canyonblue737
Apr 27, 07:58 AM
That's good enough for me.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Apple's only screw up here was keeping the infinite database forever on your phone and backed up to your Mac. Their was no reason to back it up to the computer and no reason to keep the data on the phone after it was passed to Apple (encrypted, de-identified etc.) but I suspect the reason was simply "we weren't doing anything bad with it so we never even considered we should delete it later."
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 09:06 PM
Yeah! That's what'll happen!
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
Or they'll do further research and realize that the implications in this SINGLE ARTICLE might not be 100% true.
To the everyday user this means NOTHING as they have no knowledge of what open truly means, and therefore can't take advantage of it.
To the users who actually have the knowhow to utilize open source operating systems, this might mean a minor hinderance, but not a complete game changer.
And for clarification, the former is the vast majority.
Did no one notice the obvious bias in this article? It's slanted, and the author clearly thinks that Google has been wrong this entire time.
The everyday user has been buying Android phones in large numbers because they're cheap and are available on more carriers. This is not about everyday users, it's about the Fandroids who have been screaming "'Open' good, 'closed' bad!!" at the top of their lungs for the last three years.
I stand by my three groups: 1�indiscriminate Apple-haters (like you), 2�people who just want a team to root for: "Go Android!!" Right or wrong, and 3�the true believers in the open-source religion.
Now as I said before, the only truly "open" phones would be FreeRunners that Stallman assembles in his Mom's basement from components gleaned from dumpsters and hands out for free, so I have no idea what new savior they'll turn to to save them from the tyrant Jobs. Be funny if it was Microsoft!
And no, I see no "bias" in the article�I think you're using the Rupert Murdoch definition: "Facts I don't want anybody to hear."
OhEsTen
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
I figured Apple didn't change the cases for the powerbooks (MBP) MacBook's and mini's and iMac's for a reason...
It reminds people that nothing has really changed about them other than their brains (which is a big deal for sure - it just keep people from thinking Apple's going out of business...)
I remember when Apple made their announcement a year ago about the Intel switch - Macworld running an article about "what it all means" and "is this death for Apple?" - some people were a bit freaked out (which was completely understandable from the netburst point of view) - but keeping the same enclosures for the first round of intel boxes helps people not freak out.... maybe.
It reminds people that nothing has really changed about them other than their brains (which is a big deal for sure - it just keep people from thinking Apple's going out of business...)
I remember when Apple made their announcement a year ago about the Intel switch - Macworld running an article about "what it all means" and "is this death for Apple?" - some people were a bit freaked out (which was completely understandable from the netburst point of view) - but keeping the same enclosures for the first round of intel boxes helps people not freak out.... maybe.
paul4339
Mar 22, 01:00 PM
Unfortunately you're so very right. Until it's in the hand and on the shelves it's vaporware.
...
Yes, I think they should at least have a model that they can 'power on' before they say that it's going to be released on June 8 (that's just over 2 months away to get it working and out the door!)
P.
...
Yes, I think they should at least have a model that they can 'power on' before they say that it's going to be released on June 8 (that's just over 2 months away to get it working and out the door!)
P.
daneoni
Aug 25, 08:26 PM
Right. Because the whole "if your battery's serial number falls within this range, this range, or this range" concept was so terribly difficult to grasp.
No, because different versions of the ranges were initially posted only recently has it been clarified...get with the program and stop trying to be a smartass
No, because different versions of the ranges were initially posted only recently has it been clarified...get with the program and stop trying to be a smartass
Michael383
Apr 8, 04:11 AM
Many Best Buys with Apple Shoppes have Apple representatives who work right at the store, I doubt they would let this happen at their store. I wonder how many Best Buys have done this
The Best Buy I bought my MBP at was in an Apple Shop and had a great representitive in it. Dan was great and could not have been more helpful. I hope the first time I visit a Apple store I have a similar experience.
The Best Buy I bought my MBP at was in an Apple Shop and had a great representitive in it. Dan was great and could not have been more helpful. I hope the first time I visit a Apple store I have a similar experience.
Marx55
Jul 15, 02:23 AM
My top 10 features (in order of preference).
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
1. Quiet Mac. THAT IS A MUST. If possible, no fans.
2. Modular Mac. Use any Apple cinema display with it.
3. Fast 7,200 rpm drive inside. NO SLOW DRIVES!
4. At least a maximum of 2 GB RAM (BTO).
5. FireWire 800 (2), 400 (2), USB 2 (6) and eSATA (2).
6. True 64-bit microprocessor inside.
7. True Intel virtualization microprocessor inside.
8. Two Blu-ray drives built-in (at least as a BTO).
9. Upgradeable microprocessor inside.
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
hulugu
Mar 23, 12:19 AM
Although I backed the implementation of a no-fly zone a few weeks ago, I wouldn't describe my position as one of wholehearted support. More a queasy half-hearted recognition that something had to be done and that all alternatives lead to rabbit holes of some degree or another. When all is said and done, my usual fallback position is an intense weariness at the evil that men do.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
For the record, I actually supported (if silence is considered consent) both Gulf wars at the start; I believed in the fictional WMD, I believed it when Colin Powell held his little vial up at the UN... but I, like many was tied down with work and other concerns and was only paying cursory attention to the news at the time. Like Obama, I also initially supported the war in Afghanistan, or at least the idea of it, initiated by a Republican president, but since then it seems to have become a fiasco of Catch-22 proportions.
