japanime
Mar 30, 07:27 AM
Saying happy employees are good employees is an idiom, like a penny saved is a penny earned.
Thank you for the English lesson. If I ever find myself in Arizona, I will be sure to enroll in your class.
Thank you for the English lesson. If I ever find myself in Arizona, I will be sure to enroll in your class.
ChrisTX
Apr 20, 05:34 AM
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Have you ever tried to run any iPhone apps on the iPad? Have you not noticed that what they scale down to is a size larger than the iPhone's current 3.5" size? Not sure why Apple chose a size slightly larger than 3.5" but none the less they scale just fine.
NATO
Apr 18, 04:34 PM
Lawyers don't sue people; people sue people...
... Lawyers protect people from people with worse Lawyers
(Sorry, been watching American Dad too much recently)
... Lawyers protect people from people with worse Lawyers
(Sorry, been watching American Dad too much recently)
toujames
Apr 21, 11:22 PM
Steve: "Introducing, the new iRack!" :D
ebolamonkey3
Apr 9, 06:09 PM
All depends on whether the (9+3) is on the top or bottom. As the OP typed it, it's on the top.
48/2(9+3) = 24 * 12 = 288
48/[2(9+3)] would've been = 2
48/2(9+3) = 24 * 12 = 288
48/[2(9+3)] would've been = 2
Reach9
Mar 26, 10:18 PM
As long as they show it and preview it, I'm okay with waiting. Especially if it's a redesign
Agreed. As long as the preview looks amazing, and Apple delivers, and if this is a complete revamp of iOS, then i'm all up for more waiting.
But the iPhone 5 should be released in the usual time period.
Agreed. As long as the preview looks amazing, and Apple delivers, and if this is a complete revamp of iOS, then i'm all up for more waiting.
But the iPhone 5 should be released in the usual time period.
Full of Win
Apr 25, 09:23 AM
Nothing to see here...just the unabashed evilness of Apple shining through. I'm sure Apple will 'flash the wad' to the right people and make this issue go away...sad :( We are nothing more than chattel to Apple Consumer Electronics, where we are tracked and monitored like open range livestock. This is how they view us, as THEIR herd to do with as they please.
Welcome to the future guys. :mad:
Welcome to the future guys. :mad:
Satori
Apr 7, 09:32 AM
Shame - a bit of competition couldn't hurt iPad development.
appleguy123
May 2, 11:01 PM
In I haven't read the rules yet, so there's a small chance that that might change.
ABernardoJr
May 6, 01:22 AM
No.. They make mobile processors. Low power usage.
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
The short story is that Apple is moving the laptop line, and presumably desktops too, to ARM based chips as soon as possible.
Anyway the main reason why I feel reluctant about this hypothetical (and I stress hypothetical) situation is the potentiality of troubles that would come from transitioning everything again (like others have said).
P.S. Is anyone else slightly concerned with the site's name being "SemiAccurate"? lol It's just a name of course and I'm half joking, but still :D
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
The short story is that Apple is moving the laptop line, and presumably desktops too, to ARM based chips as soon as possible.
Anyway the main reason why I feel reluctant about this hypothetical (and I stress hypothetical) situation is the potentiality of troubles that would come from transitioning everything again (like others have said).
P.S. Is anyone else slightly concerned with the site's name being "SemiAccurate"? lol It's just a name of course and I'm half joking, but still :D
n00bst3r
Sep 11, 03:25 AM
n00bst3r predicts:
1. Movie Store
love you more than myself.
love you more than myself. i
i love you more than myself.
love you more than myself. i
love you more than myself.
love you more than myself.
i love you more than myself.
love you more than myself. i
1. Movie Store
marvel2
Jan 14, 11:51 AM
So I solved my problem. Erased the TomTom kit from the iPhones BT memory and repaired the two devices. Now the iPhone automatically pairs when I dock it in the TomTom kit.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
MacAddict1978
Apr 25, 10:46 AM
And they can get that data directly from the telecos without access to your phone. I highly doubt this database exists for that purpose when there are much more seamless/invisible ways to get the information. (Waits patiently for someone to down vote this reply since I mentioned the government getting information from the telcos...ignoring the fact I never took a position on it personally. So much for staying informed.)
