elray
Apr 14, 11:24 AM
white iphone is ugly late and unnecessary so apple can keep it.. they never made it cause demand was always lower for white ones and the white design look worse on iphone 4 than on 3gs..
I guess it's just a matter of preference. I personally think the white iPhone 4 is gorgeous, while my white 3g always reminded me of an Oreo cookie.
And it seems like the demand for the white one has been pretty high since they unveiled it last year. Not to mention they have produced white iPad 2's which seem to be pretty popular.
I guess it's just a matter of preference. I personally think the white iPhone 4 is gorgeous, while my white 3g always reminded me of an Oreo cookie.
And it seems like the demand for the white one has been pretty high since they unveiled it last year. Not to mention they have produced white iPad 2's which seem to be pretty popular.
Don't panic
Apr 30, 08:30 PM
So long, and thanks for all the fish!
come on boys now, make me proud!
I'll keep following and update the spreadsheet in my sig (maybe not til monday) as a minimal satisfaction (plus a bigger one if the village win), i have a perfect record this game, only voted to lynch the wolves!
go villas!
There Moyank!, I hear your apres-mort parties are to die for!
I've got some Ol' Janx Spirit....
come on boys now, make me proud!
I'll keep following and update the spreadsheet in my sig (maybe not til monday) as a minimal satisfaction (plus a bigger one if the village win), i have a perfect record this game, only voted to lynch the wolves!
go villas!
There Moyank!, I hear your apres-mort parties are to die for!
I've got some Ol' Janx Spirit....
benhollberg
Apr 25, 11:29 AM
Did 9to5 Mac get this from the MacRumors forums? I think so: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1142610
chaosbunny
Apr 27, 03:44 AM
I will not use any cloud stuff anyway, if it's free or not doesn't matter. No need for government and corporations to gather even more data on everybody. It's a sour pill wrapped in a thin layer of sugar. Everybody embracing this cloud stuff seems to either be not very well informed or simply doesn't value freedom and the simple democratic rule of "innocent until proven otherwise".
Nausicaa
Apr 22, 04:40 PM
That render is terrible. Apple should stick with the iPhone 4 design if this is the alternative. I will never buy another product with a Chrome back casing like that. Had an iPod Touch back in the day (still have it, actually, unused) with a chrome back, and it looks like **** after like, a week of use. Scratches easily and feels weird in my hands.
KPOM
Apr 18, 05:58 PM
Some people are lying themselves. Of course every high-end laptop will be like the MBA in few-several years. That is the point, getting slimmer, portable and more and more powerful. That's the ideal laptop.
So a MBA with better GPU/CPU is always welcomed.
The point, though, is that the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air will have a much better CPU, but a worse GPU unless Apple does something surprising.
So a MBA with better GPU/CPU is always welcomed.
The point, though, is that the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air will have a much better CPU, but a worse GPU unless Apple does something surprising.
ZooCrewMan
Jan 30, 10:32 AM
Apple's stock (APPL in NYSE) has plummeted $68 in the last 30 days (from $198 to $130 or 35%) does anyone know what has caused this? Curious...
-Hart
Simple, it was overpriced.
-Hart
Simple, it was overpriced.
macFanDave
Jul 21, 12:16 PM
Although Apple is behind Gateway in market share, Apple's earnings (not revenue, earnings) last quarter (not year, quarter) is pretty close to Gateway's market capitalization!
theconsltant
Apr 24, 11:26 PM
I have a friend that has had his iPhone 3g on T-Mobile for a year:confused:. He got it unlocked (T-Mobile had to have his phone to do it) and he was on the service! Problems he had with AT&T made it possible.
CEAbiscuit
Jul 24, 03:43 PM
Make it easy to clean, or I'm sticking with my Kensington Trackball. 10 years, the same design. And I can replace the white trackball with my favorite snooker ball.
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00006B8NT.01-A2RT822UHB0YS8._AA225_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B00006B8NT.01-A2RT822UHB0YS8._AA225_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
AidenShaw
Apr 27, 07:47 AM
You always seem to forget that Tbolt is a dual bidirectional 10Gb/s channel technology, so in fact it can handle 4 SATA connections, 2 upstream and 2 downstream. With room to spare. On a single port.
SATA is also bi-directional....
