oscarmacca
Apr 24, 03:45 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
wizard
Mar 29, 04:11 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)
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
These jokes just aren't funny.
It's too early for this. Maybe it will never not be too early for this, but please have some sensitivity for people who have friends/family/are themselves in affected areas.
Actually, Japanese companies manufacturing products in Japan is extremely inefficient due to the high cost, and due primarily to protectionism and racial pride. The Japanese domestic market is known for being highly inefficient.
Do you have any evidence for this?
Who is joking here?
A better battery is highly improbable. However if you only look at the dark side of an event you pass up any chance of benefitting from it. Certainly it isn't good to have your nukes melt down but this is also a learning opportunity. That is if people can look at what is happening objectively. If all you see is people getting irradiated then you aren't looking at the bigger picture.
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
These jokes just aren't funny.
It's too early for this. Maybe it will never not be too early for this, but please have some sensitivity for people who have friends/family/are themselves in affected areas.
Actually, Japanese companies manufacturing products in Japan is extremely inefficient due to the high cost, and due primarily to protectionism and racial pride. The Japanese domestic market is known for being highly inefficient.
Do you have any evidence for this?
Who is joking here?
A better battery is highly improbable. However if you only look at the dark side of an event you pass up any chance of benefitting from it. Certainly it isn't good to have your nukes melt down but this is also a learning opportunity. That is if people can look at what is happening objectively. If all you see is people getting irradiated then you aren't looking at the bigger picture.
citizenzen
Apr 14, 12:17 PM
Personally, I think we need to increase taxes across the board.
Which is exactly what I said. But you couldn't help twisting the dagger a little bit by saying ...
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
So are you, on your own, going to voluntarily give money to the government? Or do we get to lump you in with your description of Democrats?
Which is exactly what I said. But you couldn't help twisting the dagger a little bit by saying ...
Democrats - "I am in favor of increasing government taxation, and I have the opportunity to put my money where my mouth is by voluntarily paying more taxes, but I am nonetheless not going to if other people don't."
So are you, on your own, going to voluntarily give money to the government? Or do we get to lump you in with your description of Democrats?
Cougarcat
May 4, 07:16 PM
I think Apple is doing it this way to cut down on the ability to make hackintoshes.
No, they are doing it to make installations easier. You can already install Lion on Hackintoshes.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
It's not huge...792 MB. Handy for the times your boot drive isn't around. But I could see why you wouldn't want it on your air--every bit of space counts on an SSD.
No, they are doing it to make installations easier. You can already install Lion on Hackintoshes.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
It's not huge...792 MB. Handy for the times your boot drive isn't around. But I could see why you wouldn't want it on your air--every bit of space counts on an SSD.
Unspeaked
Aug 11, 11:11 AM
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
skeep5
Nov 3, 11:23 AM
yawner
ehoui
May 6, 08:45 AM
Yes, you are correct - once you are in science or engineering. But how many children never get there because of a system that over-complicates even simple calculations. All it takes is a couple of bad years/teachers/experiences to put a kid totally off of math. Truly brilliant kids will likely overcome these set-backs, but most kids are not brilliant.... they are good to competent. And good to competent engineers are needed as much as the ones who put landers on the Mars... oh, wait wasn't there a problem with one of those that involved non-metric measurements? (what is the smiley for "snarky" and "tongue in cheek"?)
I can understand the intuitive justification of this argument, but I'd like to see something more rigorous before I accept it. My own intuitive sense is that learning measurement systems, while important to early child development, don't, in of themselves (i.e., imperial or metric), have a causal relationship with math and science success (or failure) in school. I think there are other much stronger factors to success in math and engineering. One example: "male malaise" in the UK and the USA (a general problem in elementary and secondary schools); also, public school math programs are not rigorous and set the bar relatively low.
I can understand the intuitive justification of this argument, but I'd like to see something more rigorous before I accept it. My own intuitive sense is that learning measurement systems, while important to early child development, don't, in of themselves (i.e., imperial or metric), have a causal relationship with math and science success (or failure) in school. I think there are other much stronger factors to success in math and engineering. One example: "male malaise" in the UK and the USA (a general problem in elementary and secondary schools); also, public school math programs are not rigorous and set the bar relatively low.
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 02:07 PM
i thought the merom chips have the same pricing as the yonah 5 or 6 month ago. that would mean apple could switch to all merom (MB, mini, MBP). especially since they are compared to dell & co. in the windows world you are almost forced to use the better chip (merom) because the competition is fierce.
Stella
Apr 25, 10:02 AM
Apple could do themselves a lot of favours if they came out with an offical statement, explaining what iOS does in regards of user tracking ( i.e, location database ). Some 1 line email response fired off by SJ doesn't do much good.
Once again, Apple fall down in terms of customer relations / communications. If Apple handled this correctly then all the fuss could go away in a couple days.
Once again, Apple fall down in terms of customer relations / communications. If Apple handled this correctly then all the fuss could go away in a couple days.
arkmannj
May 7, 10:20 PM
I would be shocked... but you never know. Maybe they will offer it for free if you purchase a Mac.
That's the way it used to be with the old .mac, it was a selling point. You get a mac and you got email, a .mac web address, 'n such. Then they'd charge for extra space 'n such.
That's the way it used to be with the old .mac, it was a selling point. You get a mac and you got email, a .mac web address, 'n such. Then they'd charge for extra space 'n such.
mscriv
May 3, 11:26 AM
Hmm, interesting. I'm not eligible since I didn't play in Intell's last game, but this looks like fun.
Pressure
Sep 16, 04:10 AM
Indeed. I don't like the MacBook keyboard at all.
I'd be happy if it was the same enclosure with a Merom CPU and an upgraded GPU - ATI X1800 or nVidia 7700 would be nice.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
I really don't understand the obsession with the magnetic latch.
At most it would have the yet to be released Mobility X1700 or currently available Geforce GO7600.
There is simply not enough room for either a Mobility X1800 or Geforce GO7800 (was GO7700, meant 7800) chip in this 1" thick notebook. Stay in fairyland . . . why can't people be a bit realistic?
I'd be happy if it was the same enclosure with a Merom CPU and an upgraded GPU - ATI X1800 or nVidia 7700 would be nice.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
I really don't understand the obsession with the magnetic latch.
At most it would have the yet to be released Mobility X1700 or currently available Geforce GO7600.
There is simply not enough room for either a Mobility X1800 or Geforce GO7800 (was GO7700, meant 7800) chip in this 1" thick notebook. Stay in fairyland . . . why can't people be a bit realistic?
MacNut
May 3, 06:57 PM
I don't see us ever switching.
Eidorian
Jul 21, 02:20 PM
This may be a dumb question, but why would apple just use the new chips in mbp's and not the mb? Dosn't seem to make sense. As soon as core 2 merom comes out every pc notebook will have it. Price wouldn't be an issue cause merom is same price as yonah, correct?The MBP is a PRO model. They can keep Yonah (Which is fast enough mind you) and still speed bump it/lower the price some more.
I don't think we'll see these at WWDC unless there are other substantial changes. Going from a Yonah to a Merom chip may be great news, but it's hardly something Steve can crow about on stage. "Here's the new macbook pro... it looks and functions exactly like the old one, but 20% faster. Um, yeah. You already know all about the macbook pro, so there's really nothing else for me to say, is there?"
I expect we will see mac pros and leopard demo'ed at WWDC, plus the usual talk about how well apple is doing, etc. Maybe some talk about pro apps because it's a developer's conference. MAYBE a new ipod (nano) just because it's such big news, even tho it's not really for developers.
But as far as new MBPs go, I'd expect a quiet announcement some tuesday in the relatively near future.So new iMacs next Tuesday? :eek:
I do agree that the new Pro towers need a much more proper launch while the other lines can just get a shiny new Core 2 Duo logo on their site and an update to Apple's Intel page.
I posted this very early on:
tuscaloosa tornado april 15.
Tuscaloosa Tornado (4/26/2011)
Photos: Tuscaloosa Tornado
Tuscaloosa, Alabama Tornado
4-27-11 Tornado Tuscaloosa,
I don't think we'll see these at WWDC unless there are other substantial changes. Going from a Yonah to a Merom chip may be great news, but it's hardly something Steve can crow about on stage. "Here's the new macbook pro... it looks and functions exactly like the old one, but 20% faster. Um, yeah. You already know all about the macbook pro, so there's really nothing else for me to say, is there?"
I expect we will see mac pros and leopard demo'ed at WWDC, plus the usual talk about how well apple is doing, etc. Maybe some talk about pro apps because it's a developer's conference. MAYBE a new ipod (nano) just because it's such big news, even tho it's not really for developers.
But as far as new MBPs go, I'd expect a quiet announcement some tuesday in the relatively near future.So new iMacs next Tuesday? :eek:
I do agree that the new Pro towers need a much more proper launch while the other lines can just get a shiny new Core 2 Duo logo on their site and an update to Apple's Intel page.
I posted this very early on:
shaolindave
May 4, 05:46 PM
Oh! I see. I can agree to that.
If Apple does not allow that, I might as well go out and buy the DVD or USB for such a purpose.
If Apple does not allow that, then a failed hard drive would mean that the only way to install your legal copy of OS X would be to buy a second copy of OS X. Hopefully they see the flaws and will do something about it.
If Apple does not allow that, I might as well go out and buy the DVD or USB for such a purpose.
If Apple does not allow that, then a failed hard drive would mean that the only way to install your legal copy of OS X would be to buy a second copy of OS X. Hopefully they see the flaws and will do something about it.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
daneoni
Aug 11, 09:29 AM
If they do a revision, then its safe to say we won't see another update till santa rosa chipsets ship next spring alongside leopard. Which means "next month" is a good time to buy a MBP at least for a while.
