Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 03:23 PM
YEP...over 100,000 people bought a Xoom...and clearly half of them will be on this forum telling everybody how much better it is than the iPad...;)
Isn't it 100,000 sold into the distribution channels?
How many are really being bought?
Now that would be a fair comparison.
Isn't it 100,000 sold into the distribution channels?
How many are really being bought?
Now that would be a fair comparison.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 24, 01:07 PM
Oh. So when a person criticizes Obama for keeping us in Afghanistan, Iraq, and/or Libya, just level an accusation of racism.
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
Got it.
The vast majority of conservatives are WASP-ish, and almost all of the people who question Obama's religion/nationality are self-described conservatives. Furthermore, conservatives as a group refuse to admit that this is the case. Got that?
NATO
Nov 28, 06:58 PM
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
So they say.... :rolleyes:
So they say.... :rolleyes:
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 05:37 AM
For a desktop machine those iMac specs are utterly pathetic. A X1600 in 2007? Heck, it was a mediocre card 6 months ago, let alone in 6 months time. A crappy 2Mb cache C2D and both slow as hell compared to what every other desktop manufacturer will be offering?
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
Crappy 2MB? LOL! So that automatically makes the current iMacs crap. And an X1650 Pro is a brand new card? 600 MHz core/ 700 MHz memory clocks (Apple will probably underclock it though :p) and 12 pixel pipes and great bang-for-buck makes the X1650 Pro the card of choice.
The iMac is a desktop computer and Apple's only desktop computer. It should offer desktop performance, end of. What use is a crippled desktop, with all the problems of a mobile form factor but none of the advantages, to anyone? You might as well buy a Macbook.
You mean only all-in-one. And how is it crippled? You want the GMA 950 from a MacBook? :p
What would be competitive:
MB: 1.83 and 2.0Ghz Merom, Integrated graphics
MBP: 2-2.33Ghz Merom, X1800
iMac 2.4-2.66Ghz Conroe, X1800 and LCD res upgrade
Mac Mini: 1.83Ghz Allendale (going to be much cheaper than Merom, so if they can they will put one in) Integrated graphics
Mac Pro: Dual 2.0-3.0Ghz Xeons
MB: What I said
MBP: What I said
iMac: You'll be pushing up prices as well as getting into Mac Pro's territory. A low-end X1800 is a possibilty but considering Apple's track record for graphics cards, unlikely.
Mac Mini: If you like liquid Mac Minis then sure :) I have even suggested that an Allendale Core 2 Duo along with a 3.5" HD should be put in the Mini but it would require a case redesign.
Mac Pro: It's already like that.
P.S. And you obviously didn't read what I said about cost of going from a 1.83 GHz Yonah to a 2.4 Ghz Conroe.
merk850
Jul 28, 07:41 PM
Well we all know how Apple works with when things are due.
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
Multimedia, Snowy and Grokgod,
Thanks for the continued thoughts. A store manager said she would be flexible with the 14 day return date, as lnog as I understand that I would pay the restock fee of 10%. What that means to me is I will hold on to this machine until the WWDC and if new model is announced I will return and repurchase, eating the restock fee.( Kind of a pay for usage plan I look at it as.) If no new enhancements are announced with the iMac i guess I will keep mine.
However, there is the thought as one of you have brought up to just reetuen and wait until Sept. when it may be more likely to arrive. A slippery slop0e I know but I am leaning mroe toward a return and repurchase, as a sort of insruance policy of sorts.
I know I can't have my cake and eat it...., but I was looking for insight into how likely an improvement in the iMac is this August.
Thanks again!
Merk850
Look at the G5 laptop.
Tweak or no tweak, the return will cost money and getting a refurbished is not getting a new one.
CounterPoint: If he is just going to take it back to buy a refurbished one, why take it back.
He allready has it! Thats a roundabout way to work, isnt it?
If you take it back, you wait for the new one, why spend the money for restocking and not get the new one?
The question remains, what are you going to get with a new iMac that you dont have now?
If you were going to get a MacPro, then I would say, my god, return that iMac and get a new MacPro, if not then keep what you got and use it for the next 2 months and enjoy it,, cheers!
Multimedia, Snowy and Grokgod,
Thanks for the continued thoughts. A store manager said she would be flexible with the 14 day return date, as lnog as I understand that I would pay the restock fee of 10%. What that means to me is I will hold on to this machine until the WWDC and if new model is announced I will return and repurchase, eating the restock fee.( Kind of a pay for usage plan I look at it as.) If no new enhancements are announced with the iMac i guess I will keep mine.
However, there is the thought as one of you have brought up to just reetuen and wait until Sept. when it may be more likely to arrive. A slippery slop0e I know but I am leaning mroe toward a return and repurchase, as a sort of insruance policy of sorts.
I know I can't have my cake and eat it...., but I was looking for insight into how likely an improvement in the iMac is this August.
Thanks again!
Merk850
centauratlas
Apr 6, 02:19 PM
I read it somewhere, where was it, oh yeah, HERE ( http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/apples-suppliers-ship-roughly-2-5-million-ipad-2s-in-march/) that Apple sold around 2.5 million iPad 2s in March (plus a lot of older iPad 1 stock). And that was about 3 weeks from launch day.
And they expect around 12 million per quarter according to the article here earlier today. Talk about a huge difference....nearly 110,000 iPad 2s per day! Plus a lot of original iPads.
And they expect around 12 million per quarter according to the article here earlier today. Talk about a huge difference....nearly 110,000 iPad 2s per day! Plus a lot of original iPads.
Macaroony
Mar 3, 03:40 AM
Bill, I would love to hear your explanation for the position of the male prostate.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
A quick side note: Sexual tension is most often the cause for anger, jealousy and frustration. So, if everyone had at least one good orgasm every day, the world would be a much more relaxed and peaceful place and we wouldn't have the need for silly discussions such as these.
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:35 PM
Recall that Tiger features saw significant UI overhauls (Dashboard, Spotlight, Automator) from the original Tiger demos at WWDC until it's reshowing at Macworld. Apple has no reason to rush this out after WWDC.
You can bank on 07. First Half. No sooner than April.
You're right that there is "no reason to rush" except it would be awfully fun to beat Vista to market AGAIN.
David :cool:
You can bank on 07. First Half. No sooner than April.
You're right that there is "no reason to rush" except it would be awfully fun to beat Vista to market AGAIN.
David :cool:
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 03:48 PM
I standby my assumption that the amount of internet usage is probably a good gauge of cell phone usage.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
I am sure you are...
Care to dispute, then provide your own "facts".
My assumption (http://www.gsmworld.com/index.shtml). I was wrong. It is not 81%, it is 82%. Sorry, I will check my sources better next time.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 8, 06:17 AM
The problem is not the number of retail-locations selling iPads, the problem is number of iPads in those stores. Now that BB is out of the picture, other retailers can receive more units. Now Apple can stop supplying BB-stores, and use those units to supply some other stores instead. You know, stores that actually sell the product to a customer?
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
My point is that Apple sells BB more products than the iPad. If it gets pissy about how the iPad is sold and holds units back then it's going to strain the relationship and right now Apple needs BBs floor space to show off its other products b/c there are lots of gaps in Apple Store locations.
As I said this story is fantasy and B.S.
ciTiger
Mar 25, 10:35 PM
What? this seems hard to believe... Already done on development? :confused:
Luph67
Mar 31, 11:02 PM
I'd take an iPhone over an android any day, but let's get real--the apple community is having a field day with this because of how much the competition has stressed "open" over "closed" in the past. Really the whole argument is so bogged down in brand loyalty that it's not even worth having anymore.
Frobozz
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
The best way to achieve a user friendly platform is to control it. Period. And since we know Google can't possibly be naive enough to think Android would really be "open," one can conclude this was planned. If you gain enough steam, you can start getting hardware vendors reliant on your platform. At which point, you tighten the strings to create a consistent and satisfying user experience.
I have used Honeycomb. There are nice features to it, just as there are nice features to Android. But I felt like I had to "learn" Android. I have never felt that way with iOS. Although advanced features can be opaque, the navigation and interaction model are intuitive and simple. They are based on real world gestures and interactions. That makes the learning curve less severe. Android doesn't really do this. It attempts to shove desktop metaphors and all the mess that comes with it. User's don't want to interact with the file system. They don't want to have to have 3 or 4 ways to achieve the same tasks; case in point, application switching. And, just like windows, everything seems to be buried under a pile of menus.
Google hasn't figured out UI design yet. They don't know how to conceptualize an experience FIRST, and implement features later. They are talented developers, but they don't understand users yet. I have confidence they will get there over time, however.
I have used Honeycomb. There are nice features to it, just as there are nice features to Android. But I felt like I had to "learn" Android. I have never felt that way with iOS. Although advanced features can be opaque, the navigation and interaction model are intuitive and simple. They are based on real world gestures and interactions. That makes the learning curve less severe. Android doesn't really do this. It attempts to shove desktop metaphors and all the mess that comes with it. User's don't want to interact with the file system. They don't want to have to have 3 or 4 ways to achieve the same tasks; case in point, application switching. And, just like windows, everything seems to be buried under a pile of menus.
Google hasn't figured out UI design yet. They don't know how to conceptualize an experience FIRST, and implement features later. They are talented developers, but they don't understand users yet. I have confidence they will get there over time, however.
Shasterball
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
10" Tab, here I come!
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 11:16 PM
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
He's also the guy that headed up Adobe Premiere. Sure, the iMovie revamp wasn't a high point but the guy laid the foundations for two of the three most popular NLE's so he can't be all bad. ;)
Lethal
He's also the guy that headed up Adobe Premiere. Sure, the iMovie revamp wasn't a high point but the guy laid the foundations for two of the three most popular NLE's so he can't be all bad. ;)
Lethal
decimortis
Apr 6, 10:38 AM
I loves me my 11.6 ultimate and it hasn't let me down yet in the power department for my work with CS5, but of course, updated more faster, more shiny MBA's are always welcome. Can't say I'll upgrade but nice to see them progressing.
D.
D.
GFLPraxis
Aug 11, 10:39 AM
These iPhone rumours continue to persist. I admit to being a sceptic, but maybe I'm wrong! I just hope that if they do do it, they do it well.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
The Intel Mac rumors persisted too.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
andy721
Mar 25, 11:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7A341 Safari/528.16)
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If it is $129.00 he can shove this up his A$$, unless like you said my Mac Pro will run 2x faster.
If this is a standard $129 upgrade I don't see anything here worth that price sadly. That is unless somehow my 2009 mac pro will run 2x as fast but I am not keeping my fingers crossed.
If it is $129.00 he can shove this up his A$$, unless like you said my Mac Pro will run 2x faster.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
furi0usbee
Mar 26, 06:48 PM
Windows manages to run legacy apps still. Even if you do have to resort to using the virtual machine they've called 'XP Mode.'
Because Windows is bloatware. I don't want my Mac OS to be able to run **** 10 years old. This only hampers innovation by having to spend time making sure all the old stuff doesn't break. Move on my friend. I can probably use XP to print to a 15 year old dot matrix printer.
Because Windows is bloatware. I don't want my Mac OS to be able to run **** 10 years old. This only hampers innovation by having to spend time making sure all the old stuff doesn't break. Move on my friend. I can probably use XP to print to a 15 year old dot matrix printer.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 08:12 PM
HA HA. You have got to be kidding me.
LOL specially those who parade around using Microsoft fanboy as a buffer.
LOL specially those who parade around using Microsoft fanboy as a buffer.
Dunepilot
Aug 8, 04:03 AM
I'm glad that Leopard will be completely (that's what they say, at least) 64-bit. I'm not sure why it's important to go on about the applications as if they were important to the operating system itself. Increased integration like what was displayed would cause the anti-trust machine to whip into action, if it was Microsoft instead of Apple.
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
Yeah, my first thought was - oh yeah, that's just like Rewind. However, the poweronsoftware.com website now forwards to http://www.nowsoftware.com/, so maybe Rewind has been bought out by Apple to use as Time Machine. Anyone know any more about this?
Dune
Time Machine is not exactly revolutionary, considering that there were a few 3rd party products available--Rewind comes to mind--that journaled changes and allowed them to be restored. Still, it should stop the various threads "I accidentally deleted..." :)
Hopefully, the features not mentioned will include a better kernel that actually performs well. It would be nice to see operating system benchmarks that don't make me cringe when I look at the Mac OS X results.
Xcode version 3.0 looks good but they still haven't provided many details.
Yeah, my first thought was - oh yeah, that's just like Rewind. However, the poweronsoftware.com website now forwards to http://www.nowsoftware.com/, so maybe Rewind has been bought out by Apple to use as Time Machine. Anyone know any more about this?
Dune
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:02 AM
I might not expect IPS, doesn’t it draw more power than TN LCDs?
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
I don't think you'll see IPS screens in MacBook Pro's or Air in the future.
Apple is working on the mass market now and mass market don't care about quality of the screens specially on the portables.
If you need colors and better screen then Apple will sale you "****ing glossy amazing" 27" display. :)
No comments:
Post a Comment