Chupa Chupa
Aug 4, 12:07 PM
Don't worry, I say this now -NO MBP CPU UPDATE AT WWDC- or till December for that matter.
I think that depends on what Dell, Sony, Toshiba, etc, come out with. No way is Apple going to still be selling a 2.16 Core Duo at it's top end laptop when the PC makers have Core 2 Duo chips. I'm pretty sure Apple will speed bump the MBP as soon after they get enough Meroms for production. Remember, they bumped the original MBP only 3 months after intro, and almost as soon as the faster chips were available.
I think that depends on what Dell, Sony, Toshiba, etc, come out with. No way is Apple going to still be selling a 2.16 Core Duo at it's top end laptop when the PC makers have Core 2 Duo chips. I'm pretty sure Apple will speed bump the MBP as soon after they get enough Meroms for production. Remember, they bumped the original MBP only 3 months after intro, and almost as soon as the faster chips were available.
G4DP
Mar 29, 02:02 PM
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Up to another 50% on what they already cost?
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
Up to another 50% on what they already cost?
chedda
Apr 22, 02:35 AM
How utterly retarded does one have to be to get to the point where they put workstations on top of the desk instead of on the floor where they belong? Do you really need to put your Apple computer next to your overpriced, glossy Apple display to prove yourself?
kate middleton wedding dresses
kate middleton knitted dress
kate middleton wedding dress
Pick Out Kate Middleton#39;s
Who designed Kate Middleton#39;s
Kate Middleton and Prince
Kate Middleton Wedding Dress
kate middleton wedding dress
Kate Middleton#39;s Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton#39;s Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton#39;s wedding
Kate Middleton Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton Wedding Dress
Kate Middleton wedding dress
Next Tuesday
Sep 15, 07:07 PM
Of course MBPs are being updated... I BOUGHT ONE TODAY! :rolleyes:
-Matt
Cross your fingers.
-Matt
Cross your fingers.
milozauckerman
Jul 22, 11:58 AM
Every pc laptop being sold at a lower price than the MacBook is also competing with the Macbook. Some people look at price before features.
By this logic Yugos and Ferraris are also in competition. Hey, they both drive!
A $499 Dell laptop is not Apple's direct competition - to find that you look at price, features and size. Which is where every manufacturer will start to move their $1299 and $1499 laptops over to Core 2 Duo. The $1099 is a little more problematic (the low-end Core 2 being more expensive than Core Duo's low-end), but maybe Apple will take a small hit in order to push the MacBook market even harder.
"You can buy that $1000 Windows laptop with old technology - or you can get this new Apple laptop with the latest and greatest for the same money, Mr. Switcher."
By this logic Yugos and Ferraris are also in competition. Hey, they both drive!
A $499 Dell laptop is not Apple's direct competition - to find that you look at price, features and size. Which is where every manufacturer will start to move their $1299 and $1499 laptops over to Core 2 Duo. The $1099 is a little more problematic (the low-end Core 2 being more expensive than Core Duo's low-end), but maybe Apple will take a small hit in order to push the MacBook market even harder.
"You can buy that $1000 Windows laptop with old technology - or you can get this new Apple laptop with the latest and greatest for the same money, Mr. Switcher."
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.
gigidey
Mar 26, 10:12 PM
TechCrunch likely doesn't know jack about dates or new features in iOS 5. Just saying.
They have a terrible track record. I think the fact that they're still going with the iPad 3 release this fall completely invalidates anything they're saying.
They have a terrible track record. I think the fact that they're still going with the iPad 3 release this fall completely invalidates anything they're saying.
Rot'nApple
Apr 25, 09:35 AM
"We don't track anyone."
Sent from your backyard.
:D :D :D
Shouldn't that be "Received in your backyard... no wait, your kitchen..., no wait, your bathroom... hmmm, hmmm, hmm, hm, hmm,... hey wash your hands now that you are finished!... now received out the front door, getting into car... did you know your license has expired?... Just help'n you out... :rolleyes: :eek:
Could you please explain the necessity of the passive location-tracking tool embedded in my iPhone?
Reply: Oh yes they do.
Not much in the way of explanation from Steve...
Guess that e-mailer is probably learning the ins and outs of his new Droid...
/
/
/
Sent from your backyard.
:D :D :D
Shouldn't that be "Received in your backyard... no wait, your kitchen..., no wait, your bathroom... hmmm, hmmm, hmm, hm, hmm,... hey wash your hands now that you are finished!... now received out the front door, getting into car... did you know your license has expired?... Just help'n you out... :rolleyes: :eek:
Could you please explain the necessity of the passive location-tracking tool embedded in my iPhone?
Reply: Oh yes they do.
Not much in the way of explanation from Steve...
Guess that e-mailer is probably learning the ins and outs of his new Droid...
/
/
/
ciTiger
Apr 23, 06:11 PM
Ok, I'll try this question, which is a fair question...............
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
hobo.hopkins
Mar 30, 10:47 AM
The most dogmatic persons I have ever conversed with are evolutionists and atheists. Their decrying of religion is hilarious in view of the beliefs they present themselves. Faith. Credulity. Different words, often confused, often misapplied.
I think by definition religious individuals have to be considerably more dogmatic than atheists or evolutionists.
I think by definition religious individuals have to be considerably more dogmatic than atheists or evolutionists.
JAT
Apr 25, 11:22 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".
Apple knows exactly how to find me. My iTunes receipt from Friday is proof of that. ;)
Apple knows exactly how to find me. My iTunes receipt from Friday is proof of that. ;)
Amazing Iceman
Apr 25, 10:08 AM
Hilarious that the email sender said a DROID won't track him...hahahah so funny... as if a "GOOGLE" phone doesn't track their Android user's every move... This isn't really a iPhone matter, its a matter of all smartphones, with maybe a little exception for blackberry's. It's really nothing new... Google even has a stored database for random screen-caps it takes on all its Android users at any time.
Android, WinMo, Symbian, WebOS, etc. openness makes them the most vulnerable, easiest targets of all.
The iPhone is more secure in this sense, as it's locked. Not impossible to break, but at least difficult.
We would need to go back to the days of the old flip-phone with no application capabilities: no symbian, no java, nothing!
Android, WinMo, Symbian, WebOS, etc. openness makes them the most vulnerable, easiest targets of all.
The iPhone is more secure in this sense, as it's locked. Not impossible to break, but at least difficult.
We would need to go back to the days of the old flip-phone with no application capabilities: no symbian, no java, nothing!
aptar
Sep 17, 02:31 AM
You couldn't buy the new 80GB iPod at the new lower price of only $349? Man you are buying an obsolete inferior iPod. That is plain lame short sightedness. :eek:
If I were you I would phone back and insist on the new 80GB model for sure.
I'm assuming this person is using a rebate. If so, no, you can't get the new model unless you want to pay full retail price for it.
I chose a 30gb (last gen) because it cost me less than $100
If I were you I would phone back and insist on the new 80GB model for sure.
I'm assuming this person is using a rebate. If so, no, you can't get the new model unless you want to pay full retail price for it.
I chose a 30gb (last gen) because it cost me less than $100
SirHaakon
Mar 30, 12:25 AM
I really do like the concept of having an enormous amount of online storage, immediately accessible from anywhere.. but ultimately I see this as an issue of me having to pay someone else for granting access to things I already own.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
Mainyehc
Nov 26, 02:59 PM
Like this? Linkety (http://www.oqo.com/)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
Hey, I remember reading about this device back when it was still a prototype. It seems that the company was founded by some ex-Apple engineers (and it certainly shows... that thing suspiciously resembles a shrunken TiBook). I thought, at the time, that using it to run XPee would be such a waste, and after seeing the final product, I'm definitely sure about it.
If there's one device that could have been developed by Apple, or deserved to run OS X, this is definitely it.
Just look at the specs:
1GHz Transmeta Crusoe
30GB hard drive (shock-mounted)
512MB DDR RAM
Dimensions: 4.9" x 3.4" x 0.9"
Weight: 14 ounces
800 x 480 W-VGA 5" transflective display (indoor/outdoor readable)
3D accelerated graphics with 8MB of video RAM
QWERTY thumb keyboard with mouse buttons and TrackStik
802.11b wireless
Bluetooth wireless
4-pin FireWire (1394)
USB 2.0
3.5mm stereo headphone jack
Microphone
Speaker
Digital pen
Removable lithium polymer battery
Battery life up to three hours, depending on usage
OQO docking cable includes:
3D accelerated 1280 x 1024 VGA video output
Additional USB
Additional FireWire (1394)
Ethernet
DC power
Audio out
These specs roughly match the early 2004 G4 iBook (it has less 1/4 of VRAM but 2x more RAM!), so with some optimization, I'm guessing Tiger/x86 would run fine on that Trasmeta processor. Sure, it's a tad expensive and the battery life isn't that great, but it has some sweet specs...
Of course, I'm preety sure Apple could do even better, especially with their accumulated experience with the iPod and all those wicked patents, and some Intel partnership and their ULV processors, so I'm very eager to see what they come up with next year... ;)
A bit more expensive than you would like, but otherwise seems to fit pretty well.
Hey, I remember reading about this device back when it was still a prototype. It seems that the company was founded by some ex-Apple engineers (and it certainly shows... that thing suspiciously resembles a shrunken TiBook). I thought, at the time, that using it to run XPee would be such a waste, and after seeing the final product, I'm definitely sure about it.
If there's one device that could have been developed by Apple, or deserved to run OS X, this is definitely it.
Just look at the specs:
1GHz Transmeta Crusoe
30GB hard drive (shock-mounted)
512MB DDR RAM
Dimensions: 4.9" x 3.4" x 0.9"
Weight: 14 ounces
800 x 480 W-VGA 5" transflective display (indoor/outdoor readable)
3D accelerated graphics with 8MB of video RAM
QWERTY thumb keyboard with mouse buttons and TrackStik
802.11b wireless
Bluetooth wireless
4-pin FireWire (1394)
USB 2.0
3.5mm stereo headphone jack
Microphone
Speaker
Digital pen
Removable lithium polymer battery
Battery life up to three hours, depending on usage
OQO docking cable includes:
3D accelerated 1280 x 1024 VGA video output
Additional USB
Additional FireWire (1394)
Ethernet
DC power
Audio out
These specs roughly match the early 2004 G4 iBook (it has less 1/4 of VRAM but 2x more RAM!), so with some optimization, I'm guessing Tiger/x86 would run fine on that Trasmeta processor. Sure, it's a tad expensive and the battery life isn't that great, but it has some sweet specs...
Of course, I'm preety sure Apple could do even better, especially with their accumulated experience with the iPod and all those wicked patents, and some Intel partnership and their ULV processors, so I'm very eager to see what they come up with next year... ;)
Steven in VA
May 8, 11:19 PM
Didn't somebody already point out the family account bargain?
$149 for 5 accounts; only 30 bucks per account per year seems like a good deal for us. Even though our kids are grown they still like having it. And the 10GB storage on the sub-accounts is still big enough to be useful.
But I just got the email notice that mine/ours is just about to renew, too. To have it become free for new users in a week, or a month, even, would be somewhat of a bite . . .
$149 for 5 accounts; only 30 bucks per account per year seems like a good deal for us. Even though our kids are grown they still like having it. And the 10GB storage on the sub-accounts is still big enough to be useful.
But I just got the email notice that mine/ours is just about to renew, too. To have it become free for new users in a week, or a month, even, would be somewhat of a bite . . .
louis Fashion
Mar 28, 10:50 AM
Wow, a new iPad3 AND a new phone. Guess I will have to cash in some worthless Bank of America stock next year. Not that it will be worth anymore then than now. Yuck. (the stock, not the new iToys)
Popeye206
Apr 6, 06:04 PM
If the sales are so bad why don't they just replace it from the stock they have?
Good question, but they did have them in stock. I was there last night looking at TV related equipment, stopped and looked at the iPad2. Asked if they had any in stock, they said no, and then I asked about the Xoom. The rep said they had some in stock and when I started walking to the demo unit, he pointed out it was broken and had been for a couple weeks. Not sure why they don't replace it unless they don't feel it's worth it. That's all I could figure.
Good question, but they did have them in stock. I was there last night looking at TV related equipment, stopped and looked at the iPad2. Asked if they had any in stock, they said no, and then I asked about the Xoom. The rep said they had some in stock and when I started walking to the demo unit, he pointed out it was broken and had been for a couple weeks. Not sure why they don't replace it unless they don't feel it's worth it. That's all I could figure.
illegalprelude
Aug 4, 08:53 PM
DO you guys think the Mac MINI will get a speed bump anytime soon? A friend of mine, shes looking to come over to the Mac side and the MINI seems perfect for her needs but something faster would be nice then the current.
bradc
Aug 7, 03:15 PM
Just ordered my Mac Pro!! :D
Quad 3Ghz, 4GB ram, 250GB HD + 500 GB HD, X1900 XT 512MB, Bluetooth+Airport, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1 Superdrive (holding out for BluRay) 30" ACD... $8264.23 :eek:
Estimated Ship Time... 3- 5 Weeks :eek: :eek:
This is gonna be good.
I went Quad 3Ghz, 1GB Ram, 160GB HD, X1900XT, Bluetooth and Fibre-Channel, 2-Superdrives. Then I'll buy more RAM and a bigger hd when it gets here. I am sooooooooo pumped!
Quad 3Ghz, 4GB ram, 250GB HD + 500 GB HD, X1900 XT 512MB, Bluetooth+Airport, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1 Superdrive (holding out for BluRay) 30" ACD... $8264.23 :eek:
Estimated Ship Time... 3- 5 Weeks :eek: :eek:
This is gonna be good.
I went Quad 3Ghz, 1GB Ram, 160GB HD, X1900XT, Bluetooth and Fibre-Channel, 2-Superdrives. Then I'll buy more RAM and a bigger hd when it gets here. I am sooooooooo pumped!
StarshipTrooper
Nov 2, 03:41 PM
I wonder if it will work on the newer models that are made out of Aluminum, or only the older plastic ones?
they should update their icons.
they should update their icons.
Xenious
Sep 11, 10:05 AM
If they add the "album only" feature to *All* Radiohead's songs, more bands will follow. Mostly for marketing reasons. There are lots of those crappy "Radiohead wannabes - ohhhhhh our songs should not be outside their album":mad:
Now, I can't wait for tomorrow's event!
If we get more album only things, you might as well buy the CD instead. Nothing upsets me more than an entire album on itunes which is album only.
Now, I can't wait for tomorrow's event!
If we get more album only things, you might as well buy the CD instead. Nothing upsets me more than an entire album on itunes which is album only.
ozone
Nov 26, 10:33 PM
Not. Gonna. Happen. The tablet market is very small, and for good reason. Why use a tablet when a laptop fits the bill? Or a PDA? It's a glorified scribble toy. Apple's not going to try and grab such a miniscule market. There's no reason to even try.
You naysayers are a tiresome lot. I've read so many "tablets are stupid" related comments in the last year or so it's ridiculous. Interestingly, many of the comments don't seem to come from ACTUAL tablet users. Sure, they're not perfect, but then again, all my students want one, quite a few other professors use one, and I see more and more of them being used in class. How many of you have tried to type notes in a meeting where it would just be plain impolite, but you need more than just pen and paper? In fact, the main complaint is NOT that the tablet form factor is limiting - it's the OS. They all want Mac OS X.
Remember that the world didn't want a minivan until Chrysler created it either. Keep THAT in mind. Don't knock what you don't know.
You naysayers are a tiresome lot. I've read so many "tablets are stupid" related comments in the last year or so it's ridiculous. Interestingly, many of the comments don't seem to come from ACTUAL tablet users. Sure, they're not perfect, but then again, all my students want one, quite a few other professors use one, and I see more and more of them being used in class. How many of you have tried to type notes in a meeting where it would just be plain impolite, but you need more than just pen and paper? In fact, the main complaint is NOT that the tablet form factor is limiting - it's the OS. They all want Mac OS X.
Remember that the world didn't want a minivan until Chrysler created it either. Keep THAT in mind. Don't knock what you don't know.
marvel2
Nov 13, 03:19 PM
Which leaves the only concern left being clarify of calls.
I went on a drive on my lunch and received my first call through the TomTom kit today. What I can say is that the speaker clarity was good and the mic picked up my voice suprisingly good for the distance I had it from the driver's seat. I had it mounted on the windshield. However, I did find myself talking a bit louder than normal to ensure the mic would pick up everything, and it did. Throughout the conversation, the person I was talking on the phone with never asked me to repeat anything. I was able to carry on a conversation throughout my drive as I normally would in my car - hands free :p
The speaker volume on the TomTom kit leaves a little bit to desired in my opinion. I found myself constantly moving the volume switch up, but wasn't sure it was on its highest setting because it isn't a 'dial' type adjuster. Although the speaker was loud enough to hear, I wanted it a little louder. However, this may be because my car does not dampen road noise very well. I'm sure your sedan will be much quiter and the speaker volume will be adequate. The speaker quality is clear enough to hold a conversation.
I went on a drive on my lunch and received my first call through the TomTom kit today. What I can say is that the speaker clarity was good and the mic picked up my voice suprisingly good for the distance I had it from the driver's seat. I had it mounted on the windshield. However, I did find myself talking a bit louder than normal to ensure the mic would pick up everything, and it did. Throughout the conversation, the person I was talking on the phone with never asked me to repeat anything. I was able to carry on a conversation throughout my drive as I normally would in my car - hands free :p
The speaker volume on the TomTom kit leaves a little bit to desired in my opinion. I found myself constantly moving the volume switch up, but wasn't sure it was on its highest setting because it isn't a 'dial' type adjuster. Although the speaker was loud enough to hear, I wanted it a little louder. However, this may be because my car does not dampen road noise very well. I'm sure your sedan will be much quiter and the speaker volume will be adequate. The speaker quality is clear enough to hold a conversation.