dernhelm
Jul 27, 10:27 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Perfect description.
...But all I want is an iMac upgrade to Core 2 Duo and I'll be happy.
You never get all the marbles.
Perfect description.
...But all I want is an iMac upgrade to Core 2 Duo and I'll be happy.
ergle2
Sep 20, 01:50 PM
No, one that just ignores you and your inquiries because it was already clear where you were coming from..thus I feel no obligation to engage you in my thought process and your self important questioning. Has nothing to do with my maturity, and everything to do with my lack of caring about you or your opinion.
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
Ah, a response that is pompous, imperious, petulant, inconsistent AND incorrect -- you didn't ignore me, after all, you were simply obnoxious and evasive with a serious of ridiculous replies.
Nice projection with the "self-important", though.
Where I was coming from was purely from a sense of curiosity as to why someone would apparently feel that technology can advance too quickly. It's not unobvious, I grant you, but a rather unobjectionable query to my mind.
Interestingly, it would appear you do care enough about my opinion - or perhaps that of other forum denizens? - to respond in a way you apparently consider to be "clever". Feel free to ignore me -- really, I can take it! I mean, I'm sure I'll probably suffer a couple of seconds of heartbreak sometime around, say, 2020, but I'll survive.
Oh and "thought process" - ROTFL - lovely!
roadbloc
Mar 26, 06:43 PM
I'm glad rosetta is going away. Maybe the dev will finally update the app.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
By saying that you clearly misunderstand the idea of a legacy app. Say I have an old PPC game that I still enjoy to play. Why on earth would the dev want to update the old game to work in intel, especially if the dev is busy with new and more profitable endeavours?
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Fortunately, my one and only PPC program does indeed have an intel version that I wasn't aware of, so I'm fine.
RedTomato
Aug 11, 09:31 PM
Apple won't put GPS in unless they can create a whole new 'Apple' interface for it.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
I'm no GPS expert, but I'm not sure how they could do that with a simple candybar phone. It would need to be some sort of smartphone / pocketPC thing.
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 01:57 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Woo! Something not MacBook Pro or iOS related!
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
awesome!!! this is really tempting. Should I throw an SSD in my 2010 4GB 2.66 GHz 13" MBP or sell it and wait for the MBA refresh?
If you have to do either, I'd do the former. But I'm in the "screw the Intel HD 3000 bandwaggon" and I also don't think that an Air should replace a Pro unless you have a problem lifting five pounds.
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
KEEP DREAMING!
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
First off, it's a fair assumption that they won't be more powerful than the current 13" MacBook Pros. Second, it's a fair assumption that the Intel HD 3000 will be in tow, and if the SV HD 3000 is inferior to the SV NVIDIA GeForce 320M, then it's a fair assumption that the ULV versions will probably have a similar result when benchmarked. Then again, who in their right mind is relying on a MacBook Air to play games over say, a MacBook Pro or a P-freakin-C?!
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
Most Flash and Java based sites have App-equivalents. Ideal, no. A true web experience, no. But there's an app for that.
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
It's a MacBook Air, for crying out loud! What were you going to use the GeForce 320M for anyway that you won't be able to do with the Intel HD 3000? (Note: Final Cut Studio type things and gaming, which are the only two things that you'd feel the difference between the two IGPs on anyway, are laughable answers.)
I LOL'd. I owned iPad 1 for a year, and while it's nice, it's a FAR, FAR cry from the productivity capabilities of the current gen MBA.
Like it or not, iPad is SEVERELY CRIPPLED for content creation (i.e. real work), but excels at content CONSUMPTION. That's factual and completely undebatable. Everyone knows this.
So, no, it's not "something better". It's a more viable choice for entertainment and consumption. That's it.
The MacBook Air is crippled for content creation purposes. It is no MacBook Pro. The iPad is not crippled for content consumption. Sure, the iPad isn't yet the most stellar option for content creation purposes, but it's not crippled for what it's intended to do. With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's more that a feature was taken away and the natural psychological response when that happens is "Why did you do that? Give it back!"
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
It's a step down from the GeForce 320M, but a step up from the GeForce 9400M and the Intel GMA IGPs used before it.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
+1
sorry but if you're trying to do "pro" work on a MBA, ur doin it wrong.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
This.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Woo! Something not MacBook Pro or iOS related!
