snberk103
May 5, 11:02 PM
I don't think it matters. If you are in an Science or Engineering, unit conversions are the least of your worries. That was my point. Metric or not-metric in our daily lives have little bearing on those in rigorous math-oriented disciplines. I might be wrong, but I'd like to hear why.
Yes, you are correct - once you are in science or engineering. But how many children never get there because of a system that over-complicates even simple calculations. All it takes is a couple of bad years/teachers/experiences to put a kid totally off of math. Truly brilliant kids will likely overcome these set-backs, but most kids are not brilliant.... they are good to competent. And good to competent engineers are needed as much as the ones who put landers on the Mars... oh, wait wasn't there a problem with one of those that involved non-metric measurements? (what is the smiley for "snarky" and "tongue in cheek"?)
Yes, you are correct - once you are in science or engineering. But how many children never get there because of a system that over-complicates even simple calculations. All it takes is a couple of bad years/teachers/experiences to put a kid totally off of math. Truly brilliant kids will likely overcome these set-backs, but most kids are not brilliant.... they are good to competent. And good to competent engineers are needed as much as the ones who put landers on the Mars... oh, wait wasn't there a problem with one of those that involved non-metric measurements? (what is the smiley for "snarky" and "tongue in cheek"?)
Tones2
Apr 26, 02:33 PM
If in fact Apple waits until September for the iPhone 5 and even then only have a speed bump and a slightly better camera, this picture is only going to get worse. They need 4G, a larger screen, a microSD slot or a bump to 64 GB, a USB input, and the rest of the MODERN hardware features that HTC phones are putting out almost monthly.
It's NOT about the OS - who the heck cares. The OS is transparent at this point. They are close enough not to make a difference. And the Android app market is catching up tp the iOS app market at least in terms of bigger name quality apps (not so much the 10,000 iOS fart apps out there), and that difference is shrinking all the time.
It's all about hardware now - and the iPhone is currently woefully behind -and probably will remain until mid next year.
Tony
It's NOT about the OS - who the heck cares. The OS is transparent at this point. They are close enough not to make a difference. And the Android app market is catching up tp the iOS app market at least in terms of bigger name quality apps (not so much the 10,000 iOS fart apps out there), and that difference is shrinking all the time.
It's all about hardware now - and the iPhone is currently woefully behind -and probably will remain until mid next year.
Tony
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
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. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
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. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
jonharris200
Aug 7, 03:36 PM
No iMac update (but added expectation of one with the pro-sumer-sized 'gap' people have commented on) is good news for my wallet and my patience. :rolleyes:
nanofrog
Apr 29, 01:41 AM
What has me wondering, is how Apple might support the 14 SATA devices that the X79 chipset will natively provide. Presumably, they will determine that their average customer only needs X SATA ports, and the rest will be left unexposed. With TB support, this may not be that big of an issue for those that really need or want 10-12 drives.
They already provide fewer USB ports than the ICH10 actually provides (12 on the chip, but Apple only provides access to 5), so it's certainly possible this sort of thinking could be applied elsewhere.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
They already provide fewer USB ports than the ICH10 actually provides (12 on the chip, but Apple only provides access to 5), so it's certainly possible this sort of thinking could be applied elsewhere.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 09:50 PM
Ok, that makes sense. I guess Conroe is the only Core 2 Duo chip that's available today. (And Woodcrest but it's marketed as Xeon 5100)
Merom is also availible today.
They have been shipping them for a few weeks now. Even a a few weeks before they were introduced. Intel just says that they won't show up on the market until the end of August.
I think Apple could have their out before that. If the rumors are ture, they just have to replace the Merom chip in the assembly line in place of Yonah. They already have the computers built (more or less).
Merom is also availible today.
They have been shipping them for a few weeks now. Even a a few weeks before they were introduced. Intel just says that they won't show up on the market until the end of August.
I think Apple could have their out before that. If the rumors are ture, they just have to replace the Merom chip in the assembly line in place of Yonah. They already have the computers built (more or less).
Jodles
Nov 2, 07:59 PM
just out of curiosity, what type of work?
Lots of places require antivirus software installed to access their internet. I'm at uni and no mac or pc will get internet access unless they pass a test with valid and up to date antivirus. I think it's a good thing, even for mac users, as it limits the amount of viruses that are passed on.
We get McAfee on a uni license, but this might make me consider Sophos instead if it's lighter on system resources (the only thing I don't like about antivirus software...)
Lots of places require antivirus software installed to access their internet. I'm at uni and no mac or pc will get internet access unless they pass a test with valid and up to date antivirus. I think it's a good thing, even for mac users, as it limits the amount of viruses that are passed on.
We get McAfee on a uni license, but this might make me consider Sophos instead if it's lighter on system resources (the only thing I don't like about antivirus software...)
wclyffe
Dec 3, 08:57 PM
What do you guys think, should we wait or go ahead and buy from somewhere else. Or just wait fo Magellans car kit?
Hard call. I like the idea that I would not have to remove my case to use the Magellan, but that's all I like about the look of it. It looks cheaper to me and I'm guessing we would be waiting until the end of January, or later, before the price would start to drop from $130. From viewing the many Youtube videos on the TomTom car kit it seems pretty great for $90.
Hard call. I like the idea that I would not have to remove my case to use the Magellan, but that's all I like about the look of it. It looks cheaper to me and I'm guessing we would be waiting until the end of January, or later, before the price would start to drop from $130. From viewing the many Youtube videos on the TomTom car kit it seems pretty great for $90.
GGJstudios
Jan 12, 09:57 AM
This is quite ignorant on a number of levels:
It's not ignorant at all.
1. Trojans do exist for OSX,
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
although unless you're logged in as admin (and who routinely operates their Mac like that?
I do, as do many others. There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
the request to install should alert you to something wrong.
Exactly. See "common sense" remark above.
2. Security through obscurity is no security at all, especially as OSX and iOS become more mainstream.
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact. The fact is, OSX has a larger market than ever before, growing by over a million Macs every month, and the number of malware threats is at an all-time low, the number of viruses is now zero.
3. If you send files to friends, relations, or business colleagues with a less fortunate computing experience it would be playing nice not to pass on nasties to them.
If they use even a tiny amount of the above-mentioned common sense, they already have anti-virus running on their computers. If not, they have a much larger exposure to malware from other sources than they do from a Mac user sending them a file. If someone stands in the middle of the freeway, my choosing to drive on a different road to avoid hitting them does nothing to ensure they're protected.
Talk to GGJStudios about point #3. He will rip your head off and call you unprofessional :D
No, he won't. He will, however, respectfully point out the fallacy of that argument.
It's not ignorant at all.
1. Trojans do exist for OSX,
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
although unless you're logged in as admin (and who routinely operates their Mac like that?
I do, as do many others. There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
the request to install should alert you to something wrong.
Exactly. See "common sense" remark above.
2. Security through obscurity is no security at all, especially as OSX and iOS become more mainstream.
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact. The fact is, OSX has a larger market than ever before, growing by over a million Macs every month, and the number of malware threats is at an all-time low, the number of viruses is now zero.
3. If you send files to friends, relations, or business colleagues with a less fortunate computing experience it would be playing nice not to pass on nasties to them.
If they use even a tiny amount of the above-mentioned common sense, they already have anti-virus running on their computers. If not, they have a much larger exposure to malware from other sources than they do from a Mac user sending them a file. If someone stands in the middle of the freeway, my choosing to drive on a different road to avoid hitting them does nothing to ensure they're protected.
Talk to GGJStudios about point #3. He will rip your head off and call you unprofessional :D
No, he won't. He will, however, respectfully point out the fallacy of that argument.
Mac Fly (film)
Aug 2, 10:52 AM
Mac Pro + Cinema Display (iSight), Leopard demo, Core 2 Duo iMac & MacBook Pro. New Nano's too (more storage + bluetooth)
Long shot, iPhone + iChat 4.0 (VoiP), Mac & Windows.
Long shot, iPhone + iChat 4.0 (VoiP), Mac & Windows.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 7, 02:04 PM
106fps in Doom 3 at high quality with the X1900 XT :eek: :eek:
What a machine! I'll have 3 to go please.
What a machine! I'll have 3 to go please.
mrblack927
Apr 21, 05:02 PM
I think the next Mac Pro refresh will be a huge milestone. Not only will it be the first case redesign in nearly a decade and add all the latest tech (USB3, sata III, thunderbolt, etc) but I believe Apple will take this opportunity to finally revise the pricing structure. Over the past few years, Apple has been making a clear shift towards the consumer market. Part of that is arguably negative ("dumbing things down") but the positive is more reasonable prices. The Mac Pro is the only computer left that hasn't been revised. My hope is that Apple will create a few models of the new Mac Pro, at least one of which is an affordable mid-range consumer tower starting under the the $2,000 mark.
Unfortunately, they will probably wait to use the new performance desktop/server sandy bridge CPUs which Intel won't have ready until Q4 2011 (or later). If that's true then we won't see these new beauties until 1H 2012. :(
Unfortunately, they will probably wait to use the new performance desktop/server sandy bridge CPUs which Intel won't have ready until Q4 2011 (or later). If that's true then we won't see these new beauties until 1H 2012. :(
Ammo
Apr 20, 07:46 AM
No LTE/4G = No sale
Would HSPA+ w/ expanded backhaul persuade you?
I think people highly underestimate HSPA+'s capabilities. If it's giving you 4G speeds, why does it matter if it's HSPA+ than LTE? (While the LTE network is being built...which will definitely have its advantages over time BUT for the time being HSPA+ is screaming fast)
Would HSPA+ w/ expanded backhaul persuade you?
I think people highly underestimate HSPA+'s capabilities. If it's giving you 4G speeds, why does it matter if it's HSPA+ than LTE? (While the LTE network is being built...which will definitely have its advantages over time BUT for the time being HSPA+ is screaming fast)
tokevino
Aug 7, 03:37 PM
A 2.66GHz CPU is about $400 more expensive than a 2.0GHz, BTO only takes $300 off, so the base config is the best choice. There is a gap, no single processor mac pro, not like Apple's sale strategy. Either Cornore mac pro or iMac will be great.
No, it's "TWO 2.66GHz CPUs are about $800 more expensive than TWO 2.0GHz.....".
No, it's "TWO 2.66GHz CPUs are about $800 more expensive than TWO 2.0GHz.....".
iris_failsafe
Nov 22, 06:52 PM
Apple learned that with their old music player, you know the one before the iPod, oh wait there wasn't one...
Apple 26.2
Apr 21, 04:14 PM
Hello enterprise... it's nice to meet you!
ptysell
Apr 7, 10:58 AM
Ehh, purposeful or not (as a sabotage)...not good news for iPad competition:( Which isnt good news for us iPad users...Apple needs constant pressure to release revolutionary products.
The iPod hasn't see ANY competition in the past 10 years and they seem to be doing fine with pushing that product line.
The iPod hasn't see ANY competition in the past 10 years and they seem to be doing fine with pushing that product line.
~Shard~
Aug 12, 01:05 AM
That being said bring on the quad cores in the MBP's in a couple years. Just when I will be getting ready to upgrade. :D
Sounds like you'll be getting a nice Penryn MBP then! ;) :D :cool:
Sounds like you'll be getting a nice Penryn MBP then! ;) :D :cool:
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 10:26 AM
I'd rather have Apple ( or ANY company for that matter ) compete rather than having it throttle its competition.
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple has competition, Apple. When your products have reached market saturation, your only sales are people upgrading to the newest model. Apple must make the 2012 iPad better than the or they will stagnate and die. RIM, Google and Microsoft are not factors. (If Apple ever fails to compete to the level RIM or Microsoft are factors, they will have bigger problems.)
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple has competition, Apple. When your products have reached market saturation, your only sales are people upgrading to the newest model. Apple must make the 2012 iPad better than the or they will stagnate and die. RIM, Google and Microsoft are not factors. (If Apple ever fails to compete to the level RIM or Microsoft are factors, they will have bigger problems.)
EricNau
Nov 26, 10:37 AM
Looks like that 8 pound, 10" iPod might be true after all. :D
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
milozauckerman
Aug 7, 06:14 PM
I'm SO angry too! I'm seriously going to be PISSED OFF until Apple offers a 50 GHz workstation with 32 GB of RAM and a 4 TB hard drive for free!
Reductio ad absurdum only works if the original argument/request was absurd (hmmm...).
I, for one, am not asking for anything extraordinary or underpriced. I think the people looking for a $999 desktop are nuts, too. That's a market where Apple doesn't have a niche to get into.
But a sub-$2k desktop with a decent-to-good graphics card (and yes, the 7300 GT is completely useless - the x1600 in the iMac I'm using right now
I want something in competition with the mid-range PCs of the world - a tower with a 2.4GHz Conroe or a 2.0GHz single Xeon, with a graphics card at least capable of playing whatever games are out (once upon a time, I remember playing games now and then), two hard drive bays (four is nice, but two gives me a boot drive and a media drive, backups can go external), for $1599-2000 retail.
If Gateway can sell me a 2.4GHz Conroe with X1900 XT - more than adequate for my needs in photography and design, with the added benefit of games - for $1850, why the hell can't Apple sell me one for $2k? I'll happily pay the Apple Tax for something that genuinely fits my needs.
Reductio ad absurdum only works if the original argument/request was absurd (hmmm...).
I, for one, am not asking for anything extraordinary or underpriced. I think the people looking for a $999 desktop are nuts, too. That's a market where Apple doesn't have a niche to get into.
But a sub-$2k desktop with a decent-to-good graphics card (and yes, the 7300 GT is completely useless - the x1600 in the iMac I'm using right now
I want something in competition with the mid-range PCs of the world - a tower with a 2.4GHz Conroe or a 2.0GHz single Xeon, with a graphics card at least capable of playing whatever games are out (once upon a time, I remember playing games now and then), two hard drive bays (four is nice, but two gives me a boot drive and a media drive, backups can go external), for $1599-2000 retail.
If Gateway can sell me a 2.4GHz Conroe with X1900 XT - more than adequate for my needs in photography and design, with the added benefit of games - for $1850, why the hell can't Apple sell me one for $2k? I'll happily pay the Apple Tax for something that genuinely fits my needs.
Endow
Sep 16, 01:30 PM
If there IS an upgrade/redesign/whatever do you think there will be a 12" MacbookPro or do you guys think Apple is not going for that on the Pro line?
(also are both 15" and 17" upgrades to be expected or just 15"??)
(also are both 15" and 17" upgrades to be expected or just 15"??)
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 7, 03:47 PM
The old Macfanclub hating the gamer , we have heard it before. There isnt any reason Macs cant game. You buy a thousand or two thousand machine it should be able to game. Mini cant.............Powermac is pure Overkill workstation. A gigantic hole for sure. Here's to the Mac gamers ! Its folks like you that have kept the fun in Mac :D Work Sucks:) edit in response to thataboy
iVeBeenDrinkin'
Apr 9, 06:35 PM
2