This also suggest new ipods this fall (for christmas), conroe iMacs at the paris expo, iPhone as well as iLife/iWork updates and maybe Leopard shipping at MWSF....we all know steve likes beating deadlines meaning Leopard would definately ship before spring, unless he really wants vista out first before showing his cards to avoid photocopying.
This also suggest new ipods this fall (for christmas), conroe iMacs at the paris expo, iPhone as well as iLife/iWork updates and maybe Leopard shipping at MWSF....we all know steve likes beating deadlines meaning Leopard would definately ship before spring, unless he really wants vista out first before showing his cards to avoid photocopying.
Lesser Evets
Mar 28, 10:16 AM
Good RUMOR. Maybe it should be called a lie, but we won't know until June.
About time Apple released a new iMac, btw.
About time Apple released a new iMac, btw.
diamond.g
Mar 28, 11:46 AM
Dude... your contract is only there to cover the subsidized cost of your phone. You don't have to sign a new contract to keep your pricing. Just let it go and all will be the same until you upgrade. There is no price changes because your contract is up.
The downside is you are giving them "free" money since you are paying the subsidized price for your contract, but no longer using a subsidized phone. It would be nice if after your contract is over with your bill goes down (removing the subsidy payment). I think it would allow people to divorce the contract price versus the phone price.
The downside is you are giving them "free" money since you are paying the subsidized price for your contract, but no longer using a subsidized phone. It would be nice if after your contract is over with your bill goes down (removing the subsidy payment). I think it would allow people to divorce the contract price versus the phone price.
ucfgrad93
May 3, 05:49 PM
We may need a woman in charge, because Lord knows none of the men will ask for directions. ;)
That is what a GPS is for babe!;)
That is what a GPS is for babe!;)
johnnyturbouk
Apr 7, 03:47 PM
This gives RIM time to rethink their tablet.
lol
is it me, or does the RIM look pretty lame in comparison to other tablets
lol
is it me, or does the RIM look pretty lame in comparison to other tablets
Apple OC
May 2, 09:06 PM
The main reason that it will never happen -> they never will charge the gas by the liter, they want to keep it by the gallon...and continue increasing the price, if they change to the liters...a lot of people will be confused and start to complaint and blame the price increases on the metric system...wait they may want to use it as a smoke flare....hum,....:confused:
$1.38 per litre for gas sounds cheaper ... Gas pricing may be the reason the US adopts the metric system
$1.38 per litre for gas sounds cheaper ... Gas pricing may be the reason the US adopts the metric system
ChrisTX
Mar 27, 12:01 AM
i want what the "reliable sources" are smoking.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
Every time Apple has demoed a new version of iOS it has been on the current hardware prior to the release of new hardware.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
Every time Apple has demoed a new version of iOS it has been on the current hardware prior to the release of new hardware.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 6, 07:14 AM
Just because you know how to design a computer user interface doesn't mean that you also know how to design a car. Cars are much more complex than computers -- all cars have computers built in, but no computer has a car built in.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
Well I don't quite agree that Apple, if tasked with designing a car, couldn't add to the industry. You say a car has a computer in it but that does not mean Toyota knows how to make a good looking GUI for an OS. They tried and it looks horrible. But they didn't have to create the OS to try. Same thing for Apple in this hypothetical. I'm not talking about Apple designing brake systems etc. I'm talking about what it would be like if Apple had the chance to take control of the design elements with feedback from engineers in the field of course.
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower. That has been the appeal of Apple for a while now. So what would the people at Apple do if tasked with modifying car design? A better job that toyota did with iOS I''m sure.
Also, most of Apple's products look better than they are user friendly or work well. Their keyboards and mice are horrible, for example - every Microsoft or Logitech keyboard or mice blows the Apple competition out of the water when it comes to ergonomics. And ergonomics is something that's VERY important in a car. Apple very obviously sucks at that.
If you want a car that looks and feels like something that could have been designed by Apple, buy a Smart (Diesel). They're great and affordable city and short distance cars, I love them. The only difference is that if Apple would have designed the Smart, it would cost as much as BMW.
Well I don't quite agree that Apple, if tasked with designing a car, couldn't add to the industry. You say a car has a computer in it but that does not mean Toyota knows how to make a good looking GUI for an OS. They tried and it looks horrible. But they didn't have to create the OS to try. Same thing for Apple in this hypothetical. I'm not talking about Apple designing brake systems etc. I'm talking about what it would be like if Apple had the chance to take control of the design elements with feedback from engineers in the field of course.
Apple brought design elements to desktops and delivered us from the tan box tower. That has been the appeal of Apple for a while now. So what would the people at Apple do if tasked with modifying car design? A better job that toyota did with iOS I''m sure.
