jaxstate
Aug 4, 09:54 AM
I was talking abou this reference to the 400 series celerons. I should have made that more clear.How does he know what? It is well known what is in the Core 2 and Core processors.
furi0usbee
Apr 26, 03:03 PM
The fact there is one Android phone or ten Android phones is irrelevant. Every one of those people could have chose to buy an iPhone. They didn't.
Well, the fact is that there is one iPhone, and ten Android phones. But anyway, of course this fact is relevant. If I have 10 chances to do something, and only one chance to do something else... how often do you think the 1 in 10 chance is going to come around.... maybe 1 in 10 times?
That's like saying the people who *lose* the lottery should have just picked the winning numbers. People choose phones, or lottery numbers for various reasons. The products that tend to be pushed upon them, or are more readily available, are usually the ones that people end up walking out the door with.
The 90% of PC users *should* have just bought a Mac as well. Doesn't mean the PC is better, but there are many more circumstances under which someone buys something; cost, availability, etc.
Well, the fact is that there is one iPhone, and ten Android phones. But anyway, of course this fact is relevant. If I have 10 chances to do something, and only one chance to do something else... how often do you think the 1 in 10 chance is going to come around.... maybe 1 in 10 times?
That's like saying the people who *lose* the lottery should have just picked the winning numbers. People choose phones, or lottery numbers for various reasons. The products that tend to be pushed upon them, or are more readily available, are usually the ones that people end up walking out the door with.
The 90% of PC users *should* have just bought a Mac as well. Doesn't mean the PC is better, but there are many more circumstances under which someone buys something; cost, availability, etc.
milo
May 4, 03:11 PM
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times.
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
SilentLoner
Apr 20, 04:33 AM
I will probably update, just because I can lol Might update to the iPad2 then too
nearlycomplete
Mar 26, 10:09 PM
ipad 3, ugh im running out of money lol
twoodcc
Aug 2, 01:50 PM
i can't wait!! and it's gonna be so hard buying a Macbook tomorrow and not being able to open it til the 7th!
ictiosapiens
Sep 11, 12:39 PM
Yep, downloadable TV shows, movies for purchase or rent, iPhoto photobooks/prints/calendars/cards etc.
Who gives a rat's? Not me because we can't use any of them.
Yes you can, get yourself some US Itunes gift certificate codes on ebay, and enjoy...
Who gives a rat's? Not me because we can't use any of them.
Yes you can, get yourself some US Itunes gift certificate codes on ebay, and enjoy...
mdriftmeyer
Nov 23, 01:36 PM
Apple doesn't need to deliver a revolutionary phone-like device to grab marketshare. It's more about integrating a device within the system... and that is something Apple is good at.
Phones, new features, and additional functionality are a dime-a-dozen. New bells and whistles are added all the time, that's not what the market needs. Someone (hopefully Apple!) needs to take some of these advancements and deliver a products that integrates them in a logical and intuative way.
I second this insight. The market has been exposed to the gimmicks and now that the package has worn thin they are looking for an intuitive, durable and reliable phone that has some features you'd expect in a computer but mostly a phone that can be used with any carrier and doesn't need to be updated every 9 months.
Phones, new features, and additional functionality are a dime-a-dozen. New bells and whistles are added all the time, that's not what the market needs. Someone (hopefully Apple!) needs to take some of these advancements and deliver a products that integrates them in a logical and intuative way.
I second this insight. The market has been exposed to the gimmicks and now that the package has worn thin they are looking for an intuitive, durable and reliable phone that has some features you'd expect in a computer but mostly a phone that can be used with any carrier and doesn't need to be updated every 9 months.
ovrlrd
Mar 30, 07:23 PM
So nobody has answered yet whether this requires you to reinstall Lion or if you just install an "update" through the Mac App Store somehow. I am not at home so I can't test it out myself yet.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 04:11 PM
The samsung devices look like rebranded apple products.
The GUI looks very similar.
This is really bad.
The GUI looks very similar.
This is really bad.
Jape
Nov 4, 11:29 AM
I don't know how they do it at such a discount, but mine just arrived a day early in fine shape, so at least in my case they came through fine.
I'll try it out this afternoon.
Ok, thats good to hear, let me know how it works when you try it out :) I am considering getting it from there
I'll try it out this afternoon.
Ok, thats good to hear, let me know how it works when you try it out :) I am considering getting it from there
islanders
Jul 23, 11:01 PM
Not likely.
In the "old days" (i.e. pre-Intel) Apple could do this, keep selling outdated technology to clear out inventory before updating processors, graphics cards/chips, etc.
They had no other choice� g3 or g4.
But now that they're competing head-to-head with PC technology, this won't EVER happen. It was not accidental that Yonah debuted on MBP's before Dell, HP and Sony started selling them. No, Apple will have them out of the chute as soon as anyone else does (Intel probably won't give Apple first dibs this time - that was probably a Yonah bribe to get Apple to commit to Intel), which means there's no way we'll be waiting until Christmas (unless some production snafu makes EVERYONE wait that long.)
Announcement in August, shipping in September maybe?
:cool:
iBorg
September �maybe� is not to far from November!
Someone had to take a pragmatic position. Might as well be me.
Ok. Merom is going to happen for MBP September (maybe), October and Novermber (probably) December (maybe).
However, it has always been my conviction that not even Apple knows these exact dates. If sales are strong they put off updates, if they are slack they roll out new stuff.
This time Intel jumped the gun so Apple may take longer to respond.
In the "old days" (i.e. pre-Intel) Apple could do this, keep selling outdated technology to clear out inventory before updating processors, graphics cards/chips, etc.
They had no other choice� g3 or g4.
But now that they're competing head-to-head with PC technology, this won't EVER happen. It was not accidental that Yonah debuted on MBP's before Dell, HP and Sony started selling them. No, Apple will have them out of the chute as soon as anyone else does (Intel probably won't give Apple first dibs this time - that was probably a Yonah bribe to get Apple to commit to Intel), which means there's no way we'll be waiting until Christmas (unless some production snafu makes EVERYONE wait that long.)
Announcement in August, shipping in September maybe?
:cool:
iBorg
September �maybe� is not to far from November!
Someone had to take a pragmatic position. Might as well be me.
Ok. Merom is going to happen for MBP September (maybe), October and Novermber (probably) December (maybe).
However, it has always been my conviction that not even Apple knows these exact dates. If sales are strong they put off updates, if they are slack they roll out new stuff.
This time Intel jumped the gun so Apple may take longer to respond.
greenstork
Aug 2, 12:29 PM
I presume the point was, the Intel update was just putting faster processes into existing boxes (except the MacBook which got a new design), as happens every year. And many of the apps which would take the greatest benefit from the Intel chips (pro applications and games) aren't yet universal, so we've not yet seen the best of them.
I think now that Apple has a very fixed product matrix, there's less room for surprises. Apart from a brand new design, like an Apple branded PDA, an iPhone, or an inexpensive mini-tower with a fast processor and upgradable graphics card, everything else (to me, at least) is just an incremental upgrade.
You're hard to please. The Core 2 Duo isn't just any old speed bumped processor, it's a huge leap forward in processor design, similar, at least speed wise, to the jump from G4 to G5:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/core2/index.x?pg=1
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060714-7267.html
I think now that Apple has a very fixed product matrix, there's less room for surprises. Apart from a brand new design, like an Apple branded PDA, an iPhone, or an inexpensive mini-tower with a fast processor and upgradable graphics card, everything else (to me, at least) is just an incremental upgrade.
You're hard to please. The Core 2 Duo isn't just any old speed bumped processor, it's a huge leap forward in processor design, similar, at least speed wise, to the jump from G4 to G5:
http://techreport.com/reviews/2006q3/core2/index.x?pg=1
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2771
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20060714-7267.html
Rodimus Prime
Mar 28, 11:22 AM
You're missing something here.... The iPhone actually gets updates over its lifespan rather than promises of updates followed up by the requirement to buy a new phone in order to install the latest version of an open Android operating system on a closed manufacturer's phone. All-to-frequent updates make buyers feel like they have been tricked, especially when they cannot upgrade their phone to do the same things the new phones are doing because the manufacturer prevents it.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
Might like to point out that part of the problem with Android updates is not the manufactures but the Carriers.
AT&T being by far the worse offenders. If AT&T had its way the iPhone would never get more than security updates. To upgrade your OS you would have to buy a new phone.
This is no were more apparent that looking no farther than the GalaxyS phones. AT&T GalaxyS phone (Captivate) still is waiting on its Android 2.2 update when over seas it is already getting its Android 2.3 updated. Clearly it is not the manufacture causing problems but the carrier.
I hope the manufactures start taking a cue from Apple and MS to say screw the carriers and start supply updates for their phones. No more blocking the updates from the carriers.
Apple is about the only company that can get away with the delay. Most others would be fried for it. iPhone is already starting to show its age and delaying it longer will only make it worse.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
Might like to point out that part of the problem with Android updates is not the manufactures but the Carriers.
AT&T being by far the worse offenders. If AT&T had its way the iPhone would never get more than security updates. To upgrade your OS you would have to buy a new phone.
This is no were more apparent that looking no farther than the GalaxyS phones. AT&T GalaxyS phone (Captivate) still is waiting on its Android 2.2 update when over seas it is already getting its Android 2.3 updated. Clearly it is not the manufacture causing problems but the carrier.
I hope the manufactures start taking a cue from Apple and MS to say screw the carriers and start supply updates for their phones. No more blocking the updates from the carriers.
Apple is about the only company that can get away with the delay. Most others would be fried for it. iPhone is already starting to show its age and delaying it longer will only make it worse.
MacinDoc
Jul 23, 02:00 AM
i think the macbook should get the chips with 2 MB of shared L2 cache,
and the pro's get the chips with 4 MB of shared L2 cache
There will be then a difference between the two models (is having 4mb of shared L2 cache a lot better than 2mb? i have no idea but i presume it is)
or perhaps just let the blackbook have the 2.0ghz chip with 4mb of shared l2 cache to compensate for them charging for colour
...only if the Macbooks also get a price drop, because the Core Duo chips should get a price drop, if Intel even keeps making them.
What everyone keeps forgetting in this discussion, however, is that the Core2 Duo chips will be considerably more energy efficient, reducing heat production and prolonging battery life. Considering that they will be introduced at the same price as the current Core Duo chips, why not use them in the Macbook, at the 2 GHz speed?
Furthermore, transitioning all Macs to 64 bit chips as quickly as possible would also hasten the transition to a true 64 bit system, as developers would have more reason to develop for a 64 bit environment (assuming that OS X 10.5 is truly 64 bit).
and the pro's get the chips with 4 MB of shared L2 cache
There will be then a difference between the two models (is having 4mb of shared L2 cache a lot better than 2mb? i have no idea but i presume it is)
or perhaps just let the blackbook have the 2.0ghz chip with 4mb of shared l2 cache to compensate for them charging for colour
...only if the Macbooks also get a price drop, because the Core Duo chips should get a price drop, if Intel even keeps making them.
What everyone keeps forgetting in this discussion, however, is that the Core2 Duo chips will be considerably more energy efficient, reducing heat production and prolonging battery life. Considering that they will be introduced at the same price as the current Core Duo chips, why not use them in the Macbook, at the 2 GHz speed?
Furthermore, transitioning all Macs to 64 bit chips as quickly as possible would also hasten the transition to a true 64 bit system, as developers would have more reason to develop for a 64 bit environment (assuming that OS X 10.5 is truly 64 bit).
ucfgrad93
May 5, 11:31 AM
BTW, searching a room disarms traps, so we should get to a point where our last move is search instead of move, if I understand the rules.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Silentwave
Jul 29, 11:16 PM
Oh I hope for these to be false, I hate cell phones and I don't want to hate an apple product. But if they did make a phone it would require the following features.
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
As a photo geek I would have to disagree with you here. I don't believe myself that the lens quality for something so small would be good enough, and I especially don't believe that the sensors @ 5mp that small would be up to it. You'd have ridiculous amounts of noise in almost any photo, and optical aberrations would be easily picked up. Pixel density would be incredible. They have trouble getting good performance out of 6mp sensors that are several times as large as the one that would be here, and lenses on those same point and shoot digital cameras often will show massive amounts of chromatic aberrations particularly around strong light sources and highlight-shadow transitions even with lenses that are many many times larger.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
As a photo geek I would have to disagree with you here. I don't believe myself that the lens quality for something so small would be good enough, and I especially don't believe that the sensors @ 5mp that small would be up to it. You'd have ridiculous amounts of noise in almost any photo, and optical aberrations would be easily picked up. Pixel density would be incredible. They have trouble getting good performance out of 6mp sensors that are several times as large as the one that would be here, and lenses on those same point and shoot digital cameras often will show massive amounts of chromatic aberrations particularly around strong light sources and highlight-shadow transitions even with lenses that are many many times larger.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
chaosbringer
Apr 27, 02:44 AM
How does having the PSU on the bottom keep it cool?...
Hot air rises, so the heat generated by the PSU will just rise and fill up the case.
Unless I'm missing something or the laws of physics have changed in recent years?
the PSU is cooled down by air inside the case, if it's on top of the case, it will get mostly hot air, if it's on the bottom, only fresh air. Plus the heat generated by any Mac Pro PSU will go out the back.. Missed didn't you? :D
The G5 had a better PSU location, just not a better form size for it.
Hot air rises, so the heat generated by the PSU will just rise and fill up the case.
Unless I'm missing something or the laws of physics have changed in recent years?
the PSU is cooled down by air inside the case, if it's on top of the case, it will get mostly hot air, if it's on the bottom, only fresh air. Plus the heat generated by any Mac Pro PSU will go out the back.. Missed didn't you? :D
The G5 had a better PSU location, just not a better form size for it.
rhsgolfer33
Apr 20, 06:19 PM
Capital gains allows you to choose the timeline and the price to a point. If Capital Gains is special because of time-linked shifts in pricing, why isn't freelance income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
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.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
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.
Diode
Apr 20, 08:04 AM
Just give me LTE so I can switch to Verizon please :rolleyes:
Xenc
Mar 31, 02:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
They sold well over 1 million desktops/workstation units last quarter and will surpass that quite handily this quarter.
People who think they know Apple's long term strategy as iOS only know nothing of Apple.
Out of curiosity then, what is the long term strategy of Apple? Educate us.
To make money :p
Lion looks awesome, I don't know why there is so much whining about it.
They sold well over 1 million desktops/workstation units last quarter and will surpass that quite handily this quarter.
People who think they know Apple's long term strategy as iOS only know nothing of Apple.
Out of curiosity then, what is the long term strategy of Apple? Educate us.
To make money :p
Lion looks awesome, I don't know why there is so much whining about it.
err404
Apr 5, 03:49 PM
How many did iOS have FOR the iPad when it was announced? FIVE, and they were the five that APPLE created, but hey, live in your world.
Really? Your talking about apps ready at the announcement? let's talk launch day...
Apple had a phenomenal launch for the iPad. There were over 1000 apps available specifically for the iPad on launch day, with many 100's more appearing every week.
It was literally the strongest new product launch that I have ever experienced.
They managed the release of a new product where the quality and quantity of apps felt like the product had been around for years.
(sure, leveraging iOS helped, but Google failed at leveraging the same opportunity for their Honeycomb launch)
Really? Your talking about apps ready at the announcement? let's talk launch day...
Apple had a phenomenal launch for the iPad. There were over 1000 apps available specifically for the iPad on launch day, with many 100's more appearing every week.
It was literally the strongest new product launch that I have ever experienced.
They managed the release of a new product where the quality and quantity of apps felt like the product had been around for years.
(sure, leveraging iOS helped, but Google failed at leveraging the same opportunity for their Honeycomb launch)
Grakkle
Nov 26, 03:16 PM
i'm digging this idea! i love macs, home cinema and home automation! the one thing is i feel that the screen should be at least macbook size, although the 8" from previous rumours may be a tad small, although i think i'm already sold...
Yes, if the screen was some tiny affair it wouldn't be nearly as useful. I say at least 10" or so minimum.
Yes, if the screen was some tiny affair it wouldn't be nearly as useful. I say at least 10" or so minimum.
LegendKillerUK
Mar 26, 11:19 PM
I think that Apple will introduce IOS 5 in June/July, when it introduces the iPhone 5 (assuming that's what they call it). If there is some aspect of ios 5 that they can't get ready until Fall, they may have an ios 5.3 update in the Fall.
This is the most sensible conclusion. Game Center wasn't ready for the prime time upon release of the offical 4.0, so it came with 4.1. This is a clever move for Apple as it gives the feeling of extra value added to those who could update as not everyone with these devices even knew it existed until it landed on their device. We of course knew better so it wasn't a shock to us, but the bottom line is we all benefit from it.
This is the most sensible conclusion. Game Center wasn't ready for the prime time upon release of the offical 4.0, so it came with 4.1. This is a clever move for Apple as it gives the feeling of extra value added to those who could update as not everyone with these devices even knew it existed until it landed on their device. We of course knew better so it wasn't a shock to us, but the bottom line is we all benefit from it.