11thIndian
Apr 9, 10:07 PM
Uh, except I said "lots of professionals" and then you claimed I meant "professionals that I know" and then you acknowledged that it's not just professionals that I know.
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
Yes, I agreed there are professionals, but not LOTS of professionals. You don't know, cause... you don't know them, and neither do I. So these "lots" outside of your field of view may or may not be looking to switch. You see the difference, yes?
Lollypop
Jul 28, 04:07 AM
I would really like to se a mid range mac, not really fond of the illustrations above but the extra expansion of the pro line would be apreciated but at a more affordable price. I use a few older powermacs for servers but I really would like something with a bit more processing power... :D and something with a bit more longevity, something like a nice new Core 2 Duo Extreme! LOL
nwcs
Apr 10, 07:40 AM
Oh boo hoo about the companies being "booted" from sponsorships. The company I work for goes to trade shows. The time invested is actually quite small and most of the materials are in inventory anyway. The presentations are usually based on the same script. I bet the companies aren't that disappointed. In fact they would like to be there and see what Apple is up to more than anyone else. So I bet they'll send the same presenter staff there to view and record anything of note to send back to their company.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
Businesses deal with things by contract and those contracts have terms and conditions. No company would just break a contract so I'm sure everything wad handled quite smoothly behind the scenes. So I think this idea that Apple bullied or pushed people is silly.
nostrum
Aug 8, 04:38 AM
Pretty underwhelmed by Leopard to be honest. Time Machine looks like the best new feature, but i doubt that I'll even use it that much. But does it really matter? OS X is the best OS out there, its still a significantly better than anything MS can produce. Its stable, doesn't crash, freeze, lock up. Its secure. It does everything you want without the hassle you get from XP. In truth it doesn't even need to be updated. It works and thats the most important thing to me as a user.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
I'm happy with Tiger and unless there's something significant that will be in Leopard, i doubt that I'll upgrade unless I get a new Intel Mac.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 09:53 AM
And I'm sure when the next Apple-gate story gets created, the blind fanbois will jump to their defense. :rolleyes:
And once again the Apple fans will turn out to have been correct.
And once again the Apple fans will turn out to have been correct.
4God
Jul 14, 11:07 PM
8 cores?! Wow, maybe one day!
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
8 cores, yeah you can get that in a jumbled amd setup today.
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:22 AM
hey bokdol, you and i can start a business and help all the intel mac pro users dispose of their old G5 power macs
we can go into business :)
i'm in
we can start today
we can go into business :)
i'm in
we can start today
fullmanfullninj
Apr 8, 02:33 AM
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
Hm, I see what you're saying. I will have to double check for iPad sales. As far as I know, however, they do not contribute toward meeting daily budgets.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
Hm, I see what you're saying. I will have to double check for iPad sales. As far as I know, however, they do not contribute toward meeting daily budgets.
Barabas
Jul 20, 09:21 AM
Why don't they just call it: Big Mac.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
b166er
Apr 7, 10:34 PM
me too! I wanna learn!
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
How does withholding stock from the public aid a company? I can imagine holding them till everything is registered in their system and accounted for. But turning people away when they actually do have stock doesn't sound like a good business practice to me
When you are as HUGE as best buy, and you are selling a product as huge as the iPad, it makes sense to create a demand. People do this all the time. You can't get it now, so the second it becomes available to you, you buy it in fear that you might have to wait another month. This happens all the time with a lot of products.
mac1984user
Apr 27, 08:33 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist. Still, they all managed to get it a bit wrong, though. I noticed (like so many others out there), that the map wasn't recording my EXACT location, but just cell towers and wifi spots I may have accessed. The info didn't really bother me. It wasn't like it had me pegged at my local pub - or did it?!?! =)
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
MattSepeta
Mar 23, 11:20 AM
I certainly realize that the circumstances are different, but the fact remains, we launched missiles at another country.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Adpa5kYUhCA
whatever
Sep 13, 12:41 PM
All the people that just coughed up $3k for a quad core MacPro.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
I'm one of those people who dropped $4K for a quad core MacPro and basically I'm happy that I did. It blows away everything else that is out there today and will be the top performing Mac until 2007. Apple will not be releasing an upgrade to the Mac Pro this year. No matter what anyone says.
Why you might ask, well they don't need to!
But what if the competition releases these super fast machines, won't Apple be left behind. No! What OS will these machines be running, Windows XP. One of the things that seperates Apple from everyone else is their OS. They have an OS which takes full advantage (important word is full) of the hardware. It's the big advantage that they have over Dell and HP, they create the software that runs on the computer.
So if I want to run Final Cut Pro as fast as possible on an optiomized machine, then I'll have to run it on a Mac. Alright, that's a bad example, but in a way it's not, because a lot of the people buying Mac Pros also live in Apple's Pro apps.
The next new computer we'll see from Apple anytime soon will be the MacBook Pro which will be redesigned (featuring the MacBook's keyboard), upgrades to the MacBook won't happen until January (however Apple may try to get them out in December).
Apple's goal is to have everything 64-Bit before Leopard is uncaged.
SevenInchScrew
Aug 12, 11:00 PM
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 originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
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.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
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
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
You originally said...
so either way, there's only 4 versions of the game out. at over 57 million copies sold, i'd say they sold a fair few.
...which as I've said, a few times now, is incorrect. If you only count 4 games, as you originally said in that quote, that only totals 46M. And besides, if you check that link I originally provided, which is FROM POLYPHONY THEMSELVES, you would see that the total worldwide is only 56M. At least if you're going to quote the number in the wrong context, use the right number.
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.
Yay, let's play the "Twist The Numbers To Fit Our Needs" game....
100M / 15 years = 6.66M per year (Need for Speed)
56M / 13 years = 4.31M per year (Gran Turismo)
So yea, Need for Speed sells 50% more per year. YAY, math is fun!!!
well again this is your opinion...
It is. I don't like the direction Polyphony has taken the game. A game that used to be my favorite game. It disappoints me. Thus my frustration. I bought my PS3 with the hopes
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
Can I buy one and drive it to work? No? Then it isn't real, intentions or not.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great?
Then according to you, Wii Play is the "greatest" video game of all time. Just reading that sentence should show you exactly why sales have very little to do with the quality of a game.
I keep saying this, but it seems people don't really understand it. Sales, which deal with numbers, are an objective measure of something. Greatness, which deals with personal preferences, is a subjective measure. You can think GT, or the iPhone, or Star Wars, or whatever, is great. That is fine, and a personal opinion. But, the sales of those things can't be "great". They can be large, and they are, but they can't be great.
And really, if someone uses the sales of something to qualify the greatness of it to themselves, that is kind of sad. Quite a few of my favorite things, which I consider great, didn't sell very well. That doesn't make them any less great to me.
But anyway, I don't even know why I'm arguing about this. I'm not even going to be buying this game. I'm done with this thread now. I'll just tip my hat, and bid you adieu.
FreeState
Feb 28, 08:23 PM
They still can not have valid sacramental marriage
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Here let me fix that for you:
They Gays and lesbians still can not have a valid sacramental Catholic marriage.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage Catholicism view of fornication and marriage.
---
There are Christian Churches that perform marriage for any loving couple, regardless of orientation. The Catholic Church does not dictate doctrine for all Christians.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage
Here let me fix that for you:
They Gays and lesbians still can not have a valid sacramental Catholic marriage.
Fornication doesn't matter if the person doesn't care about the religious connotations of marriage Catholicism view of fornication and marriage.
---
There are Christian Churches that perform marriage for any loving couple, regardless of orientation. The Catholic Church does not dictate doctrine for all Christians.
Westside guy
Mar 22, 01:05 PM
Ugh. When and if I buy a tablet, I don't intend to limit my consideration to just the iPad - but displaying pre-release hardware that doesn't even function yet is just silly. That's a Microsoft-ish move - it may excite the tech press, but customers aren't going to care unless they can see the darn thing run!
I must admit I'm a bit put off by what appears to be a consistent unwillingness by hardware manufacturers to provide software upgrades for their existing Android devices.
I must admit I'm a bit put off by what appears to be a consistent unwillingness by hardware manufacturers to provide software upgrades for their existing Android devices.
maproduction
Apr 5, 05:25 PM
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
Yeap, cause everything ends up on BluRay, no wait, it doesn't.
FCP is for editing, Motion is for graphics, Soundtrack Pro is for audio, Compressor is for encoding (even for BluRay) and Color is for grading.
If you need to author BluRay you use another tool.
Also there will be no training of the new software at NAB, why because NAB is almost over by Tuesday night. Most of the training will already have happened. And there is always a lot of training going on, there are classes to get certified, and certified instructors do not get advanced copies of the software.
Also I don't see Apple hijacking the SuperMeet, those guys would not screw all their long time sponsors for a one time apple thing. This event is huge, they have everything. Now there might be some re-shifting but as I said Tuesday is a long time to hold something through NAB. Apple used to have there own major event on Sunday mornings to unveil the newest FCP.
Yeap, cause everything ends up on BluRay, no wait, it doesn't.
FCP is for editing, Motion is for graphics, Soundtrack Pro is for audio, Compressor is for encoding (even for BluRay) and Color is for grading.
If you need to author BluRay you use another tool.
Also there will be no training of the new software at NAB, why because NAB is almost over by Tuesday night. Most of the training will already have happened. And there is always a lot of training going on, there are classes to get certified, and certified instructors do not get advanced copies of the software.
Also I don't see Apple hijacking the SuperMeet, those guys would not screw all their long time sponsors for a one time apple thing. This event is huge, they have everything. Now there might be some re-shifting but as I said Tuesday is a long time to hold something through NAB. Apple used to have there own major event on Sunday mornings to unveil the newest FCP.
Krevnik
Apr 27, 09:19 AM
Are you somehow trying to imply that because the credit card company knows so much about you that it is OK to keep that information unencrypted on your phone and backup on your computer?
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Apple provides the option of encrypting your backups. I suggest that anyone concerned about the safety of their personal information use this feature.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
All people are asking for is that personal information is kept encrypted and secured. No more. No less.
Apple provides the option of encrypting your backups. I suggest that anyone concerned about the safety of their personal information use this feature.
Can you trust anyone to completely cover their bases correctly on this issue? Their "meh" data might be your "personal" data. The only way to be certain that the backups are encrypted is to encrypt the whole backup. Doesn't lengthen the time it takes much either, and you get to set the password to use/access the backup.
Yes, Apple made a bone-head move here. But there's a lot more personal information floating in the backups. SMS message history, 3rd party app data, etc. Not all of it is encrypted, and some of it you probably want encrypted.
andiwm2003
Apr 25, 02:50 PM
But that's different from APPLE "EXPLOITING" you, isn't it? Perhaps a dictionary reference will help you "understand it"?
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
Verb 1. exploit - use or manipulate to one's advantage;
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/exploit
So, pray tell, what's Apple's advantage over you here?
Where did I say Apple is exploiting me?:confused:
Apple did a shoddy programming job by not encrypting the data. Thaty is why Apple is under pressure by the various govenments and rightfully so. Nobody says Apple is using this data in a malicious way. (aside of this lawsuit but that is only here in the USA and stupid and greed driven by lawyers and totally besides the real issue)
starflyer
Apr 6, 01:41 PM
Oh yeah, well just wait until people find out iOS is a closed system and the Xoom uses Android which is open....
oh nevermind :D
oh nevermind :D
HiRez
Sep 18, 11:57 PM
The aluminum design has been been pretty good (although I personally like the Titanium design better, with the dark keys that don't get glared when light is shining on them). But, the Mac pro laptop line is in dire need on a system refresh. The design is getting a little stale.
Here's what I'd like to see:
-- How about some new textures for the case, such as brushed copper? I think that would look sharp. Or tinted aluminum, including brushed black metal. The brushings could even have subtle anisotropic patterns visible when tilted into and away from light sources, like circular rings, houndstooth, herringbone, starburst, etc. Imagine a blue-greenish "surfer" MBP with a "wave" pattern brushed into it, or a Boston Celtics green or two-toned wood-colored model with a brushed parquet pattern. This would be some real cutting-edge design that no other laptop vendor could easily copy.
-- 256 MB graphics, Radeon X1800 Mobility or better
-- HDMI output
-- SDI input and dual SDI video output (fill + key). Yes, input. This would be fantastic for mobile video professionals.
-- 1920x1200 resolution on the 17" model (this will become important with the resolution-independent UI in Leopard)
-- 1680x1050 resolution on the 15" model
-- 12"-13" model with 1440x900 resolution and backlit keyboard
-- Dual Firewire ports on separate controllers, with no shared bandwidth. One 400 Mbps, one 400/800?
-- Three USB2 ports on separate controllers.
Here's what I'd like to see:
-- How about some new textures for the case, such as brushed copper? I think that would look sharp. Or tinted aluminum, including brushed black metal. The brushings could even have subtle anisotropic patterns visible when tilted into and away from light sources, like circular rings, houndstooth, herringbone, starburst, etc. Imagine a blue-greenish "surfer" MBP with a "wave" pattern brushed into it, or a Boston Celtics green or two-toned wood-colored model with a brushed parquet pattern. This would be some real cutting-edge design that no other laptop vendor could easily copy.
-- 256 MB graphics, Radeon X1800 Mobility or better
-- HDMI output
-- SDI input and dual SDI video output (fill + key). Yes, input. This would be fantastic for mobile video professionals.
-- 1920x1200 resolution on the 17" model (this will become important with the resolution-independent UI in Leopard)
-- 1680x1050 resolution on the 15" model
-- 12"-13" model with 1440x900 resolution and backlit keyboard
-- Dual Firewire ports on separate controllers, with no shared bandwidth. One 400 Mbps, one 400/800?
-- Three USB2 ports on separate controllers.
manu chao
Apr 27, 08:56 AM
No they won't. They're not going to delete the DB - they're only storing a week. Did you read the story?
And assume you go to a place you have been a month ago, wouldn't having the database speed things up when you return to that location a month later?
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
And assume you go to a place you have been a month ago, wouldn't having the database speed things up when you return to that location a month later?
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
No comments:
Post a Comment