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
No... they use a third party company to hack the phone, and have been for the past year. It's funny this just not became newsworthy as the cops have been on this since the 3GS and have convicted people with the location data. Sorry about your alibis.
http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20056344-281.html
No... they use a third party company to hack the phone, and have been for the past year. It's funny this just not became newsworthy as the cops have been on this since the 3GS and have convicted people with the location data. Sorry about your alibis.
tundrabuggy
Apr 18, 03:17 PM
couldn't Samsung simply get back at Apple by NOT making Apple's stuff? I mean, come on.
You would think that on the surface. People asked, if Apple wants to kill Flash, why doesn't Adobe just kill, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, Dreamwever, Premiere and InDesign on the Mac, that would cripple Apple as a creative platform for designers, well, Adobe does not want to kill more than 50% of its revenue stream.....the answer is money! Samsung loves the profitability of making Apples stuff! They do not want to lose that golden goose.
You would think that on the surface. People asked, if Apple wants to kill Flash, why doesn't Adobe just kill, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, Dreamwever, Premiere and InDesign on the Mac, that would cripple Apple as a creative platform for designers, well, Adobe does not want to kill more than 50% of its revenue stream.....the answer is money! Samsung loves the profitability of making Apples stuff! They do not want to lose that golden goose.
SiliconAddict
Nov 26, 03:11 PM
http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macdesign/images/21286fujitsustylisticmodded.jpg
Close but no banana. Any type of tablet needs to have at least 1"-1.5" of border so when you pick it up one handed you don't touch the screen. Also I think Apple would NEED to have grips on a couple sides of the thing. I don't know ab out you guys but picking up my MBP one handed is difficult and sometimes scary.
Also screen size dictates battery life. Granted this picture doesn't depict the screen size but it can't be larger then 12-13" max
12-13" + Intel Core 2 Solo ULV + the entire backside being a battery + a swivel keyboard on the thing + a modified OS X GUI == Apple for the win.
Just look at the specs:
1GHz Transmeta Crusoe
Transmeta sucks....like black hole sucking.
I've always been of the impression, since the time of the pre-release discussions of tablet PCs, that they were a solution looking for a problem.
I would never, ever want to spend my money on an electronic equivalent to a notepad. And I happen to use notepads, BTW. However, if I was taking notes with it (which is NOT at all what I do with the notepads I own), there's no way in the world I'd be writing on it; that would be far too slow.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
The TPC market is so highly specialized and so incredibly vertical that I believe it would be nothing more than a distraction for Apple away from their core business and development strengths.
handwriting on a tablet PC is what I define as bandwidth limiting. In order from fastest to slowest.
Speech
Typing
Handwriting
All three can be done a tablet, granted speech to text is still a hit and miss tech, as long as said tablet is a convertible and NOT a slate design. Slate designs, ones that don't have a keyboard are for vertical markets and dedicated devices like multimedia players and the like.
Close but no banana. Any type of tablet needs to have at least 1"-1.5" of border so when you pick it up one handed you don't touch the screen. Also I think Apple would NEED to have grips on a couple sides of the thing. I don't know ab out you guys but picking up my MBP one handed is difficult and sometimes scary.
Also screen size dictates battery life. Granted this picture doesn't depict the screen size but it can't be larger then 12-13" max
12-13" + Intel Core 2 Solo ULV + the entire backside being a battery + a swivel keyboard on the thing + a modified OS X GUI == Apple for the win.
Just look at the specs:
1GHz Transmeta Crusoe
Transmeta sucks....like black hole sucking.