For a programmer dealing with Terminal, Xcode, Netbeans, Eclipse, etc (not graphic intensive softwares), would this macbook air be a better deal than the 13/15" Macbook pro?
Anyone?
Both machines would be fine, though the 13"/15" MacBook Pro is more fully-featured of a machine than the Air, and frankly at that cost, why pay for an incomplete system?
awesome!!! this is really tempting. Should I throw an SSD in my 2010 4GB 2.66 GHz 13" MBP or sell it and wait for the MBA refresh?
If you have to do either, I'd do the former. But I'm in the "screw the Intel HD 3000 bandwaggon" and I also don't think that an Air should replace a Pro unless you have a problem lifting five pounds.
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
KEEP DREAMING!
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
First off, it's a fair assumption that they won't be more powerful than the current 13" MacBook Pros. Second, it's a fair assumption that the Intel HD 3000 will be in tow, and if the SV HD 3000 is inferior to the SV NVIDIA GeForce 320M, then it's a fair assumption that the ULV versions will probably have a similar result when benchmarked. Then again, who in their right mind is relying on a MacBook Air to play games over say, a MacBook Pro or a P-freakin-C?!
Alas, there are some things that the curated app store will never be able to supply. Case in point: a pokerstars or fulltilt client. And if the ipad's Safari can't do java or flash or allow me to run the applications of my choosing, then it's not sufficiently open for my needs.
Most Flash and Java based sites have App-equivalents. Ideal, no. A true web experience, no. But there's an app for that.
At least I now have a short finite timeline to work with to buy my 13"/2.13GHz C2D/256GB MBA before they "upgrade" it to a vastly inferior Intel GPU.
It's a MacBook Air, for crying out loud! What were you going to use the GeForce 320M for anyway that you won't be able to do with the Intel HD 3000? (Note: Final Cut Studio type things and gaming, which are the only two things that you'd feel the difference between the two IGPs on anyway, are laughable answers.)
I LOL'd. I owned iPad 1 for a year, and while it's nice, it's a FAR, FAR cry from the productivity capabilities of the current gen MBA.
Like it or not, iPad is SEVERELY CRIPPLED for content creation (i.e. real work), but excels at content CONSUMPTION. That's factual and completely undebatable. Everyone knows this.
So, no, it's not "something better". It's a more viable choice for entertainment and consumption. That's it.
The MacBook Air is crippled for content creation purposes. It is no MacBook Pro. The iPad is not crippled for content consumption. Sure, the iPad isn't yet the most stellar option for content creation purposes, but it's not crippled for what it's intended to do. With a 13" or 15" MacBook Pro, there's little practical use for a MacBook Air unless you have a problem lifting the two extra pounds, and really, if you do, either exercise or invest in physical therapy.
What is the obsession with back-lit keys?
Do you actually look at the keyboard when you're typing?
It's more that a feature was taken away and the natural psychological response when that happens is "Why did you do that? Give it back!"
The current nvidia chip is also integrated so it's not that much of a step down. As a 13" Pro user I can happily tell anyone that for what the product is made for, it's perfectly usable. At first I was pissed at the idea but it turned out the Intel HD 3000 were more powerful than the graphics in my old laptop.
It's a step down from the GeForce 320M, but a step up from the GeForce 9400M and the Intel GMA IGPs used before it.
By game I mean a modern title at full settings. Otherwise it's just 'making do'.
+1
sorry but if you're trying to do "pro" work on a MBA, ur doin it wrong.
i'm glad Apple has their MBA line for ultra-portability, plus the MBP line for intensive portable work.
This.
vincenz
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
Looks like we'll be waiting in line in the cold instead of the heat. Can't really complain...
Leoff
Sep 19, 08:25 AM
You may be right to a certain extent, but l i assumed that most people who want a Macbook Pro are going to be using it for intensive stuff - I was under the impressions that Macs are the platform of choice for a lot of graphics professionals etc so the high end line would have a lot of those kind of ppl buying. Granted the difference in speed will probably be fairly minimal, but when you are spending a load of cash on a top-of-the line notebook, why shouldnt you expect to have the latest and greatest technology available? It also seems quite likely they might either make them cheaper, or offer more RAM on the base model etc. so buying now unless you really have to seems foolish.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
Note that I, and the previous commenter who I quoted, have been talking about MacBooks, not MacBook Pros.
