scrapple
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
yawn..
they both made billions... who cares.
they both made billions... who cares.
Ja Di ksw
Oct 13, 12:10 AM
From looking at the picture, should it be a fact that the red iPod nano is coming out? It doesn't look like a rumor that I see red iPod nanos on display.
It's fact, not rumor. One of my friends was there while they were doing stuff with it, and the picture is obviously not photoshopped. They talked about it on CBS as well.
It's fact, not rumor. One of my friends was there while they were doing stuff with it, and the picture is obviously not photoshopped. They talked about it on CBS as well.
ctachme
Sep 26, 08:30 AM
Agrhhh... why does Apple have to be so stupid? Do they not know that there are vast areas here in the US where Cingular doesn't support?
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
Why the hell can't they just sell an unlocked phone and just let us choose providers that actually have service where we live? I really hope someone finds a way to hack these phones and make them carrier-independant! :mad:
NT1440
Apr 10, 09:17 PM
First, we need to institute total no-opt-out public financing of all elections. Then we should explore something like an inflexible expiration for all corporate charters, say 9 years (about half a patent term). Dissolution would begin by satisfying the investors and then proceed to establishing non-incorporated component businesses to maintain (if necessary) the products/services the corporation had established, creating a co�perative arrangement if appropriate.
Right now, long-lived large business has replaced the problem that the dynamic democratic republic was supposed to address. We have no official peerage, but what we do have is almost indistinguishable.
That would be a great start. America needs to seriously address the way we let corporations run the show, starting with how we view them in the first place. Corporations don't have a self fulfilling right to exists.
In fact, the funny thing about those rallying against unions today, fail to recognize that corporations are essentially a form of union.
Right now, long-lived large business has replaced the problem that the dynamic democratic republic was supposed to address. We have no official peerage, but what we do have is almost indistinguishable.
That would be a great start. America needs to seriously address the way we let corporations run the show, starting with how we view them in the first place. Corporations don't have a self fulfilling right to exists.
In fact, the funny thing about those rallying against unions today, fail to recognize that corporations are essentially a form of union.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 11:47 AM
You keep talking about a non-existent adapter that costs $10 and comparing mini-display port adapters that merely convert signal paths isn't even in the same realm as converting to an entirely different interface. In other words your 'adapter' prices are 100% BS and you know it.
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
funny happy mothers day poems.
happy mothers day poems funny.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems. funny happy mothers day poems. funny happy mothers day poems. azzurri000. Sep 18, 11:51 PM. 1. It#39;s Merom.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems.
funny happy mothers day poems. happy mothers day funny; happy mothers day funny. pkson. Apr 19, 07:15 PM
happy mothers day poems funny.
Did you miss the USB to PS2 ports or are you just avoiding that? Are you also avoiding how I said it's too difficult for you to carry around an inch long adapter?
Don't tase me bro! :eek:
Seriously, you going to compare a demonstration with a professional mass storage array that isn't available to the public yet and which I said at the bottom of my last post is a perfect use for TB (i.e. with professional editing software) with the Lacie consumer grade 5200 RPM SLOW USB3 drive? Dude, you have to compare apples to apples. You're comparing a race car to a Chevette.... That neither proves nor disproves anything about the full capability of USB3. The ad on that box is marketing BS about the "interface" not the drive they're selling (which is a slow 5200 RPM SATA drive which all top out between 40-60MB/sec PERIOD, regardless whether they use SATA, USB3, Firewire 800 or Thunderbolt). Show me a 7200 RPM (or better yet a 10,000+ SCSI rated) drive connected to USB3 AND TB (or even FW800) and then compare their actual speeds. OR find an array that goes fast like the one Intel was using that also has USB3 on it and compare their actual speeds 1 to 1. Showing me Steak Diane on one plate and a hot dog on the other doesn't prove the cook who made the hot dog doesn't know how to cook. It simply proves he was given a hot dog to cook.LOL, the drive he was using WAS 7200-RPM so I'm not even going to bother reading the rest of this paragraph.
http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?id=10492
In reality, you need an actual hard drive test that makes sense not comparing a Porsche to a lawn tractor.... :rolleyes:
See above. :rolleyes:
No more than you assuming you're going to get a $10 USB3 adapter. At least my assumption is based on Firewire statistics and early adoption rates. Yours is based on dreaming.Your assumption is based on comparing two different technologies and assuming they will fare the same. My assumption was comparing ADAPTER prices. How expensive do you think adapters are? :rolleyes:
You can get them for super cheap if you know where to look.
I think the 5200 RPM 2.5" drive that came with my MBP capped out around 50MB/sec using a SATA II interface (or 450mbps). Does that prove my SATA chip set SUCKS? NO, IT DOES NOT. When I replaced it with a 7200 RPM Hitachi, it now caps out around 110MB/sec (or 880mbps, well above FW800's theoretical cap even). Even my PPC G4 gets 105MB/sec caps with its 1.5TB 7200 RPM Seagate Barracuda drives (and SATA does eat CPU as well; if I try to run two of them at the same time I still get a total of around 100MB/sec with the CPU pegged at 95-100%. The older PCI bus is also in the way. Thus it's not the SATA interface there that's the problem either, but you might think so if you make assumptions based only on one test number and no idea what's in the computer being used or any statistics about the CPU or Bus while its being used. Your YouTube videos comparisons are absurd in that regard. Cheap mass storage devices (like the Lacie) aren't made for performance. Show me TB making that same drive do over 100MB/sec. It won't happen.Once again, YOU ARE BASING THIS ON PRESENT DAY SPEEDS THAT ARE ACHIEVABLE. This isn't a discussion about current theoretical limits, it's about the limits of the future because that's where these technologies will actually matter. The fact is that when we move to SSD transfer speeds USB 3 will get demolished.
I never said any such thing. I said they won't pay a premium for Thunderbolt for every-day use. If you're just going to lie and change what I said, I won't bother replying anymore.
USB 3 won't be a premium over anything. It's going to be dirt cheap and a simple performance upgrade for everyone. It already is cheap for new computers and a pretty cheap add-on for existing ones; you cannot add TB to existing computers so there's another problem it has to contend with, especially trying to get a large user base in any reasonable length of time. The longer it takes to get a large installed user base, the longer the prices will stay high on any TB products. It's plainly obvious that TB is going to be a high-end niche product just like FW800, at least for the forseeable future. While Intel's demo is totally cool, it doesn't remotely represent the AVERAGE PC user in any shape or form. Most people aren't editing 4 simultaneous streams of 1080p video on a mega-buck professional high-speed drive array.
wizard
Sep 9, 12:03 PM
I'm a little skeptical about Napa64 as well. I did read the previous links and articles on it. Why make Merom backwards compatible with Yonah?
What is to be skeptical about? Seriously Intel continuously improves its hardware, they have to or end up getting trounced on by the competition. In fact recent history with respect to AMD demonstrates what happens when they don't take a serious look at their hardware.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.
Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet. That is the iMac just released is more or less a first generation implementation of Merom. I'm left with the impression that Apple just slapped the new processor in the old socket and gave us all a surprise this week. But that is what backward computability is all about. Mind you I know nothing about the current logic boards but I'm sure that information will float across the web soon.
Dave
What is to be skeptical about? Seriously Intel continuously improves its hardware, they have to or end up getting trounced on by the competition. In fact recent history with respect to AMD demonstrates what happens when they don't take a serious look at their hardware.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.
Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet. That is the iMac just released is more or less a first generation implementation of Merom. I'm left with the impression that Apple just slapped the new processor in the old socket and gave us all a surprise this week. But that is what backward computability is all about. Mind you I know nothing about the current logic boards but I'm sure that information will float across the web soon.
Dave
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:30 AM
Problems:
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
ever heard of the pandora app??
--Dependence on an internet connection. Deal breaker right there. Subways? Forget it.
--Buffer times
--Connection instability/loss
--Already way overstrained data networks contributing to the above
--Battery life will suffer if it's wifi
--And if it's 3G, well there's another bill in the mail every month. A recurring bill in the form of data charges to listen to my music I already paid for? No thank you. No, no, no thank you.
Since when did every device in the house need a monthly bill to go with it? AT&T provides a pretty crappy service as it is to begin with, why shuffle any more money right into their pockets?
Dependence on an internet connection and a bill in the mail are enormous deal breakers.
To the people saying "Oh, well Apple isn't taking your hard drive away", no, they aren't, but this is the first step. In 20 years hard drives will be obsolete, as everything will be cloud based, and you'll be forced into the cloud whether you want to be or not.
This service is a completely stupid idea for anyone who has an iPod with a big enough hard drive to store their stuff. I can see the appeal for those with more than 160 GB of music, but other than those people, I see literally zero benefits to be had by this, and a slew of problems/frustrations to be gained.
ever heard of the pandora app??
laidbackliam
Oct 13, 01:59 AM
It's like those audiophiles who argue endlessly about if gold plated or silver plated speaker wire sounds better.
true, but there is a parralel could be drawn between audiophiles and mac "zealots".
and its fiber optic vs copper plated. its the rca connectors taht would be gold or silver plated, and yes, gold sounds better, transfers signal better.
my two cents :)
true, but there is a parralel could be drawn between audiophiles and mac "zealots".
and its fiber optic vs copper plated. its the rca connectors taht would be gold or silver plated, and yes, gold sounds better, transfers signal better.
my two cents :)
Porco
Oct 28, 04:55 AM
I am very concerned about the environment, but I think it sounds like Greenpeace did go too far. I am actually dubious of the methodology used to say that Apple is ranked so poorly in terms of the environment, because as others have said, I think Mac users tend to hang on to their machines more, or else they do seem to have a better time being resold on e-bay etc, they hold their value well. So even if an individual Mac contained, say 10% more dangerous stuff (guesstimate - ) in it than a Dell or something, if it has two owners or is used for twice as long then does that really still make them so bad?
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
That said, I do wish Apple would improve upon meeting their environmental responsibilities, there's no good reason for them not to. Their name and company logo is a piece of fruit that grows on trees, so the tree-hugging comments aren't quite so irrelevant, are they? :p
Edit: Apple can you also put a spell check into Safari please :)
If you're running Tiger, it does already - system-wide actually, just choose Edit>Spelling>Check Spelling as You Type whilst using anything you can enter text in (a forum reply box would work for example) :)
Meandmunch
Mar 22, 02:46 PM
Call me spoiled by all things thin, I think the iMac is looking pretty chunky these days. Not sure why it isn't significantly thinner than it is. The next time they do update the form factor it should essentially look like a giant first gen iPad.
Stella
Apr 14, 12:03 PM
Any thunderbolt -> USB3 adapters out there? be useful for people who have 2011 macbooks...
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
( I know there's USB3 -> Thunderbolt connectors.. )
jeremyb66
Apr 4, 12:01 PM
This is what you get when you (criminals) don't want to be part of society!! Take note criminals there will be REAL! repercussions for your actions.
RollTide
Mar 22, 06:23 PM
Maybe all those "OS on SD and everything else on HD was aimed more at iMac????
Here's hopin.
Here's hopin.
VicMacs
Sep 9, 01:57 AM
now is the Xeon processor faster than the core 2 duo?
WildCowboy
Aug 23, 06:01 PM
It's seems to me that it's unlikely that the cost of litigation could have exceeded the cost of a settlement, so does that show that Apple expected to be found liable for patent infringement as charged?
I don't know...with five lawsuits between the companies, I wouldn't be surprised if the litigation would have cost at least $100 million. But I do think Apple wasn't terribly confident...
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
I don't know...with five lawsuits between the companies, I wouldn't be surprised if the litigation would have cost at least $100 million. But I do think Apple wasn't terribly confident...
Edit: The estimates I've seen say that a typical patent infringement case costs up to $5 million per side. This would probably be higher than a typical case, with $100 million in total not out of the question.
rstansby
Apr 22, 02:20 AM
So Apple's method could be more efficient their side, offering a spotify type model where everyone accesses the same iTunes purchased track (except this time they own it) instead of Amazon's where each indivdual track is stored in their "digital locker"?
A nice bt of foresight by Apple if so.
It's not really an original idea. Lala was doing this last year, until Apple bought them and shut them down.
A nice bt of foresight by Apple if so.
It's not really an original idea. Lala was doing this last year, until Apple bought them and shut them down.
Meandmunch
Apr 25, 07:08 PM
Other than shaving a few millimeters of the case, a few grams of weight what amount of change isn't incremental at this point?
Aldyn
Apr 25, 02:44 PM
When my mom was a cool, happening chick in the early '70s and added avocado green appliances to replace those big, white 50's-era appliances she looked around her new kitchen and thought to herself "Wow. Gorgeous! How much better can it get?"
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
Hahahaha this.
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
Hahahaha this.
kavika411
Mar 22, 01:19 PM
Newbie question - please don't flame me.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
How big of a transition is this, as compared - for example - to the Intel chip back around 2006? What I mean is, after the transition to Intel, certain software and eventually the newest operating system itself could no longer be run on the old chip. So, is this transition as significant as that, or is this more of a speed boost kind of thing?
Thanks.
JackieTreehorn
Mar 22, 01:21 PM
Still lovin' my 2009 iMac.... best machine I've ever owned.
HarryKeogh
Apr 25, 02:42 PM
Could just be me, but I think the design is perfect. Apple is still way ahead of the competition with the unibody design. How much better can it get?
When my mom was a cool, happening chick in the early '70s and added avocado green appliances to replace those big, white 50's-era appliances she looked around her new kitchen and thought to herself "Wow. Gorgeous! How much better can it get?"
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
When my mom was a cool, happening chick in the early '70s and added avocado green appliances to replace those big, white 50's-era appliances she looked around her new kitchen and thought to herself "Wow. Gorgeous! How much better can it get?"
And I'm sure in 15 years my kids will tell their friends "Ugh, my parents have that 2010-era stainless and granite kitchen. So hideous".
I guess what I'm trying to say is I'm hungry.
mKTank
Dec 31, 01:57 AM
Yes, this sticky obtrusive and uninstallable piece of junk that constantly plagues people in the PC world (not to mention it radically slows your machine down. I recently installed Flash player on the PC side and without my permission McAffe was installed....ARGGGHH. Now they want to infect the Mac world....PLEASE NO!
Hurf. There was a checkbox for installing a trial version. You didn't uncheck it.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
Hurf. There was a checkbox for installing a trial version. You didn't uncheck it.
Maybe this is why you're using OSX then. It makes choices for you. Not yours, but you know...
cube
Apr 22, 12:02 PM
Err... and how is that relevant? I'm sure Blu-Ray will live on in other notebooks, but Apple's? Unlikely.
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
There are no BDXL notebook drives yet.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
There were 100GB BDXL when Apple refreshed the MacBook Pro's this year.
There are no BDXL notebook drives yet.
Just preempting any claim that there's no place for optical drives because "BD is obsolete".
Even DVDs and CDs are not obsolete. They are mainstream distribution media.
Optical drives at not at all at "floppy time".
Piggie
Apr 22, 11:24 AM
You don't own anything you download from the iTunes store now. You hold a license and are allowed to play or view it, but you do not own it.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.
Well no, not in the true sense of the word, but you do have the data and can use the data elsewhere.
In the same way technically you don't own the music on a record, or cassette or CD, but you do have the ability to use/listen to the music elsewhere.
I can just see this ability, which we have taken for granted since the 1st every records were sold to the public in around 1894 will soon, if big companies get there way and the public buy into it without thinking, will be coming to an end.