I've always been of the impression, since the time of the pre-release discussions of tablet PCs, that they were a solution looking for a problem.
I would never, ever want to spend my money on an electronic equivalent to a notepad. And I happen to use notepads, BTW. However, if I was taking notes with it (which is NOT at all what I do with the notepads I own), there's no way in the world I'd be writing on it; that would be far too slow.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
The TPC market is so highly specialized and so incredibly vertical that I believe it would be nothing more than a distraction for Apple away from their core business and development strengths.
handwriting on a tablet PC is what I define as bandwidth limiting. In order from fastest to slowest.
Speech
Typing
Handwriting
All three can be done a tablet, granted speech to text is still a hit and miss tech, as long as said tablet is a convertible and NOT a slate design. Slate designs, ones that don't have a keyboard are for vertical markets and dedicated devices like multimedia players and the like.
kcroy
Jul 29, 10:19 PM
I will now be picturing Steve Jobs answering that phone during his Keynote in my dreams. :)
Don't panic
May 4, 05:23 PM
Concur
well then, its a majority decision.
R2T2: we move to the next room across the hallway
well then, its a majority decision.
R2T2: we move to the next room across the hallway
dukebound85
Apr 10, 09:05 PM
Really.
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
edit: to stay out of prsi but l am not against helping maintain society via taxes and other similar ways such as this
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
edit: to stay out of prsi but l am not against helping maintain society via taxes and other similar ways such as this
vand0576
Aug 11, 09:32 AM
If they are truly planning this for the MacBook, then they are surely planning to bump the iMac to this chip too or better the Conroe. They continually refer to the MacBook and iMac as their "consumer line". I have been planning to buy an iMac for some time now, and this is definately an upgrade I would like to see. I'm most likely waiting until after MacWorld Expo to see what updates they will have for the iMac. The chip should be upgraded much before then, but I bet by that time they will have a few more upgrades for the iMac.
Mac Pro and Xserve have the Xeon (Woodcrest).
MacBook Pro, MacBook, and iMac will be upgraded to the Core 2 Duo (Merom) with iMac possibly being Conroe.
Mac Mini will probably keep the Core Duo (Yonah).
This sounds perfectly reasonable. Things are definately more interesting with the Intel chips because they are being rolled out so fast, unlike the PowerPC chips from Freescale/Motorola. It has only been about 6-7 months since the Core Duo was unveiled, now Core Duo 2 is here. Since Apple prides themselves on using advanced hardware, it only makes sense that they should upgrade the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and iMac to the Core 2 Duo (iMac=Conroe), and continue to upgrade to the best available chips Intel is offering at the time (aside from the 'extreme' editions).
Mac Pro and Xserve have the Xeon (Woodcrest).
MacBook Pro, MacBook, and iMac will be upgraded to the Core 2 Duo (Merom) with iMac possibly being Conroe.
Mac Mini will probably keep the Core Duo (Yonah).
This sounds perfectly reasonable. Things are definately more interesting with the Intel chips because they are being rolled out so fast, unlike the PowerPC chips from Freescale/Motorola. It has only been about 6-7 months since the Core Duo was unveiled, now Core Duo 2 is here. Since Apple prides themselves on using advanced hardware, it only makes sense that they should upgrade the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and iMac to the Core 2 Duo (iMac=Conroe), and continue to upgrade to the best available chips Intel is offering at the time (aside from the 'extreme' editions).
gkarris
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Am I the only one who loves looking at high res high quality icons? I feel a bit sad over here. :p
Yes, but they're so big.
You'd only be able to fit, like, one icon on the screen... :eek:
:D
Yes, but they're so big.
You'd only be able to fit, like, one icon on the screen... :eek:
:D
darrens
Aug 4, 06:46 PM
In other words, lots of people need 64-bit for the addressing PER PROCESS, not per system (processor) as you say. (Actually, there's no "per processor" limit - a 2-way can't address more RAM than a 1-way.)