Im also not sure about your point on the resale value, i would imagine pro users probably would be concerned about which processor it had in it.
Note that I, and the previous commenter who I quoted, have been talking about MacBooks, not MacBook Pros.
Sabenth
Nov 28, 07:09 PM
i can only but laugh at this as some one mentioned ealier ipods or zunes or cd players play music its up the indvidual who puts the music on them to use legal or iligal sounds and the player makes no diffrance so lables shouldnt get a cut from sales
RMBootneck
Mar 22, 07:59 PM
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
VERY well said!
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
VERY well said!
k995
Apr 20, 09:05 AM
No. I don't think that's possible; but samsung didn't ship it until later. So, that could have been a testing unit meant for a future release.
Sure manufacturers always have a couple of design laying arund just in case.
Reality of course is samsung had bene designing that for quit some time as were others .
Queen Elizabeth II Britain#39;s
Obama, Queen Elizabeth
Queen Elizabeth 3 by Mike
the QUEEN ELIZABETH#39;s mast
queen elizabeth 11 marriage.
Queen Elizabeth III
Queen Elizabeth III
newest Queen Elizabeth
The MS Queen Elizabeth cruise
Sure manufacturers always have a couple of design laying arund just in case.
Reality of course is samsung had bene designing that for quit some time as were others .
mmmcheese
Sep 13, 01:02 PM
Anyone seen this?
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1775_large_longtermroadmap.png
The real architecture changes are coming June then June then June 2012. With derivatives in the years between.
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
And what's interesting is that each architecture change will be a leap in performance similar to Pentium D to Conroe transition. (source) (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2649)
Screw Tigerton, Penryn's next (probably June 2007)
Screw that, I'm not going to buy until Gesher!
http://images.dailytech.com/nimage/1775_large_longtermroadmap.png
The real architecture changes are coming June then June then June 2012. With derivatives in the years between.
So Merom(Merom Santa Rosa)/Conroe/Woodcrest(Clovertown) are the end of the road of separate chips. No more mobile/desktop/sever chip... all are the same (should expect mobiles to have the lowest MHz, then desktop, then toping out with server)
And what's interesting is that each architecture change will be a leap in performance similar to Pentium D to Conroe transition. (source) (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2649)
Screw Tigerton, Penryn's next (probably June 2007)
Screw that, I'm not going to buy until Gesher!
bassfingers
Apr 27, 01:13 PM
Where's the extremism?
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Don't lose faith in his craziness just because he's postponed driving our country into the ground.
And it's a good thing he showed his birth certificate. How embarrassing would it be for us to look back, and the man who did all the damage wasn't even born here?
If you want america to be like europe. Go to europe and pretend you're in america. Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
obamacare in its smallest form is extreme
stimulus bill is extreme (and extrememly $$)
The extreme people he hires, etc.
Don't lose faith in his craziness just because he's postponed driving our country into the ground.
And it's a good thing he showed his birth certificate. How embarrassing would it be for us to look back, and the man who did all the damage wasn't even born here?
If you want america to be like europe. Go to europe and pretend you're in america. Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
NathanMuir
Feb 28, 06:36 PM
Well, I have nothing to say, but that the University has grounds for dismissal if difference of opinion arises.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
I agree, the situation in the OP was bound to happen sooner or later.
True, you can argue the gay card, but in this case, they college played the rights cards to get rid of him. Was it the best choice? No.
Still, it's the college's right on who teaches or not; and seeing how it's a Catholic Church college, I'd say it was bound to happen.
I agree, the situation in the OP was bound to happen sooner or later.
dernhelm
Aug 11, 11:07 AM
Doesn't that suggest Paris this year being a very likely time and place for the introduction of the iPhone? I doubt Apple will wait one more year considering the competition (see SE W810i (http://www.sonyericsson.com/spg.jsp?cc=us&lc=en&ver=4000&template=pp1_loader&php=PHP1_10376&zone=pp&lm=pp1&pid=10376) and others)
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
X2468
Mar 31, 11:03 PM
Probably what bothers me the most about the discourse that Android is open is that underlying that logic is an implicit (or perhaps really explicit, depending on who is touting that discourse) assumption that it is democratic, liberal, progressive, and for "the people" and thus prevents a "draconian future" from happening because instead of letting corporations dictate our digital worlds, the people will a) have a say in it and b) have a choice.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Your verbose attempt to cloud the truth is impressive, even if wildly false. It's readily apparent you've gone to great lengths to cover up your lack of technical erudition.