No need to trash TBolt because it can't handle $50,000+ devices
Pointing out that TBolt speed is of the same order of magnitude as SATA speed isn't trashing - it's countering some of the TBolt hype. Some people seem to think that TBolt is infinitely fast.
Agree with you that the real promise of TBolt is to bring PCIe expansion to systems without PCIe slots.
SATA is also bi-directional....
No need to trash TBolt because it can't handle $50,000+ devices
Pointing out that TBolt speed is of the same order of magnitude as SATA speed isn't trashing - it's countering some of the TBolt hype. Some people seem to think that TBolt is infinitely fast.
Agree with you that the real promise of TBolt is to bring PCIe expansion to systems without PCIe slots.
flopticalcube
Apr 11, 02:42 PM
I've seen what TB can do and it's great. But what I'm saying is that it will be HARD for TB to step into a USB-dominated computer industry and just kill USB altogether from all angles. Will TB be faster than USB 3.0?...in real world use by 90% of the consumers/prosumers out there? Maybe. Maybe not. It's like asking Bluray to come in and just dominate the DVD market...it's been trying and 3+ years BluRay is doing well, but the average Joe understands he needs to re-purchase all this movies as well as purchase a hi-def tv and stereo receiver to take advantage of all the features of Bluray (I love Bluray, by the way). It's time, money, and not everyone sees the value or HAS A NEED for that value.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
My issue with USB has always been that it goes through the CPU. At the speeds of USB 3.0, this could really bite performance.
Will people throw out all their USB devices and twiddle their thumbs waiting for TB devices other than hard drives (cameras, printers, video cams, keyboards, mice, flash keys,)? No. Of course not.
Speed vs. Speed is 1 argument...versatility is another. But again, what I'm really saying is to look around you and ask yourself if the world is just going to dump USB technology for TB? Nope. TB will likely coincide with USB 3.0 just like eSATA and Firewire.
We'll see in a few years where we are.
My issue with USB has always been that it goes through the CPU. At the speeds of USB 3.0, this could really bite performance.
Ammo
Apr 26, 08:48 PM
The theoretical never actually happen though. That's why I'd take a superior network standard with a lower frequency, and thus better building penetration, any day.
Well AT&T is rolling out LTE as well so it's really the best of both worlds.
Well AT&T is rolling out LTE as well so it's really the best of both worlds.
Evangelion
Jul 25, 11:50 AM
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
toddybody
Apr 25, 12:39 PM
Never going to have a matte screen lol
Grab a U2711:)
Grab a U2711:)
-aggie-
Apr 25, 08:21 PM
I am completely and utterly shocked by this vote.
/sarcasm
And forget about cheap sandwiches...you're paying double for lapdances!
After this post, I can’t even think straight.
/sarcasm
And forget about cheap sandwiches...you're paying double for lapdances!
After this post, I can’t even think straight.
firestarter
May 1, 11:25 PM
Watch the news on this right now ... they are talking about how huge Bin Laden is in Al-Queda ... he goes back to the beginning of it.
if anything Ayman al-Zawahiri is a distant #2 leader
Come on... you don't really believe that do you?
It's just bravado and backslapping BS following a victory. Great that Bin Laden's out of the way - but Al Qaeda has mutated into a distributed concept - not a hierarchical force.
A lot of the Al Qaeda myth was built by the US keen to find a 'bogeymen' anyhow.
if anything Ayman al-Zawahiri is a distant #2 leader
Come on... you don't really believe that do you?
It's just bravado and backslapping BS following a victory. Great that Bin Laden's out of the way - but Al Qaeda has mutated into a distributed concept - not a hierarchical force.
A lot of the Al Qaeda myth was built by the US keen to find a 'bogeymen' anyhow.
winty03
May 3, 07:54 AM
I was hoping for i7...c'mon apple WHY!
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
BTO i7 3.4
oh, BTO option, I hope they have i7 in stores
BTO i7 3.4
ialamo
Mar 16, 09:34 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wow I wish I got to brea earlier. About 35th in line. I wonder how much it would take to buy the first spot in line....
Wow I wish I got to brea earlier. About 35th in line. I wonder how much it would take to buy the first spot in line....
strwrsfrk
Apr 25, 11:44 AM
I'm interested to see what ends up in this refresh. My MacBook Pro is great, but a good base iMac option could be appealing. My guesses:
Base 21.5"
Quad Core i7 (2.2GHz?); 2x2GB 1333 DDR3; 640GB 7200RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6670; Thunderbolt, ditch Firewire?; 1920x1080
Fully Loaded 27"
3.4GHz Quad Core i7; 4x4GB 1333 DDR3; 512GB SSD & 2TB 7200 RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6870 (1GB); 2560x1440
Base 21.5"
Quad Core i7 (2.2GHz?); 2x2GB 1333 DDR3; 640GB 7200RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6670; Thunderbolt, ditch Firewire?; 1920x1080
Fully Loaded 27"
3.4GHz Quad Core i7; 4x4GB 1333 DDR3; 512GB SSD & 2TB 7200 RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6870 (1GB); 2560x1440
MagnusVonMagnum
Nov 11, 10:54 AM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
Apple dropped support for PPC in Snow Leopard and so many programs now even require Snow Leopard to run. Such programs will not work in Leopard, let alone as Universal Apps. If you use any Snow Leopard specific features, I figure you cannot get a Universal binary regardless. It's why I think Apple should have waited until Lion to ditch PPC. Developers for OSX tend to prematurely drop support for previous versions of the operating system simply because they cannot be bothered to support it and/or have no way to test it. I think a lot of apps didn't bother with PPC purely due to the testing issue. Some apps need a bit of tweaking to work in PPC some times even with Apple's two for the price of one system.
This is why I said when Apple dropped PPC for a "tweak" upgrade (Snow Leopard) that PPC was pretty much finished despite all the people saying that "Leopard still works". Yes, it still works but most new software does not. You see the same thin on the App store for iOS a lot. Some app updates will suddenly require iOS 4.x and too bad if iTunes isn't flagged properly and it updates it locally since older iPod Touches and iPhones won't be able to use the app at that point.
You don't just lose out on any new operating system features when your hardware isn't supported any longer. You often lose out on new software as well. You rarely see this with Windows. The vast majority of software that works with Vista and Windows7 still works with XP. Even most games still support DirectX 9 as well because so many users still use XP (which is still faster for gaming for the most part). And XP isn't even officially supported by Microsoft anymore. I guess that's the problem with the high turnover rates with OSX. Older versions get dumped into oblivion instead of slowly fading away. Look how fast OS9 disappeared off the face of the earth whereas you could still get quite a bit of software for Win98 a decade later even.
As for Skyfire and flash, it just proves that despite fanboy ravings on here, a lot of people still want to be able to view Flash web sites. Having a crippled Internet experience just plain sucks, especially if it's only to push one man's agenda for a Flash free Internet. Well, it's not going anywhere fast, regardless and Apple should not be allowed to market things like "the whole Internet" for iOS devices when it's not true.
BurtonCCC
Jul 24, 02:48 PM
There could be arguments either way that the BT Mighty Mouse would cost more than the regular BT mouse. On one hand, if they are the same price, people might just say to themselves, "Oh, the Mighty Mouse has more features, I'll get that," and soon the standard BT mouse sales would be dropping way too much. Or maybe there are still a lot of people who aren't affected by the right click features of the Mighty Mouse and would still buy the standard BT mouse. In that case, making them both the same price would be great. I would say Apple might just stop making the BT mouse if a BT Mighty Mouse comes out, but I find that hard to believe.
I know that a lot of Mac users that are used to the ctrl+click don't really care about having a right click mouse (most people don't notice that you can now do trackpad right-clicking on MacBook Pros and probably MacBooks as well), so it would be my bet that Apple will keep making both BT mice and keep them the same price, or the Mighty Mouse just $5 or $10 more.
Daniel.
I know that a lot of Mac users that are used to the ctrl+click don't really care about having a right click mouse (most people don't notice that you can now do trackpad right-clicking on MacBook Pros and probably MacBooks as well), so it would be my bet that Apple will keep making both BT mice and keep them the same price, or the Mighty Mouse just $5 or $10 more.
Daniel.
Gem�tlichkeit
Jan 30, 07:28 PM
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/61Ducldb8xL._AA300_.jpg
Via steam
Via steam
ten-oak-druid
Apr 28, 11:31 AM
There was a discussion on "banning". Gone now. LOL
Remember. Just don't respond.
Remember. Just don't respond.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий