rawknee
Apr 26, 04:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
And how many android devices are free or buy one, get one free? It's amazing how fast you can gain market usage when you give your stuff away...
And how many android devices are free or buy one, get one free? It's amazing how fast you can gain market usage when you give your stuff away...
res1233
May 6, 03:43 AM
Lets face it: The intel transition was NOT painful. Most PowerPC apps that still exist, will run fine on snow leopard, and by now, every app still being maintained has been recompiled for intel CPUs. That really isn't so hard to do so long as all the libraries your app needs to run supports the architecture you're trying to compile in... Just a small settings change. Assuming you don't use assembler code, but nobody with dreams of porting their app uses assembler code, so... Anywho, if apple did make this transition, it wouldn't be as painful as you people seem to think it would be. PowerPC apps run quite well via rosetta.
adbe
Mar 26, 10:38 PM
I highly doubt this is the case. The iPhone still leads the forefront for iOS devices and will receive iOS 5 when it is released. The only way this works is if the release of iPhone 5 is in September and I don't see that happening any time soon.
That's something that's playing on my mind too.
I'm going to be watching carefully though, because it does seem possible that Apple think the tablet is a bigger long term deal than the phone. If they do, there'll be clear signs of it this year.
Whatever happens, there'll be a new iOS release with the iPhone 5, simply because it is going to sport new tech. Whether that iOS is numbered 5, or 4.5 will be interesting.
If I had to chance my arm, I'd say iOS 5 with the phone in June, but a small spec bump iPad 2.5/3 in October.
That's something that's playing on my mind too.
I'm going to be watching carefully though, because it does seem possible that Apple think the tablet is a bigger long term deal than the phone. If they do, there'll be clear signs of it this year.
Whatever happens, there'll be a new iOS release with the iPhone 5, simply because it is going to sport new tech. Whether that iOS is numbered 5, or 4.5 will be interesting.
If I had to chance my arm, I'd say iOS 5 with the phone in June, but a small spec bump iPad 2.5/3 in October.
Jape
Dec 4, 08:30 PM
yea i agree, both apple stores in my area have it though.
ValSalva
Apr 21, 08:01 PM
IMO the Mac Pro looks like an old granny these day's. It's in dire need of a refresh and looks totally out of line when compared to the rest of Apples range. And it's interesting to think that Apple is incapable of properly re-designing the computer because that's what you are saying effectively.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder :D With the quality control of Apple these days my confidence in them being able to design such a small case with such high powered processors without cooling problems is low.
It would save money with the need for less raw materials.
If there was 1/2 the amount of raw materials in the case can you see the price going down by any more than a few dollars? Isn't most of the cost of a Mac Pro the components?
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder :D With the quality control of Apple these days my confidence in them being able to design such a small case with such high powered processors without cooling problems is low.
It would save money with the need for less raw materials.
If there was 1/2 the amount of raw materials in the case can you see the price going down by any more than a few dollars? Isn't most of the cost of a Mac Pro the components?
uv23
Aug 11, 12:48 PM
Apple will not keep Yonah in the MacBooks. Such a marketing differentiation tactic would be idiocy. All PC manufacturers are moving to Merom when it's available. The cost is the same. Yonah is dead. I expect a simultaneous transition of MBP, MB, and iMac very soon, moving all Macs to 64 bit.
marvel2
Jan 25, 12:41 PM
Ok, so for what it's worth here are my thoughts in using the Magellan Car Kit for a few days. I'll cut to the chase by telling you I'm sending it back. My big complaints are the bluetooth speakerphone is terrible with the volume being so low during phone calls that you have to turn it all the way up, but that's still not high enough. Then when you get Nav directions you have to turn it way down. The mic is very poor and I made about 15-20 calls during, and not during, the Nav software running. The 3.5mm input to connect your stereo system also plays the small bluetooth speaker on the kit at the same time....that is ridiculous, as its a tiny speaker and you cannot drive it like you can your car speakers, plus it does not sound great playing music through it. The good things were in my earlier post...the ability to pop your phone in with the case on, rock solid and better detent positions than the TomTom that do not slip, the Nav chip seems to locate very quickly, and the Nav directions through the speaker are loud and clear. I guess I'm back to waiting for someone to do this right!
Thanks for your review. I guess I will stick with my TomTom kit for the iPhone. I don't use a case with my phone and the TT kit is smaller and looks sleeker anyways.
Thanks for your review. I guess I will stick with my TomTom kit for the iPhone. I don't use a case with my phone and the TT kit is smaller and looks sleeker anyways.
McGiord
Apr 9, 07:23 PM
The two polls in reference are showing 2 as the right answer.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong.
Google is showing you a result that will drive more traffic for their Ads.
A 68020 will always kill a 68000 anywhere doing math calculations.
Mac OS X cannot be wrong.
Google is showing you a result that will drive more traffic for their Ads.
A 68020 will always kill a 68000 anywhere doing math calculations.
Mackan
Apr 20, 03:49 AM
So, how many more times are various sources gonna reiterate that iPhone 5 is to come out in Fall? :rolleyes:
As many as it takes to make you come here and read and comment the junk. Because it's all what this site is about.
As many as it takes to make you come here and read and comment the junk. Because it's all what this site is about.
bpaluzzi
Apr 25, 10:17 AM
You do realize everything you said is untrue, right?
That's par for the course for him. It'd be a page one story if he ever WASN'T spreading FUD.
I don't see any location consent popups on my iPhones here.
Are you serious? You're not looking very hard. Or at all.
That's par for the course for him. It'd be a page one story if he ever WASN'T spreading FUD.
I don't see any location consent popups on my iPhones here.
Are you serious? You're not looking very hard. Or at all.
cactus33
Apr 23, 10:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
Maybe good screens, but NOT retinas. :P (Although I wish they would have them)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
Maybe good screens, but NOT retinas. :P (Although I wish they would have them)
iLilana
Apr 23, 08:51 PM
we wont see it in macs until mid 2012
shompa
Aug 7, 04:26 PM
Not really significantly faster than the G5 Quad. Maybe 50% faster at best. As owner of a Quad G5 my motivation would be more about the 6 bays and the FW 800 on the front than the speed. :)
The G5 is almost as fast per clock cycle.
Apple COULD have released quad G5 3ghz instead, but they want us to use Intel.
The whole Intel project is beacuse of no G5 laptop.
Stupid IBM. I do not like X86, the play plattform.
But, I have changed all my PPC macs to Intel now.
Macbook pro, Macbook, macmini and today a Macpro.
The G5 is almost as fast per clock cycle.
Apple COULD have released quad G5 3ghz instead, but they want us to use Intel.
The whole Intel project is beacuse of no G5 laptop.
Stupid IBM. I do not like X86, the play plattform.
But, I have changed all my PPC macs to Intel now.
Macbook pro, Macbook, macmini and today a Macpro.
SandynJosh
Nov 26, 04:29 PM
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with.
NEWS:
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with.
NEWS:
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
digitalbiker
Aug 4, 09:09 PM
Who cares for Quicken - it's not performance critical. It probably wasn't worth the effort given the gains probaby wouldn't even be noticeable.
I'd think that all Apple's Pro apps market to the same small intel mac userbase, and they're done. They weren't cross platform so I'd think they weren't easy to port.
We all know Adobe's reasons - but still, two years is a long time.
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
I'd think that all Apple's Pro apps market to the same small intel mac userbase, and they're done. They weren't cross platform so I'd think they weren't easy to port.
We all know Adobe's reasons - but still, two years is a long time.
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
Chundles
Aug 3, 12:55 AM
1.67 x 3 = 5
1.67 rounded UP = 2
TWICE
But it's perfectly acceptable to round 1.67 down too, it's half way between 1.5 and 2. Also depends on the price of a Sidcrome socket set.
I'll believe this 2x battery life bollocks when I see the results from the labs, not some chintzy marketing ploy by Intel.
1.67 rounded UP = 2
TWICE
But it's perfectly acceptable to round 1.67 down too, it's half way between 1.5 and 2. Also depends on the price of a Sidcrome socket set.
I'll believe this 2x battery life bollocks when I see the results from the labs, not some chintzy marketing ploy by Intel.
spicyapple
Aug 11, 09:25 AM
Quad Xeons in the MacBook Pro, pretty please. After all, it is Apple's professional notebook line.
iMacZealot
Aug 4, 11:40 PM
If Im not mistaken every KeyNote from Steve Jobs, whether at WWDC, MacWorld or any other event from Apple has been on tuesdays. Why is this one DIFFERENT. Could we see a Movie Store on Tuesday ???????
No. Unlike your last five posts (which have all said the same things, how original) have said, most, if not all keynotes are on Mondays, with the exception of special events typically releasing new iPods. Ever thought of checking something first? it's an amazing thing to do that will prevent you from making the same embarrasing mistake five times.
No. Unlike your last five posts (which have all said the same things, how original) have said, most, if not all keynotes are on Mondays, with the exception of special events typically releasing new iPods. Ever thought of checking something first? it's an amazing thing to do that will prevent you from making the same embarrasing mistake five times.
err404
Apr 5, 04:30 PM
Android is still open... They are just going to be much more tighter on what Products qualify to get the google Logo and the android name.
I mostly agree. The design philosophy will leave it more open then iOS, but the reality for most users is that their subsidized handsets are compromised in openness. Without rooting, functions like tethering or updated ROMs require carrier approval. At the same time rooting itself is discouraged or prevented by most manufactures (rather, they are trying to prevent). Even Google themselves require specific standards be met for access to critical closed apps like the Market Place. Android isn't very compelling w/o Google's closed source apps like Nav.
It's more then the logo and name. The core Android experience all but requires manufactures sacrificing control to Google.
I mostly agree. The design philosophy will leave it more open then iOS, but the reality for most users is that their subsidized handsets are compromised in openness. Without rooting, functions like tethering or updated ROMs require carrier approval. At the same time rooting itself is discouraged or prevented by most manufactures (rather, they are trying to prevent). Even Google themselves require specific standards be met for access to critical closed apps like the Market Place. Android isn't very compelling w/o Google's closed source apps like Nav.
It's more then the logo and name. The core Android experience all but requires manufactures sacrificing control to Google.
ValSalva
Apr 21, 08:01 PM
IMO the Mac Pro looks like an old granny these day's. It's in dire need of a refresh and looks totally out of line when compared to the rest of Apples range. And it's interesting to think that Apple is incapable of properly re-designing the computer because that's what you are saying effectively.
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder :D With the quality control of Apple these days my confidence in them being able to design such a small case with such high powered processors without cooling problems is low.
It would save money with the need for less raw materials.
If there was 1/2 the amount of raw materials in the case can you see the price going down by any more than a few dollars? Isn't most of the cost of a Mac Pro the components?
I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder :D With the quality control of Apple these days my confidence in them being able to design such a small case with such high powered processors without cooling problems is low.
It would save money with the need for less raw materials.
If there was 1/2 the amount of raw materials in the case can you see the price going down by any more than a few dollars? Isn't most of the cost of a Mac Pro the components?
aaronb
Aug 4, 09:44 AM
I'm definitely leaning towards a Paris release, too. It breaks my heart to say it because I know I'm in the same position that a lot of you are in. But the rumored news is that "the company is slated to receive mass shipments of the new Merom Core 2 Duo processors by the first week of September..."
That said, it looks like Apple will be receiving the processors by that date, not having them in MBPs, Minis, and MBs ready to ship.
That said, it looks like Apple will be receiving the processors by that date, not having them in MBPs, Minis, and MBs ready to ship.
Superdrive
Nov 26, 10:27 AM
This looks to be a half-baked computer designed to run specific apps that control/present instead of being able to manipulate data.
Apple should give it full capabilities, about a 12" enclosure, and a durable case and we have ourselves a new toy and I've got my 12" PB replacement!
Apple should give it full capabilities, about a 12" enclosure, and a durable case and we have ourselves a new toy and I've got my 12" PB replacement!
Popeye206
Apr 23, 08:45 PM
Depends on who you talk too. OS X presents resolution as just the vertical and horizontal pixel counts, without mention of the PPI. For example, looking at System Preferences > Displays will show resolutions in this format, w/o mention of display size and PPI. The iPhone 4 tech specs seems to do the same thing, where resolution is linked to the pixel count and the PPI is mentioned afterwords.
mcrain
Apr 15, 09:02 AM
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.
No.
Capital gains do NOT stand in the way of investment in business. Why? Because capital gains ONLY apply to the gains realized upon the SALE of the shares or ownership interest in the company. That sale has ZERO effect on the business' profit, capitalization, available resources, etc... That sale ONLY might have an effect on the value of the shares of the company in the hands of other investors. That's what is called the secondary market.
What you are talking about is the initial offering of the shares by the company in which the company is looking to exchange ownership, and everything that goes with it, for capital investment.
One of the things that goes with ownership, and one of the two primary reasons people invest, is a share of profits. If a potential business has a good business plan, a good product and will make money, people will invest in it. When it makes money, that income is taxed as ordinary income when distributed, or if kept without re-investment, as business income. This money is NOT taxed as capital gain!
The second profit motive for investment is the idea that the success of the business will generate demand for ownership, thus increasing the value of ownership on the secondary market. This could lead to capital gains if you choose to sell your ownership interest.
Higher taxes result in businesses that choose to reinvest and increase their operations rather than distributing money to its owners. This causes increases in value, increases in operations, increases in hiring, increases in economic impact, etc...
Higher taxes result in investors choosing businesses that are increasing in value, generating higher income rates, operating in riskier, but higher yield, fields, etc...
Capital gains don't prevent investment, they merely affect how much tax is paid on the sale of an investment you have held for over one year.