NebulaClash
Apr 25, 10:21 AM
News Flash:
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
Stridder44
May 6, 01:18 AM
No way. Intel is fantastic, their CPUs are nearly unmatched, and while Intel itself can be finicky sometimes, it's not worth the headache of transitioning again. Not unless ARM has some amazing crap up it's sleeve that will de-rail all of Intel's market share. This rumor makes sense on some low end laptops, maybe, but the entire lineup? Hell no. Plus I've gotten used to being able to run Windows in Boot Camp.
It's taken Apple over a decade to get where we are now. Why would they throw all that away? Not to mention that ARM has absolutely nothing that comes even slightly close to even mid-range Intel chips. And even in two years time, I'm very doubtful.
It's taken Apple over a decade to get where we are now. Why would they throw all that away? Not to mention that ARM has absolutely nothing that comes even slightly close to even mid-range Intel chips. And even in two years time, I'm very doubtful.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 06:53 PM
But the average American gets a refund soooooo 288 clearly wins lol
Really.
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
Really.
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
danielwsmithee
Aug 11, 09:32 AM
Why would they keep a 32-bit processor in the macbook when they're pushing 64-bit with Lepoard?Yes but remember Leopard is not going to be only 64-bit, it will run 32-bit and 64-bit applications side by side.
Rocketman
Nov 26, 07:55 PM
This can be done quite cheaply, if Apple doesn't use off the shelf PC components - which is why current tablet PCs are so expensive. An Intel ULV processor is not cheap.
Shame that Apple moved away from the PowerPC really, when it comes to applications such as this. They could use a $20 PPC 750CL processor (16mm^2 die size, compare to the ~150mm^2 PC processors) at up to 1GHz (~2W power consumption at 700MHz), with a 30GB 1.8" hard drive (same as iPod), 512MB memory ... that'd be cheap (the display would probably be the most expensive part).
Valuable post.
Rocketman
Shame that Apple moved away from the PowerPC really, when it comes to applications such as this. They could use a $20 PPC 750CL processor (16mm^2 die size, compare to the ~150mm^2 PC processors) at up to 1GHz (~2W power consumption at 700MHz), with a 30GB 1.8" hard drive (same as iPod), 512MB memory ... that'd be cheap (the display would probably be the most expensive part).
Valuable post.
Rocketman
MacNut
Apr 14, 11:10 AM
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?I want line items on every single thing spent.
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?I want line items on every single thing spent.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 3, 11:25 AM
http://www.onedigitallife.com/2006/08/02/wwdc-2006-banner/
allegedly a banner from WWDC 2006...
oops! seen it another thread now, my bad.
"Allegedly"
Or a banner for Paris Expo? Hope not.
allegedly a banner from WWDC 2006...
oops! seen it another thread now, my bad.
"Allegedly"
Or a banner for Paris Expo? Hope not.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 02:51 PM
That's the nice thing about the equallogic, right? ;)
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
Only issue I currently have with throughput is being limited by 4gigs when there are 30 some odd VMs running in our 3 host cluster. I would love to be fiber channel but between state budget cuts and PITA systems guy it ain't happening.
On thunderbolt though, I truly believe it will be a non-starter. Sure, it's cool for those of us that know about it but people in general won't know and won't really care either way. Honestly, consumers should already be above 10Gbps because the physical hardware is already there, just a matter of market elasticity.
You do realise you can switch your multi-path policy to something like Round-Robin or Least used link or something and use both your fabrics at the same time, giving you double bandwidth (in your 4 Gig port configuration, giving you 8 Gbps, or in a 8 Gbps FC configuration, 16) right ? Actually, you should have a look at what it is set to, some versions of ESX and ESXi are completely retarded and set the default policy to use Fabric 1 only (older versions prior to 4.x didn't have a supported configuration for using both paths at the same time, the support was experimental I believe).
Or you can run FCoE or FCoIP and use dual 10 Gbps for FC on the cheap (I do realise HBAs can be pricey). Or heck, iSCSI over 10 Gbps links...
Also, looking at my current I/O statistics for one of our biggest ESXi boxes (about 20 VMs), I see we average about... 10 mbps over the fiber. ;) Servers aren't constantly writing at full bandwidth anyhow and the convenience of centralized SAN management trumps Direct Attached Storage any day of the week in a data center environnement.
Heck, I wish our DMZ servers could be attached to the SAN (stupid Security policies) so that I could actually grow the filesystems on which the file repository sits... seeing how Sun (now Oracle) wants to charge us over 10k$ for about 72 GBs of disks, just because the hardware is EOL'd and it lacks the 2nd controller so that we can use the drive bays that are free in it...
Thunderbolt brings me back to those days. It's just not something I'd ever consider for data center use. It's not going to replace iSCSI or Fiber Channel. It's a complete non-contender in that space. Consumer space or workstations ? Yeah, sure, seems it could replace Firewire and USB disks, if the price and availability of actual peripherals is good. That last part remains to be seen.
qwerto
Aug 12, 03:07 AM
i don't think so. i'm sure apple put some sticky stuff on the processor and the motherboard so that it'll stay there basically forever.
dang, i knew it was a long shot. Oh well, time to buy some more ram for my mbp... that will suffice for now
dang, i knew it was a long shot. Oh well, time to buy some more ram for my mbp... that will suffice for now
AndyK
May 8, 03:09 AM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
This.
This.
MacsRgr8
Aug 7, 03:42 PM
It's still a QUAD at $2,124. Even if it's 2 GHz, that's still utterly insane, especially when a *single* 2 GHz Woodcrest outperforms a 3.5 GHz Pentium 4 easily IIRC.
That is information what I am waiting for before calling it lame or excellent...
Another problem IMHO is that you now must buy a Quad config, if you want 2 HD's or a good grfx card.
Many people will pay for the 3rd and 4th core without ever using it.
I think Apple could have done with a Dual Core config (Conroe) as low-end Mac Pro machine: give the buyer the expansibility of a Pro machine, but keep the price in a pro-sumer level.
I wonder how much faster the Quad 2.66 really is than a Quad 2.5 GHz G5. Something tells me that Apple is usually rather positive regarding the new machines.... ;)
That is information what I am waiting for before calling it lame or excellent...
Another problem IMHO is that you now must buy a Quad config, if you want 2 HD's or a good grfx card.
Many people will pay for the 3rd and 4th core without ever using it.
I think Apple could have done with a Dual Core config (Conroe) as low-end Mac Pro machine: give the buyer the expansibility of a Pro machine, but keep the price in a pro-sumer level.
I wonder how much faster the Quad 2.66 really is than a Quad 2.5 GHz G5. Something tells me that Apple is usually rather positive regarding the new machines.... ;)
Bilbo63
Apr 18, 04:41 PM
There was at least one phone that "looked" like an iPhone before anyone new what the iPhone looked like.
Does the Prada ring a bell? Probably not to most of you, but it was first to market with that basic "look".
As for the UI, old WinMo phones had grids of icons on the desktop, so again, not a unique "look".
Next one will be arguing about the spacing or the number of icons per row. Nit picking I say.
The iPad is not "innovative" in it's looks or design either. It's minimalism at it's best. So simplistic that it will be tough to defend in court. It is a logical basic design for a tablet.
As for how it functions, it's technically the iPhone with a larger screen. So the argument of functionality fails as many devices functioned similarly prior to the release of the iPad. Screen size is irrelevant.
Now I do believe with the icons Samsung chose to use combined with the layout, one could logically argue that Samsung was copying the overall UI from iOS. I believe that is where Apple's case is with the phones.
Easy for Samsung to remedy. Ditch the TouchWiz UI... it sucks anyway.
Still failing to see the argument on the Galaxy tabs though... Honeycomb looks nothing like iOS ad Samsung hasn't uglied them up with the old TouchWiz UI overlay.
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
Does the Prada ring a bell? Probably not to most of you, but it was first to market with that basic "look".
As for the UI, old WinMo phones had grids of icons on the desktop, so again, not a unique "look".
Next one will be arguing about the spacing or the number of icons per row. Nit picking I say.
The iPad is not "innovative" in it's looks or design either. It's minimalism at it's best. So simplistic that it will be tough to defend in court. It is a logical basic design for a tablet.
As for how it functions, it's technically the iPhone with a larger screen. So the argument of functionality fails as many devices functioned similarly prior to the release of the iPad. Screen size is irrelevant.
Now I do believe with the icons Samsung chose to use combined with the layout, one could logically argue that Samsung was copying the overall UI from iOS. I believe that is where Apple's case is with the phones.
Easy for Samsung to remedy. Ditch the TouchWiz UI... it sucks anyway.
Still failing to see the argument on the Galaxy tabs though... Honeycomb looks nothing like iOS ad Samsung hasn't uglied them up with the old TouchWiz UI overlay.
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
chasemac
Aug 4, 01:02 AM
Never buy an apple product!!!
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
You have a very good system.:confused: Your Macbook will not be crap. I really don't think the Macbook will get a processor upgrade yet. Not for another couple of months anyway.
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
You have a very good system.:confused: Your Macbook will not be crap. I really don't think the Macbook will get a processor upgrade yet. Not for another couple of months anyway.
3N16MA
Mar 28, 11:59 AM
If this is true and Apple decided to hold off until later in the year I'm expecting a big change for the iPhone 5. If it's going to be a 3G --->3Gs type of upgrade (same design/form facor, new internals) I don't see why they would not be ready this June.
RCGMac
Mar 29, 10:07 AM
Can't store my music on my work machines.
Similar issue here. I have been hooking my phone to my computer to listen to music while at work. Now I can dump all my music into the cloud and listen.
Similar issue here. I have been hooking my phone to my computer to listen to music while at work. Now I can dump all my music into the cloud and listen.
SLCentral
Aug 2, 06:20 PM
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Chupa Chupa
Apr 7, 10:54 AM
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I see the wannabe lawyers are once again shaking their fists in outrage because Apple's muti-billion dollar competitors like BB, HTC, Moto can't match wits with Apple.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I see the wannabe lawyers are once again shaking their fists in outrage because Apple's muti-billion dollar competitors like BB, HTC, Moto can't match wits with Apple.
marksman
Apr 25, 11:07 AM
It seems to me that the media and those sending steve email don't understand what it means when they say "Apple is tracking me".
poppe
Aug 4, 12:04 AM
Please apple what ever you do. Don't leave me stuck with a Merom MBP at 2.16... we need the 2.33!!
n-abounds
Sep 11, 12:16 AM
Yikes. It'd take me 1.13 hours. Maybe you can get a friend to call you and start reading off ones and zeros?
LOL, that might just make it into my sig one of these days.
Clearly, new "iPod socks" will be released on Tueday. Aren't we overdue?
Agreed on the grammar correction...it should be "has".
Personallly, I would love a tower. Mainly because I want a separate monitor...and a 20" iMac won't fit on my desk, but a 20" Apple display will. I'm buying some computer on Tuesday- so I'm excited either way. Thank god for a $3800 credit limit. I would love a machine that could record from my tv, although that would conflict with iTunes selling tv shows.
LOL, that might just make it into my sig one of these days.
Clearly, new "iPod socks" will be released on Tueday. Aren't we overdue?
Agreed on the grammar correction...it should be "has".
Personallly, I would love a tower. Mainly because I want a separate monitor...and a 20" iMac won't fit on my desk, but a 20" Apple display will. I'm buying some computer on Tuesday- so I'm excited either way. Thank god for a $3800 credit limit. I would love a machine that could record from my tv, although that would conflict with iTunes selling tv shows.
Popeye206
Mar 29, 04:27 PM
Link please.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
http://www.szcpost.com/2010/05/foxconn-suicides.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_suicide_rate
http://www.szcpost.com/2010/05/foxconn-suicides.html
kalsta
May 6, 12:11 PM
If you told the average American male that his 5 inch penis was 13 centimeters, we'd be on the metric system a week from Thursday.
Can't argue with that logic. :D
Can't argue with that logic. :D
DeathChill
Apr 20, 08:50 AM
You and I are thinking alike.
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
I am extremely impressed with your ability to be disappointed with a product that hasn't been announced and we know nothing about.
Also, hasn't the iPhone 4 been the best selling iPhone ever?
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
I am extremely impressed with your ability to be disappointed with a product that hasn't been announced and we know nothing about.
Also, hasn't the iPhone 4 been the best selling iPhone ever?
Jape
Nov 12, 08:57 AM
You know, I was a lil mad at first when I saw that, but the facts are that Apple wasn't going to ship theirs until Nov 25th with a Dec 2nd estimated arrival date, and for saving $40.00 I'm willing to wait a few extra days.
And at this point.. like the previous poster said.. $87.00 is worth it for me when regular mounts without anything are around $40, so $87 is decent for bluetooth, GPS chip and cool look/setup.. however $120 ($130 when adding in tax) just isn't worth it in my opinion.
Yea I agree with you about the price being worth it, Im not going anywhere important soon either... Lol, but I did call the apple retail store and they do have them in stock now.
And at this point.. like the previous poster said.. $87.00 is worth it for me when regular mounts without anything are around $40, so $87 is decent for bluetooth, GPS chip and cool look/setup.. however $120 ($130 when adding in tax) just isn't worth it in my opinion.
Yea I agree with you about the price being worth it, Im not going anywhere important soon either... Lol, but I did call the apple retail store and they do have them in stock now.