Too true. I have a Win2k app I've been developing which could use more than 4GB RAM - in fact more than 2GB RAM (Win2k won't let a process use more than 2GB for various reasons).
Even with the 32 bit processors supporting more than 4GB RAM, does Windows support it? Microsoft has a habit of not supporting things unless "a lot" of people will use it.
I don't think any of the current intel Macs support more than 4GB anyway, so it's a bit academic for Macs right now. Hopefully for not much longer...
Too true. I have a Win2k app I've been developing which could use more than 4GB RAM - in fact more than 2GB RAM (Win2k won't let a process use more than 2GB for various reasons).
Even with the 32 bit processors supporting more than 4GB RAM, does Windows support it? Microsoft has a habit of not supporting things unless "a lot" of people will use it.
I don't think any of the current intel Macs support more than 4GB anyway, so it's a bit academic for Macs right now. Hopefully for not much longer...
shawnce
Aug 4, 05:09 PM
That's not really true of the SZ series either. The SZ ranges from 0.9 to 1.33" or so, and the drive area is in the thin part of it at the front with many things moved up into the thinker area.
If you can find the specs for the different drive mechanisms and compare them to the case designs you should find your answer (note the MBP uses a slot loading drive not a tray system).
If you can find the specs for the different drive mechanisms and compare them to the case designs you should find your answer (note the MBP uses a slot loading drive not a tray system).
ticman
Dec 2, 09:03 AM
Well it's 12/2 and I am anxiously awaiting an email that BLT has received their order and MY order is on its way.
LOL don't think I can stand another delay.
LOL don't think I can stand another delay.
Don't panic
Apr 11, 07:06 AM
are we still debating over this?
if we stay to basic math, it depends on how you read the / sign
if it only refers to the immediately following expression then you'd have
(48/2)*(9+3)=288
if it refers to everything following, then you'd have
48/[2*(9+3)]=2
it is poorly written (or more likely purposely ambiguously written), but in such cases the left-to-right rule should prevail, making it 288. on the other hand, square brackets are way cooler than round brackets, making 2 the cool answer.
if we move to postadvanced math however, it is clear that "/" separates two expressions: 48 and 2(9+3);
- as someone already mentioned above, absence of the operator implies multiplication, so 48=4*8. now, everyone knows that by the reciprocal inversity properties multiplication is the opposite of division, therefore 4 multiplied by 8 must be equal to 8 divided by 4, which is most obviously 2 (on the left part of the expression);
- now to the right part. this is easy. Ignoring the round bracket (which as mentioned are uncool), you have 2*9+3, which gives you a very straightforward 21;
- so now we have 2/21, which as demonstrated above is equal to 21*2, which is (i hope no one disagrees on this) 42.
so please now stop with your earthlingy bickering: the answer is always 42. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
if we stay to basic math, it depends on how you read the / sign
if it only refers to the immediately following expression then you'd have
(48/2)*(9+3)=288
if it refers to everything following, then you'd have
48/[2*(9+3)]=2
it is poorly written (or more likely purposely ambiguously written), but in such cases the left-to-right rule should prevail, making it 288. on the other hand, square brackets are way cooler than round brackets, making 2 the cool answer.
if we move to postadvanced math however, it is clear that "/" separates two expressions: 48 and 2(9+3);
- as someone already mentioned above, absence of the operator implies multiplication, so 48=4*8. now, everyone knows that by the reciprocal inversity properties multiplication is the opposite of division, therefore 4 multiplied by 8 must be equal to 8 divided by 4, which is most obviously 2 (on the left part of the expression);
- now to the right part. this is easy. Ignoring the round bracket (which as mentioned are uncool), you have 2*9+3, which gives you a very straightforward 21;
- so now we have 2/21, which as demonstrated above is equal to 21*2, which is (i hope no one disagrees on this) 42.
so please now stop with your earthlingy bickering: the answer is always 42. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes: