portishead
Mar 23, 04:46 PM
All DUI Checkpoints should be announced anyway beforehand. Apple will just throw these letters away.
karthi
Sep 19, 04:20 PM
It seems to me, apple is matching video quality of the downloads exactly to what the iPod can handle...
This seems logical now, so can we expect better movies after ture video iPods.
This seems logical now, so can we expect better movies after ture video iPods.
p0intblank
Sep 14, 09:46 AM
YES!!! We just had an Apple event and we're having another one?! I love looking forward to these. Obviously Aperture 2.0 is going to be showed off, but what else? I'm hoping for new Cinema Displays, but that's kind of doubtful. Probably updated MacBook Pros will be announced. :)
relimw
Sep 14, 10:21 AM
Yup. I agree. And I bet the new MBPs will ship immediately as well. What would be really cool is if Apple lowered the price of Aperture to $199 or so to make it more affordable to the photo piddlers among us. After all, surely Aperture 2 is going to have massive hardware and GPU requirements (read: QuadCore Mac + 4GB RAM + X1900 video card). That is really where Apple makes it's cash. Just dreaming, of course, because I can't justify a $300 software package when I'm just a dabbler. Lightroom beta has been fun though.
No MBPs.
Obviously, you didn't buy Aperture when it first came out, only to find out you were beta testing software for Apple. Now, if I can just figure out what to buy with my $200 store rebate. Maybe update from PS7 to CS2...hmm.
No MBPs.
Obviously, you didn't buy Aperture when it first came out, only to find out you were beta testing software for Apple. Now, if I can just figure out what to buy with my $200 store rebate. Maybe update from PS7 to CS2...hmm.
sushi
Aug 23, 10:28 PM
Apple makes money off of iTunes - they won't tell us how much, but it is a money maker (all be it insignificant compared to the iPod)
I think that you mean Apple makes money off of iTMS (iTunes Music Store). And yes, it would be interesting to know how much they really make.
I think that you mean Apple makes money off of iTMS (iTunes Music Store). And yes, it would be interesting to know how much they really make.
iMacZealot
Sep 14, 08:30 AM
Hey, across the pond, Nokia's putting in 3.2 MP's in some models with a Carl Zeiss.
But I doubt we'd be seeing an iPhone here.
Wait a minute! It the event is Sept. 24 here, wouldn't it be Sept. 25 in London? Is it a relay there?
But I doubt we'd be seeing an iPhone here.
Wait a minute! It the event is Sept. 24 here, wouldn't it be Sept. 25 in London? Is it a relay there?
MasterTick
Apr 4, 12:51 PM
Coming from a "Gun Person" (Own a HK .45 USP Tactical w/ GEMTECH Suppressor)
...All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being. I only hope that the guard did not instigate the shooting.
If you read the article you would see it was justified.
...All this "well they had it coming" BS is totally misplaced, the man who died was a human being. I only hope that the guard did not instigate the shooting.
If you read the article you would see it was justified.
ghostlyorb
Apr 29, 07:29 AM
Go apple!
bluedevil14
Oct 12, 07:51 PM
i cant possibly phantom why ANYBODY would possible rate this negative. Its a new iPod (in my favorite color) thats the same price and has the same specs as the original, and money goes towards AIDS. :) If you dont like the color dont get it. If you think more money should go toward AIDS then ten dollars, the do something about it and donate money out of your own pocket.
That is all.
That is all.
direzz
Oct 12, 04:27 PM
I hope somehow apple creates forum software with spotlight search so as soon as I start typing something it searches through 500 pages of posts and on the right side of the screen will show similar comments, who posted it, and on what pages similar comments are/where posted.
:rolleyes: buddy, this forum was designed on a pc.
:rolleyes: buddy, this forum was designed on a pc.
Lone Deranger
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
They are bothered because they want to be able to describe their app store. They want to be able to say:
"We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can by apps. Think of it as a grocery store for apps. You know, an app store."
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
"We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can by apps. Think of it as a grocery store for apps. You know, an app store."
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 01:53 AM
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 06:11 PM
136 negatives to this story ... nice. :rolleyes:
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
should we ban email? I get mass emails on occasion from people at work notifying me of check points. Where does the censorship end "to save a life"?
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
should we ban email? I get mass emails on occasion from people at work notifying me of check points. Where does the censorship end "to save a life"?
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 10, 12:48 PM
Some applications just can't be multithreaded and writing reliable multi threaded applications is damned hard still.
Back in the early 90s I was using ICL DAPs which had a grid of 1024 CPUs. You could fly through a Mandlebrot set in realtime or analyse weather patterns quicker than anything else at the time short of a couple of Crays. A Mac SE/30 however was quicker at handling files and we used to use that to handle the normal stuff.
1024 CPUs??? WOW... and I thought I had nasty simulations. :o
Still, dont you think that it is a terrible waste of computing power if the app doesnt take advantage of multiple processors, eventhough it might be very hard to write such an app? This is really not my field and I know far too little to have an opinion, so take it for what it is worth.
Back in the early 90s I was using ICL DAPs which had a grid of 1024 CPUs. You could fly through a Mandlebrot set in realtime or analyse weather patterns quicker than anything else at the time short of a couple of Crays. A Mac SE/30 however was quicker at handling files and we used to use that to handle the normal stuff.
1024 CPUs??? WOW... and I thought I had nasty simulations. :o
Still, dont you think that it is a terrible waste of computing power if the app doesnt take advantage of multiple processors, eventhough it might be very hard to write such an app? This is really not my field and I know far too little to have an opinion, so take it for what it is worth.
~Shard~
Aug 29, 12:04 AM
i don't know, but i am not sure about this Intel thing yet!:mad:
Care to elaborate on why?
Care to elaborate on why?
OllyW
Mar 29, 12:57 PM
by 2015, wp7 doesn't exist.
You're probably right, wp8 is scheduled for late 2012. :D
You're probably right, wp8 is scheduled for late 2012. :D
JGowan
Sep 19, 08:20 PM
this moel apple is using is fine, but 2 things need to happen, 1, much teh same as netflix, they should send you a blank dvd with case for each order, and secondly, like the music, all cover art should be given as well. it should be burnable, I would pay 9.99 for movie with the convinience of download, for this proce, even with the less quality if I could burn my own dvd, put it in any dvd player and watch it. but I want all teh artwork as well, so i can FEEL my dvd library growing,
andreasIt's a simple equation, really,...
Netflix account + $5.99 Used DVDs = comes with Plastic Box, Free Shipping and Original Artwork!
andreasIt's a simple equation, really,...
Netflix account + $5.99 Used DVDs = comes with Plastic Box, Free Shipping and Original Artwork!
Manic Mouse
Sep 10, 05:47 AM
The iMac is huge (relatively speaking), are you telling me such a huge enclosure won't be able to dissipitate an extra 30W or so? It is only around 30W more!
Like it or not Apple will have to somehow fit the Kentsfield into their lineup, cos their advertising campaigns are going to look very lame when Dell simply cops their "switch" campaign style and come out with a "PC" with 4 heads and a "Mac" with only 2.
When Kentfield replaces Conroes and every $999 Dell ships with quad core, it is quite hard to justify buying a dual (in Apple's case, a $2000+ quad)
I completely agree with you: Apple need to get Kentsfield/Conroe into their lineup somewhere. They are the best bang/buck chips Intel are making so it seems insane that they aren't already using Conroe.
As for thermal constraints... Well, I was a big proponent of the iMac getting Conroe and am still quite shocked they went with Merom. There was a lot of discussion before the new iMacs were released as to whether the case could handle Conroe. I think it could, and I still do. But with Kentsfield you are literally sticking TWO Conroes in there when there is some doubt as to whether it can handle one. The 24" iMac could maybe handle it, but I'm doubtful the smaller sizes could. They currently use 32W Meroms, with Kentsfield we would be talking 100W+. Maybe even as high as 130W since Conroe is 65W and Kentsfield is two Conroe dies in one package.
I personally think that a mid-tower is the only option for Apple to incorperate Conroe/Kentsfield into their lineup. Kentsfield is certainly too hot and takes too much power to go into any of their existing consumer models. It wouldn't go in the Pro since they use the Xeon chipset and will be using Clovertown.
As you say, once PC manufacturers get their hands on Kentfield the consumer Macs are going to look very anaemic.
Like it or not Apple will have to somehow fit the Kentsfield into their lineup, cos their advertising campaigns are going to look very lame when Dell simply cops their "switch" campaign style and come out with a "PC" with 4 heads and a "Mac" with only 2.
When Kentfield replaces Conroes and every $999 Dell ships with quad core, it is quite hard to justify buying a dual (in Apple's case, a $2000+ quad)
I completely agree with you: Apple need to get Kentsfield/Conroe into their lineup somewhere. They are the best bang/buck chips Intel are making so it seems insane that they aren't already using Conroe.
As for thermal constraints... Well, I was a big proponent of the iMac getting Conroe and am still quite shocked they went with Merom. There was a lot of discussion before the new iMacs were released as to whether the case could handle Conroe. I think it could, and I still do. But with Kentsfield you are literally sticking TWO Conroes in there when there is some doubt as to whether it can handle one. The 24" iMac could maybe handle it, but I'm doubtful the smaller sizes could. They currently use 32W Meroms, with Kentsfield we would be talking 100W+. Maybe even as high as 130W since Conroe is 65W and Kentsfield is two Conroe dies in one package.
I personally think that a mid-tower is the only option for Apple to incorperate Conroe/Kentsfield into their lineup. Kentsfield is certainly too hot and takes too much power to go into any of their existing consumer models. It wouldn't go in the Pro since they use the Xeon chipset and will be using Clovertown.
As you say, once PC manufacturers get their hands on Kentfield the consumer Macs are going to look very anaemic.
milo
Sep 11, 03:46 PM
Close, Manic Mouse. I dont understand people's belief that every Intel chip made has to go into an Apple machine. I doubt the Conroe will be used in any Mac nor the Kentsfield. The range is covered, and I'm sick of these silly rumors of Mac mid towers.
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
Conroe is intels best bang for the buck. It would be stupid for apple not to use it, and go with chips that are slower and more expensive instead. But apple still does some things that are stupid.
I still think we'll see a mid tower, or at least some mac with conroe. Tommorow? Probably not, but who knows?
There wont be a mid tower, not now, not "Next Tuesday".
Conroe is intels best bang for the buck. It would be stupid for apple not to use it, and go with chips that are slower and more expensive instead. But apple still does some things that are stupid.
I still think we'll see a mid tower, or at least some mac with conroe. Tommorow? Probably not, but who knows?
GFLPraxis
Jul 20, 12:29 PM
Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.
Bernard SG
Apr 29, 02:11 AM
Apple has done extremely well with mobile devices, but I don't know what Microsoft has to do with that. As far as I know, Windows still has about 90% of the market, and Apple still has a very small share. It looks to me like Apple isn't a huge player in the pc market, but they are the dominant one in the mobile market. Let's not forget that 50% of that $5.99 billion profit came from the iPhone and iPad.
- Windows Mobile was among the first platforms for smartphones and failed miserably.
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
- Windows Mobile was among the first platforms for smartphones and failed miserably.
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
baleensavage
Apr 20, 11:29 AM
I'm personally of the opinion that anyone that thinks they have any privacy in this digital age is lying to themselves. There is no privacy, every single time you do anything on the internet or cell phone, some device somewhere is keeping a log of it. This is just one more way. But like other people mentioned, unless you're a criminal or the victim of a highly sophisticated stalker, then no one really cares about your private data.
With that said, if Apple is in fact storing location data when you specifically turn location services off on your iPhone, then this is a big problem that needs to be remedied. Their TOS specifically states that they are not collecting this data when you turn location services off and that is a flat out lie.
With that said, if Apple is in fact storing location data when you specifically turn location services off on your iPhone, then this is a big problem that needs to be remedied. Their TOS specifically states that they are not collecting this data when you turn location services off and that is a flat out lie.
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:12 PM
Can sombody explain the following:
"old" 5G 30 GB: music playback 14 h, video playback 2 h.
"new" 5G 30 GB: music playback STILL 14 h, video playback ALMOST DOUBLED at 3.5 h.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
why are you confused??? video play got extended, what do you expect more than that??
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
"old" 5G 30 GB: music playback 14 h, video playback 2 h.
"new" 5G 30 GB: music playback STILL 14 h, video playback ALMOST DOUBLED at 3.5 h.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
why are you confused??? video play got extended, what do you expect more than that??
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
shanmugam
Apr 30, 01:58 PM
I've been waiting to buy my first Mac desktop for some time now... and an i7 SB iMac should last me through college :D
desktop is good for power, it will lose its resale value. if you are not moving around much or no plan upgrading for 3 years then it is good
otherwise MacBook/Pro + Monitor is win!
desktop is good for power, it will lose its resale value. if you are not moving around much or no plan upgrading for 3 years then it is good
otherwise MacBook/Pro + Monitor is win!