I do agree that Apples current advantages are:
1) Brand Name
2) Excellent Product Design
3) Huge Population Of Cult Like Followers
4) Steve Jobs, Worlds Best Sales Person
Yet change is brewing, nothing lasts forever.
Be prepared.
Baloney!
This discourse makes a false link between software being open source and political ideology. The two are not necessarily corresponding. And furthermore, that Android is actually open source is highly debatable but I won't go there.
Why do so many technophiles fall for the discourse that open means choice means freedom mean democracy discourse? It's all BALONEY! Google isn't really interested in protecting your freedom, democracy etc.. It's really interested in surviving and making money. Let's try not to fall AGAIN for that political cover.
In this case, I find Apple much more honest. They don't talk about political ideologies like freedom, democracy etc. All they say is they want to make devices that are friendly and easy to use. They don't couch their products in political ideological terms.
Your verbose attempt to cloud the truth is impressive, even if wildly false. It's readily apparent you've gone to great lengths to cover up your lack of technical erudition.
I do agree that Apples current advantages are:
1) Brand Name
2) Excellent Product Design
3) Huge Population Of Cult Like Followers
4) Steve Jobs, Worlds Best Sales Person
Yet change is brewing, nothing lasts forever.
Be prepared.
bushido
Apr 11, 04:27 PM
i got the iPhone 4 but also got a new Android because i'm sick of the same old school UI after 3 iPhones and i LOVE my android experience, sure i still use my iPhone 4 for some apps i can't get on the android, but apps r really the only thing that still saves the iPhone. of course its stupid to argue about that on a "mac"rumors site, so i'll just ***** up ^^
macfan881
Nov 18, 09:58 PM
one of my fav KB ads so far http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v3aCp899F8 :D
blackpond
Apr 11, 04:37 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas. Period, end of discussion.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
If the 5 launches a short while before Christmas, the supply constraints would be 10x worse than they are for the iPad right now.
The only thing this rumor proves is that bloggers, speculators, and analysts are getting irritated with the lack of solid info compared to this time last year.
Apple can create Christmas any day of the year.
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
DStaal
Sep 13, 09:35 AM
It would be nice if 10.5 would allow a more 'blind' method to utilize these cores, versus having programmers specificly program for multi-core. Now that would be extremely helpful and allow a more simultanous workflow.
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
How much more 'blind' do you want it? All the programmer has to do at this point is use multiple threads. Even if they don't, multiple cores will be automatically used for system and other processes.
Splitting one thread so that it ran cocurent with itself is a recipie for massive trouble. Mac OS X is about as blind as any system out there for the programmer. There may be some more optimizations that the system could make in it's own handling of multiprocessing, but from a programmer's perspective it doesn't matter how many cores the system has. (Unless you really want it to.)
janmc
Aug 5, 08:13 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
rjlawrencejr
Apr 8, 01:44 AM
Can't you also get them from AT&T? Also, the Apple Store in Santa Monica never has a line for new iPhones or iPads for some reason. I guess they work fast?
FYI, there was a line in Santa Monica this past Sunday morning http://t.co/EYgi3S6
FYI, there was a line in Santa Monica this past Sunday morning http://t.co/EYgi3S6
Tanglewood
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
I guess I would be underwhelmed if I had mistaken WWDC for Macworld or something, and expected a bunch of major new product announcements.
I agree. Release Mac Pro and just enough of Leopard to keep us going until January. Besides whats the point in Apple showing its entire hand with a release window 7-9 months out?
I do like that they'll be updating Mail. Having templates will be handy for what I use the program for.
I agree. Release Mac Pro and just enough of Leopard to keep us going until January. Besides whats the point in Apple showing its entire hand with a release window 7-9 months out?
I do like that they'll be updating Mail. Having templates will be handy for what I use the program for.
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.