Slowly discovering the real agenda and true ineptness of the Bush administration was a pivotal point in my reawakening political understanding of US current affairs after reading Hunter Thompson for so many years. Disgusted and appalled at the casual way in which we all were lied to, I'm quite happy to hold my hands up and say 'I was wrong'.
Thing is about Obama, I never had any starry-eyed notion about him being a peace-maker. He's an American president, the incentives are cemented into the role as one of using power and protecting wealth. Not that many conservatives were paying attention at the time, but he stood up in front of the Nobel academy when accepting his Nobel Peace Prize and laid out a justification for war.
Since the second Gulf War, the entire circus has been one of my occasional interests, because I've never seen a political process elsewhere riddled with so many bald-faced liars, grotesque characters and half-baked casual hate speech. What power or the sniff of it does to people, twisting them out of shape, is infinitely more interesting and has more impact on us than any other endeavour, except for possibly the parallel development of technology.
I used you as an example more out of rhetoric than anything else. However, I think your essay is spot on.
I didn't believe the Bush administration's call for war in Iraq because I was reading Hans Blix's reports and I was suspicious of the whole endeavor: the Bushies struck me as a group wholly unprepared for the difficulty of governing a foreign country after a military invasion. I did hope, like Tom Friedman, that an Iraq without Saddam might be a powerful symbol in the Middle East, but I was deeply concerned about the war.
Reading Anthony Shadid's reporting on Iraq told me that the situation was, days in, already spinning out of control. Once it became apparent that looters were able to steal artifacts from the museums, office chairs pilled with computers from the bureaus and weapons from Iraq's hundreds of ammunition dumps I knew we were in trouble.
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
We have complicated thoughts about the use of force in the world, which leads us to appear hypocritical when all things are made to appear equal to make straw.
George W. Bush is responsible for another calamity: me posting in PRSI, one of my many occasional weaknesses.
Me too. I wandered in here by accident as a new member and haven't left.
CaoCao
Feb 28, 08:25 PM
It matters that you describe it as fornication.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
No it doesn't, not when people brag about how much they sleep around
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failings
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.
What has this dubious claim to do with anything? :confused:
No it doesn't, not when people brag about how much they sleep around
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failings
He's trying to equate in our minds homosexuality, rape, and pedophilia.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.
jicon
Aug 17, 02:11 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
Does anyone seriously believe games today will show any significant improvement on a Mac Pro?
1. The video cards are underclocked compared to their PC equivalents on the Mac.
2. Generally, you are limited to a framerate of 60Hz anyway.
3. Most games are old ports, and need to run thru Rosetta.
When playing a game on a PC, you have DirectX to take full advantage of the hardware, and your processor is usually tagged consuming any and all cycles it can for the game. On a Mac, multithreading, and sharing the processor among apps seems to be the flow of the computing experience.
I'd predict a single Core2 Duo Extreme would still outdo a dual processor 3.0 Ghz Xeon Mac Pro when memory timings are nearly half of the Xeon on the Core2.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:32 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
bluetorch18
Aug 26, 04:02 PM
Merom MBP on Tuesday? I sure hope so.
rdowns
Mar 22, 01:50 PM
Where are our strict constitutionalist Tea Party Republicans? They haven't had anything to say about this. ****ing hypocrites.
leekohler
Mar 23, 03:45 PM
What are fivepoint and MattSepeta arguing about? Obama has not lied or invaded a country for no reason. This is a coordinated effort agreed upon with the UN. Huge difference. Just because people are liberal does not make them opposed to all military action.
I supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan.
I supported Bush's invasion of Afghanistan.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:42 PM
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong.]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:43 PM
Oh, Lordy! The Fandroids were always delusional, but reading some of these comments�this seems to have pushed them over the line into some sort of clinical psychosis.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 02:43 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
If Apple FAD goes away, where will Google copy from next?
You are delusional if you think Google is not building upon the Apple FAD.
Multimedia
Aug 18, 08:29 PM
I purchased Kingston PC2 5300 FB for my Mac Pro from New Egg. They seemed to have the best price and some Mac friendly reviews.
