rtharper
Sep 10, 11:08 PM
If they don't happen by then, that's when I will beging looking at yonah MBP's.
I won't buy a Yonah MBP. I would rather have a more future proof computer of a different brand. I use *nix for almost all of my work, I'll just try and buy an open source friendly machine and put windows on a partition just to run WoW and have the other run FreeBSD.
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
I won't buy a Yonah MBP. I would rather have a more future proof computer of a different brand. I use *nix for almost all of my work, I'll just try and buy an open source friendly machine and put windows on a partition just to run WoW and have the other run FreeBSD.
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
Eorlas
Apr 5, 02:49 PM
I'd bet that Steve Jobs has a jailbroken iPhone with biteSMS because he knows how awesome it is to be able to quick send/reply...
JBytes
Apr 25, 10:08 AM
I've been reading MacRumors for years - only added to the discussion a few times since 08. Not a troll, but still considered a "newbie". :D
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
reiggin
May 6, 12:21 AM
This is the most ridiculous thing to appear on the MacRumors front page in quite some time.
MacNut
May 3, 01:36 AM
I prefer my summer temperatures getting out of the 30's.:p
lucabrasi
Mar 30, 06:39 PM
Will this work on the 2011 mbp's?
The installer does not error out and seems to work... rebooting now
The installer does not error out and seems to work... rebooting now
balamw
Apr 9, 08:14 PM
As I stated above, you are missing an Important rule of pemdas. When you get to multiplication/division or addition/subtraction, you go left to right. So: 48/2 is 24. And 24 *12 is 288. If u don't believe me, just google pemdas and u get the rules:
http://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html
This.
It's basically PE(M/D)(A/S).
B
http://www.mathsisfun.com/operation-order-pemdas.html
This.
It's basically PE(M/D)(A/S).
B
Chupa Chupa
Aug 4, 12:45 PM
Apple never was a part of Mhz rat-race. Look at its bestselling Powerbook. How fast was it compared to the then PC laptops. Anyways, WWDC is suppose to be developers conference, so we should speculate more about Leopard and hopefuly MacPros (because they are long due) insted of iPods and MBPs.
Apple liked to downplay Mhz/Ghz because it knew there was no way the G3 and G4 PPCs could keep up with the P*. But when the G5 came along, what did Steve announce...that a 3Ghz chip would be ready in a year. Of course that never happened. The G5 never made it out of the high 2 GHz even three years after he made that statement. And THAT is the reason why we now have Intel Macs.
Moreover, now that PCs and Macs use the same chips Apple HAS to use the latest and greatest chips to keep up. It's not really a matter of playing the Ghz game. That game is over now that there is chip parity. But the first thing a company like Apple that basks in it's "cutting edge"/"trendy" glow must have is computers with the best chips.
Also, WWDC is about DEVELOPERS. Developers of software and hardware for all Apple products. So I think it's silly to limit speculation (especially since its all speculation) to only a few products. Theoretically every piece of Apple hardware is up for revision, not to mention possible new ones.
Apple liked to downplay Mhz/Ghz because it knew there was no way the G3 and G4 PPCs could keep up with the P*. But when the G5 came along, what did Steve announce...that a 3Ghz chip would be ready in a year. Of course that never happened. The G5 never made it out of the high 2 GHz even three years after he made that statement. And THAT is the reason why we now have Intel Macs.
Moreover, now that PCs and Macs use the same chips Apple HAS to use the latest and greatest chips to keep up. It's not really a matter of playing the Ghz game. That game is over now that there is chip parity. But the first thing a company like Apple that basks in it's "cutting edge"/"trendy" glow must have is computers with the best chips.
Also, WWDC is about DEVELOPERS. Developers of software and hardware for all Apple products. So I think it's silly to limit speculation (especially since its all speculation) to only a few products. Theoretically every piece of Apple hardware is up for revision, not to mention possible new ones.
asdf542
Mar 30, 10:53 PM
He's talking about parts of the UI that have been taken from iOS. This is the worst example so far: http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=278968&d=1301532493
It's clearly a "form over function" fail as the words are hard to read in the buttons. At least on the iPad, they had the decency to provide some contrast by making the letters white. It's horrible looking!
Then again, it's a developer preview. But I realllly hope stuff like that doesn't stick around. It's like the translucent menu bar introduced in 10.5 which everyone complained about that didn't get fixed until 10.5.2.
No, if he was talking about UI parts then he wouldn't have started to complain literally one line under about certain features in Lion.
It's clearly a "form over function" fail as the words are hard to read in the buttons. At least on the iPad, they had the decency to provide some contrast by making the letters white. It's horrible looking!
Then again, it's a developer preview. But I realllly hope stuff like that doesn't stick around. It's like the translucent menu bar introduced in 10.5 which everyone complained about that didn't get fixed until 10.5.2.
No, if he was talking about UI parts then he wouldn't have started to complain literally one line under about certain features in Lion.
valereee
Dec 25, 03:46 AM
If mac users don't use av software, there's little motivation for anyone to supply it. If NO ONE is working on av software, then in the eventuality that we do need it, we're all starting from scratch. That's just never a good place to be if you can with minimal effort prevent it.
It's kind of like getting your flu shot in a year when the flu isn't supposed to be particularly bad. I seldom get the flu, but I go ahead and get the shot every year anyway because if no one does, there's little motivation for pharma companies to develop future flu shots. Which means in the really bad flu years, there's a shortage because only one company is making the shot.
It's kind of like getting your flu shot in a year when the flu isn't supposed to be particularly bad. I seldom get the flu, but I go ahead and get the shot every year anyway because if no one does, there's little motivation for pharma companies to develop future flu shots. Which means in the really bad flu years, there's a shortage because only one company is making the shot.
Reed Rothchild
Mar 29, 02:48 PM
Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
Yep, In the case of this Amazon app/offering, that's exactly what iOS is.
The Amazon Android app lets you:
a. stream music from the cloud
b. using the mobile app, purchase music from the amazon mp3 store and
c. download that purchased music to your local android devices music library.
You simply cannot replicate that functionality with an ios app and get it approved by Apple.
There's one Apple approved way to get music onto your iPhone/Pod/Pad's local music library. Itunes.
Now I buy all my online music from Amazon and it get's into iTunes and onto my iPhone, iPad and various iPod's just fine. But only by using a computer and then syncing over the wire.
Wouldn't it be so much easier if I could just buy the damned music from Amazon ON my iPhone and have it sync BACK to iTunes and then onto my other devices, wirelessly.
Would Amazon jump at the chance to offer me that ability?
They most certainly would.
Would Apple aapprove that app?
Not a chance.
I highly suspect that lilo777 was being sarcastic :). Agree with your points though.
Yep, In the case of this Amazon app/offering, that's exactly what iOS is.
The Amazon Android app lets you:
a. stream music from the cloud
b. using the mobile app, purchase music from the amazon mp3 store and
c. download that purchased music to your local android devices music library.
You simply cannot replicate that functionality with an ios app and get it approved by Apple.
There's one Apple approved way to get music onto your iPhone/Pod/Pad's local music library. Itunes.
Now I buy all my online music from Amazon and it get's into iTunes and onto my iPhone, iPad and various iPod's just fine. But only by using a computer and then syncing over the wire.
Wouldn't it be so much easier if I could just buy the damned music from Amazon ON my iPhone and have it sync BACK to iTunes and then onto my other devices, wirelessly.
Would Amazon jump at the chance to offer me that ability?
They most certainly would.
Would Apple aapprove that app?
Not a chance.
I highly suspect that lilo777 was being sarcastic :). Agree with your points though.
Spoony
Apr 18, 03:44 PM
If the iphones interface was "so obvious" why did my firm give me a Palm Treo for 3 years where I had this stick to push on icons with windows drop down menus?!?
I think people have short memories and forget how big of a change the original iphone was.
Also stop bringing up that ridiculous Prada phone. The only similarity is it had no plastic keys. The software on that phone was ridiculous. The iPhone worked b/c the best software company in the world built the underlying software.
Prada was just a fancy phone. The iphone was/is a small computer. That is why it was/is criticized as a phone so much. The phone part almost plays second fiddle.
I think people have short memories and forget how big of a change the original iphone was.
Also stop bringing up that ridiculous Prada phone. The only similarity is it had no plastic keys. The software on that phone was ridiculous. The iPhone worked b/c the best software company in the world built the underlying software.
Prada was just a fancy phone. The iphone was/is a small computer. That is why it was/is criticized as a phone so much. The phone part almost plays second fiddle.
tatonka
Mar 29, 09:14 AM
Come on Apple you can do it ..
Having bought a good chunk of my media library of iTunes I would love to back that up into the cloud .. wirelessly syncing my phone would be heaven.
Hopeing Apple has something good up their sleeves.
T.
Having bought a good chunk of my media library of iTunes I would love to back that up into the cloud .. wirelessly syncing my phone would be heaven.
Hopeing Apple has something good up their sleeves.
T.
bdkennedy1
Mar 28, 09:59 AM
GOOD! I am tired of Apple's yearly release cycles.
AtHomeBoy_2000
Jul 30, 09:10 AM
They wouldn't have to do that. You know ESPN Mobile, Boost Mobile, and AMP'd mobile? They are all "virtual" networks that lease bandwidth from other providers who actually have a physical network. These "virtual" wireless companies are called MVNOs. Apple could become an MVNO (and it has been rumored in the past that would do so), so that they could offer all the features they want, and ensure a consistent experience across the entire user base.
How successful are MVNOs? Last I heard ESPN and Disney mobile are rumored to be shutting down due to low subscriber numbers.
How successful are MVNOs? Last I heard ESPN and Disney mobile are rumored to be shutting down due to low subscriber numbers.
yfile
Apr 24, 04:04 AM
Retina 27'' LCD should be 7200x4080 pixels. I think we can't expect it in near future... but i'd love to see it :)
iMacZealot
Jul 30, 07:37 PM
I have Verizon, my wife T-Mobile. T-Mobile works fine in New York City, and so does Verizon. Especially in the past year Verizon has spent literally a fortune improving their reception, so that dead spots are much fewer than they used to be. I believe this is why they ignore "cool" phones, they are going for reliability with companies who buy in bulk for their employees, not really for consumers - go to a Verizon store if you want to be convinced they don't really care about the common man -
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That said, Verizon rarely, with the exception of the recent Treo 700p, gets the really cool phones, so will probably bypass Apple as well.
I do agree that Verizon does not care about the layman, but I never get very good service here in Denver or if I visit my sisters in the bay area. I don't know why, but I just never get three bars or above usually at my house. Whenever I go to NYC, I spend most, if not all my time in Times Square and it just seems to constantly go in and out. I think T-Mobile is actually the best choice when it comes to international travel. Sprint is $1.50/min. and didn't even work in Rome, T-Mobile is $.99/min., and let's not even think about VZW's plans. T-Mobile worked for me from Here to LAX to TPE to SIN to KUL to even REP. Besides, they have a better minutes/dollar ratio than any of the other three major carriers and the coverage checker I checked works in every city I visit normally which are NYC, the Lamorinda Area, Vail, Boston, Denver (my home), and of course, everywhere else in the world.
mscriv
May 3, 01:44 PM
Awaiting confirmation from mscriv. In the meanwhile, one slot is still open.
Ok, I'm in. Now where did I put those....
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRmHh4sTAvx49pmmr5IYddZOPj92x-0Z4zTW1mLDtuWSLoj7s8whTMf9E9n
And just so we're all clear, I'm definitely Chaotic Good. :D
Ok, I'm in. Now where did I put those....
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRmHh4sTAvx49pmmr5IYddZOPj92x-0Z4zTW1mLDtuWSLoj7s8whTMf9E9n
And just so we're all clear, I'm definitely Chaotic Good. :D
robotx21
Sep 17, 01:11 AM
I think new displays are a STRONG possibility. Digital Photos need NICE big displays :-D Just like video editing does. I think we will definately see new displays announced.
puma1552
Apr 20, 12:59 AM
Considering I'm on a lowly, pathetic, dinosaur 3G that can't even run itself without severe, severe lag and a shattered screen, and will be coming home to the US in mid-September after being stuck with this pile for yet another 5 months, I will DEFINITELY be getting one.
A white one, on Verizon no less. Hallelujah.
A white one, on Verizon no less. Hallelujah.
Riemann Zeta
Mar 27, 11:40 AM
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
Nope, not the only one. Boo to the cloud and everything related to it. I'd rather not have all of my data on a massive public server, available to Apple, advertisers and any government agency at all times. Those claiming that "it's encrypted" are not fully appreciating the security implications of not having control over the implementation of said encryption. For example, SSL/HTTPS is "encrypted" as well, but since Certificate Authorities give signed master-key certificates to all government intelligence and law enforcement agencies, it isn't technically 100% secure (despite mathematically unbreakable encryption).
Taking off the tin-foil hat and simply thinking about economics: I still don't understand how cloud computing is actually going to become a dominant market force. There are now only 3 wireless providers in the US, forming a tight oligopoly, and all of them are incredibly stingy with data caps and limitations. Moreover, there are only a handful of unique internet providers in the US and all are cutting client bandwidth, raising prices and instituting throttling or monthly data caps. So it would seem that big software companies like Apple, Microsoft and Google are pushing the idea of streaming everything; but internet providers only want to supply bandwidth for their own cable TV services. Something just doesn't add up. How is one supposed to have no local storage and just stream music and video when their wireless connection only allows for 2GB/month and their home ISP throttles everything other than its own cable TV service?
QCassidy352
Aug 4, 09:31 AM
Where does this leave Conroe and Allendale? Apple's marketing strategy has always been that the PowerBooks (MacBook Pro) have faster processers then any of the iMac offerings. The Conroe and Allendale (Desktop) chips run faster then the Merom (Mobile) chips.
:confused: The imac had a G5 for a long time while the powerbook had a G4. The imac ended with a 2.1 G5 and the powerbook topped out at a 1.67 G4. Apple has no problem, nor should they, putting a faster processor in a desktop than a notebook, even when the notebook is a "pro" machine and the desktop a "consumer" machine.
I've maintained all along that the imac will get Conroe. It's a midrange desktop, not a laptop. Why would/should it get a laptop processor? (and don't say "yonah is a laptop processor." Apple did that because they wanted to switch to intel and the Pentium IV was not a valid option, so yonah was the only choice. Now they have a real desktop processor available, and they will use it.)
:confused: The imac had a G5 for a long time while the powerbook had a G4. The imac ended with a 2.1 G5 and the powerbook topped out at a 1.67 G4. Apple has no problem, nor should they, putting a faster processor in a desktop than a notebook, even when the notebook is a "pro" machine and the desktop a "consumer" machine.
I've maintained all along that the imac will get Conroe. It's a midrange desktop, not a laptop. Why would/should it get a laptop processor? (and don't say "yonah is a laptop processor." Apple did that because they wanted to switch to intel and the Pentium IV was not a valid option, so yonah was the only choice. Now they have a real desktop processor available, and they will use it.)
Popeye206
Apr 6, 06:20 PM
It seems to me that things have gone wildly off topic. The story was "Motorola Xoom Tablet Sales: Approximately 100,000 Units So Far?" not "Android vs. Apple: Which One Sucks More?"
We should be discussing the validity of the numbers and why this is the case, and not strictly "mine is longer than yours and here's why." Save those rants for a comparison of the devices story.
LOL! Unfortunately, this seems to go with the territory. Mention Android and it's bound to start a battle. Just like mention AT&T or Verizon and the flames start flying. It's silly, but fun to watch the banter.
100,000 or even 200,000 units is not good news for Moto. If sales don't increase quickly, retailers will loose interest and focus on what sells - the iPad.
We should be discussing the validity of the numbers and why this is the case, and not strictly "mine is longer than yours and here's why." Save those rants for a comparison of the devices story.
LOL! Unfortunately, this seems to go with the territory. Mention Android and it's bound to start a battle. Just like mention AT&T or Verizon and the flames start flying. It's silly, but fun to watch the banter.
100,000 or even 200,000 units is not good news for Moto. If sales don't increase quickly, retailers will loose interest and focus on what sells - the iPad.
mrblah
Aug 7, 03:17 PM
My god thats an expensive computer. It seems like they went all out to try and make the most expensive computer possible. You HAVE to buy a quad Xeon desktop? Why? Some people need a tower for its PCI slots but dont want or need a quad Xeon setup. Cant they release a model that uses a regular processor like a Pentium 4 or whatever and price it for like $1000 cheaper? I guess Apple will continue to leave us middle-end users out in the cold. Mac Minis suck, iMacs dont meet the needs of a lot of people thanks to no PCI slots, Mac Pros only come with a quad Xeon(!?) and well set you back more than a used Honda Accord. Apple went WAY overboard with this thing without offering anything to fill in the gap between iMac and Mac Pro. Freakin hell.
No comments:
Post a Comment