.
Biggest, yes. Mainstream, not even close.
macintel4me
Sep 4, 09:40 PM
A FrontRow AirPort Express device (with remote) is a much more cost effective way than buying a Mac Mini. Personally, I would love to play music, show my family pics and videos on my living room TV, but found a $600 Mac Mini too pricey for that. To be honest, I don't need (nor want to pay for) video editing software, music editing software, etc for my living room. An XBox can do that for half the price and it does games. I haven't gone the XBox route because it just seems too 'weird' and I'm waiting for the 'right' device to come out. I hoping this is it. :)
I would have to see however how 320x240 would look on my plasma. I have a feeling I'd be disappointed....especially for $10...so the Movie Store thing may not be for me!!
I would have to see however how 320x240 would look on my plasma. I have a feeling I'd be disappointed....especially for $10...so the Movie Store thing may not be for me!!
cmaier
Nov 13, 11:51 PM
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
Hattig
Mar 29, 12:33 PM
when closing an application in OS X is as easy as clicking an X in the top right corner let me know
Who cares about quitting applications these days?
Sure, closing windows (which is the Mac OS function for clicking on the window close button - whoa, difficult concept!) is required, but quitting apps is surely a far rarer thing, that shouldn't be accidentally invoked - hence it is behind a menu, or a keyboard shortcut. May I also point out that cmd+Q is a lot easier to type than alt+F4, and makes sense as an application level command?
But quitting apps? Why? We're not running on slow CPUs with limited RAM any more. Even our phones only quit applications upon operating system demand, and they cleverly suspend the application state to be restored upon restart. This is coming to Mac OS X Lion, and not before time. Quitting applications is the exception, not the rule.
Who cares about quitting applications these days?
Sure, closing windows (which is the Mac OS function for clicking on the window close button - whoa, difficult concept!) is required, but quitting apps is surely a far rarer thing, that shouldn't be accidentally invoked - hence it is behind a menu, or a keyboard shortcut. May I also point out that cmd+Q is a lot easier to type than alt+F4, and makes sense as an application level command?
But quitting apps? Why? We're not running on slow CPUs with limited RAM any more. Even our phones only quit applications upon operating system demand, and they cleverly suspend the application state to be restored upon restart. This is coming to Mac OS X Lion, and not before time. Quitting applications is the exception, not the rule.
wizard
Apr 4, 12:59 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
The only problem I have is that only one of these jerks ended up dead. Seriously, the legal system failed us a long time ago, we don't have much of a choice anymore. Frankly I abandoned all hope of ever seeing crime effectively reduced in this country when the Supreme Court decided it was illegal to execute minors which is one of the Courts most stupid and politically motivated decisions ever. Society is best served by removing the criminal element as early as possible.
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
That said, this is pretty ******. Sure, the guy was a criminal lowlife, and he certainly deserved punishment, but I don't think he deserved to get killed. Oh well.
The only problem I have is that only one of these jerks ended up dead. Seriously, the legal system failed us a long time ago, we don't have much of a choice anymore. Frankly I abandoned all hope of ever seeing crime effectively reduced in this country when the Supreme Court decided it was illegal to execute minors which is one of the Courts most stupid and politically motivated decisions ever. Society is best served by removing the criminal element as early as possible.
wolfie37
Apr 20, 11:05 AM
Actually this could be just as bad. Imagine a issue comes up and you need to prove that you were (or were not) somewhere and your phone conflicts with the facts. The government now has data that you need to clarify or explain.
FWIW
DLM
No it's not, it's a complete non-issue. As you said, correctly, my phone would be conflicting with the FACTS. This is a whole load of nonsense privacy wise, lets face it every mobile operator has a log of where your mobile last communicated with one of their towers, always has been. Because your mobile phone is somewhere doesn't mean that YOU are there.
People really do get so paranoid about these things. There are many many ways your personal movements are recorded, credit/debit card transactions cctv, check ins at airports, hotels, telephone calls and text messages you send. This is nothing extraordinary or of any concern, in fact completely the opposite as everyone should always be able to justify why they are at a certain place at a certain time.
The only ones ho need to worry are those that are up to no good....
FWIW
DLM
No it's not, it's a complete non-issue. As you said, correctly, my phone would be conflicting with the FACTS. This is a whole load of nonsense privacy wise, lets face it every mobile operator has a log of where your mobile last communicated with one of their towers, always has been. Because your mobile phone is somewhere doesn't mean that YOU are there.
People really do get so paranoid about these things. There are many many ways your personal movements are recorded, credit/debit card transactions cctv, check ins at airports, hotels, telephone calls and text messages you send. This is nothing extraordinary or of any concern, in fact completely the opposite as everyone should always be able to justify why they are at a certain place at a certain time.
The only ones ho need to worry are those that are up to no good....
MacNewsFix
Apr 19, 09:20 AM
Samsung also feels the need to depict its products just like Apple's, on a reflective white surface.
http://hopelesslyflawed.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/iphone-galaxy-s.jpg
I wonder how it feels to be a designer for Samsung where you are forced to emulate the competitor's work rather than implement your own vision.
Looking at that image now, I can't believe Samsung missed the opportunity to slap the silhouette of a half-eaten pear on the back. LOL
http://hopelesslyflawed.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/iphone-galaxy-s.jpg
I wonder how it feels to be a designer for Samsung where you are forced to emulate the competitor's work rather than implement your own vision.
Looking at that image now, I can't believe Samsung missed the opportunity to slap the silhouette of a half-eaten pear on the back. LOL
dudemac
Mar 23, 06:17 PM
I prefer to see the apps pulled. Some apps are best not available. Maybe we could add others, like the locations of the various whorehouses, and best corners for buying drugs.
It certainly doesn't hurt to add to Apple's No Porn standards.
This is not even close to the same as having locations of whore house or drug dealers. However I would guess the police might like to have these apps.
Where and what police are doing is a matter of public knowledge. Posting where they are is not illegal or going against some other standard.
It certainly doesn't hurt to add to Apple's No Porn standards.
This is not even close to the same as having locations of whore house or drug dealers. However I would guess the police might like to have these apps.
Where and what police are doing is a matter of public knowledge. Posting where they are is not illegal or going against some other standard.
8Phoenix
Sep 14, 12:41 AM
With due respect. The design looks good but I think it is lacking a few things.
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
prospervic
Apr 25, 02:31 PM
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there, instead of simply using the computer someone has to go through all that trouble to get what they paid for (i7 processor)? Are you for real? That sounds great. I'm sure all those random people who buy from the Apple Store also buy the Apple torx screwdriver kit and get to work when they get home. :rolleyes:
I recently changed the hard drive in my 2011 MBP. Electronics-size Phillips-head screwdrivers (No. 0 and No. 00) are all that's needed. Anybody who's handy with tools can do the job in about 15 minutes.
Even though the 7200 rpm HD is not as fast as an SSD, the difference in boot-up, app launch and overall operation speeds are quite noticeable (with no observable change in battery life).
I recently changed the hard drive in my 2011 MBP. Electronics-size Phillips-head screwdrivers (No. 0 and No. 00) are all that's needed. Anybody who's handy with tools can do the job in about 15 minutes.
Even though the 7200 rpm HD is not as fast as an SSD, the difference in boot-up, app launch and overall operation speeds are quite noticeable (with no observable change in battery life).