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!Great Caesar's Ghost! :eek: From OFF? :eek: With total 3GB RAM? You have a QT Movie you can post of that? :eek:
My Pro now starts 10.4.7 in less than 5 seconds!Great Caesar's Ghost! :eek: From OFF? :eek: With total 3GB RAM? You have a QT Movie you can post of that? :eek:
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 05:54 AM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
You're really pushing this aren't you? So what exactly is your point that has a significant relevance to the main topic? ...None, that's what.
Just because 30 years ago Apple took an idea initially developed by Xerox, but then improved upon it and subsequently released to the mass market a product that most people acknowledge as being the first home computer, has absolutely no bearing on the fact that Samsung have blatantly copied Apple's design.
peharri
Aug 11, 01:10 PM
If Apple does decide they're going to compete with, rather than cooperate with, existing cellphone manufacturers, they will lose their dominance over online music.
They have to cooperate with cellphone manufacturers because MP3 playing cellphones will end up being the future of portable music. Apple cannot make its own phone and expect to have even 10% of the entire market. Without its dominant market share, the iTMS will end up looking less attractive to the music industry - an industry already, by all accounts, upset with and wanting to get away from, iTMS - and will be deserted faster than you can say "90% of phones support Windows Media".
I don't believe this story. It doesn't make sense. Jobs crowing over a new product which by rights ought to be veiled in secrecy strikes me as insane. Apple producing a cellphone strikes me as insane. If I were a shareholder, I'd be calling up Steve Jobs personally and demanding answers.
That said, if it's any good, it's quadband, and supports EDGE and Bluetooth (and maybe UMA if the carriers can get their fingers out), I might buy one.
They have to cooperate with cellphone manufacturers because MP3 playing cellphones will end up being the future of portable music. Apple cannot make its own phone and expect to have even 10% of the entire market. Without its dominant market share, the iTMS will end up looking less attractive to the music industry - an industry already, by all accounts, upset with and wanting to get away from, iTMS - and will be deserted faster than you can say "90% of phones support Windows Media".
I don't believe this story. It doesn't make sense. Jobs crowing over a new product which by rights ought to be veiled in secrecy strikes me as insane. Apple producing a cellphone strikes me as insane. If I were a shareholder, I'd be calling up Steve Jobs personally and demanding answers.
That said, if it's any good, it's quadband, and supports EDGE and Bluetooth (and maybe UMA if the carriers can get their fingers out), I might buy one.
Prom1
Aug 6, 03:28 AM
My Predictions:
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Mac Pro:
-Fastest pro Mac ever shipped
-Hard drives, BTO 750gb, perpendicular recording
-New displays with HDMI, iSight & IR, even brighter
-Wireless-WiMax or 802.11n-whatever's ready first, otherwise BT 2.0+EDR, AE
-Multiple graphics card in a SLI/Crossfire like mode for extremely powerful graphics and stereo 3D, Quadro FX5500 and maybe also first Mac to be supported by the new Quadro Plex. 256MB std, 512MB BTO
-HD Audio
Isight on displays built-in but I only want that with higher resolution with Auto Focus ability.
> New displays with a thinner bezel around the LCD; higher contrast ratio 1200:1 minimum; denser pixel count, DLP technology with LEDs or with Zenon technology for the DLP; but more richer BLACK!
> BTO Bluetooth 2.0+EDR has been on the PowerBooks for at least 2 generations & on the MB+MBP!
> WiMax although sweet its long away; HUGE battery gobbler. 2 years minimum.
> I'd love for the MacBookPRO lineup to be more PRO with DUAL HDD configuration but without creating more heat.
> THe MBP should be equal in computing & graphical performance as the cheapest MacPro!
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 11:11 AM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I'm pretty sure you are aware that Apple would use LV CPU in 13", not ULV. That bumps us to 2.3GHz plus Turbo. You have said this yourself too and I already covered the reason in my other post.
This is just a MR article and surprisingly, they don't have much idea about the TDPs. Hopefully they will correct their article so people won't live in confusion.
NJRonbo
Jun 15, 09:02 AM
Those of you still looking to order from the Shack...
The latest I am hearing this morning from at least
one store is that preorders start at 1pm.
...however they are not calling it preorders. They
take down your name, phone and email and check
the system. No deposit.
I am being told that you ARE guaranteed a phone
with this reservation.
The latest I am hearing this morning from at least
one store is that preorders start at 1pm.
...however they are not calling it preorders. They
take down your name, phone and email and check
the system. No deposit.
I am being told that you ARE guaranteed a phone
with this reservation.
cjoy
Apr 25, 03:01 PM
Brings to mind:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
If you outlaw guns, only the outlaws will have guns.
statistics show that distribution of firearms mainly lead to more homocides and also suicides using firearms.
if guns are outlawed, their distribution is greatly limited, making it a lot harder for outlaws to obtain them.
the more you spread guns, the greater is the risk of them being used in illegal activities.
..oh wait... this forum is about apple and computers, right? :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment