Unorthodox
Aug 31, 05:09 PM
Is the Pope German? :rolleyes:
I don't know.
Is he?
I thought he was Italian...
And I also thought the saying was "Is the pope Catholic?".
I don't know what I am but what are you?!?
I don't know.
Is he?
I thought he was Italian...
And I also thought the saying was "Is the pope Catholic?".
I don't know what I am but what are you?!?
e-coli
May 3, 11:38 AM
Surely I'm not the only one who's noticed that the i7 is slower than the i5, and that the Radeon HD 6970M is slower than the 6750M.
Whaaaaa? :confused:
Whaaaaa? :confused:
milo
Sep 12, 02:51 PM
We waited 334 days for this? That is how long we went without an iPod update, by far the longest gap in updates, and all we get is larger storage capacity and a few new games?
In the past 2 quarters, for the first time since Apple introduced the iPod, iPod sales have declined. Last quarter, Apple sold just over 8 million iPods, down from a peak of over 14 million 2 quarters ago. The reason is because people bought new iPods, and there was no reason to replace them because it took Apple so long to update the models. Now, after all of the wait (nearly a year) and speculation about 16x9 video iPods, touch-screen controls, wireless capabilities, etc., I think this update will go mostly unnoticed to consumers and iPod sales will continue to fall. Apple needs to drastically change and improve iPod offerings if it wants to maintain its market advantage and keep the iPod fashionable.
The fact you seem to miss is that the Nano is by far the biggest selling iPod. And they did a pretty nice update to it, what more would you want in that model? They definitely will update the "big" ipod at some point, but there are some MAJOR technological hurdles to overcome, especially battery life for video and the no-touch interface. We'd all love to see it, but apple really needs to take their time and get it right if it's truly going to be groundbreaking.
iPod w/video sales probably won't do much (except for the price drop, which is pretty nice), but nanos and shuffles should sell like mad. I'd be shocked if iPod sales don't spike back up again.
I just checked on the Apple site, and there isn't a new iPod updater to include the new software updates for the original 5G iPods.
I thought updates were now going to be handled by iTunes. Maybe the updates haven't been made available to it online yet. After all, iTunes and QT haven't showed up in software update either.
Edit: The REAL question is have they updated iTunes to be a better video player? I hate watching TV or movies in the current version.
There definitely are new video features, although you'll have to see for yourself if your specific complaints are addressed.
In the past 2 quarters, for the first time since Apple introduced the iPod, iPod sales have declined. Last quarter, Apple sold just over 8 million iPods, down from a peak of over 14 million 2 quarters ago. The reason is because people bought new iPods, and there was no reason to replace them because it took Apple so long to update the models. Now, after all of the wait (nearly a year) and speculation about 16x9 video iPods, touch-screen controls, wireless capabilities, etc., I think this update will go mostly unnoticed to consumers and iPod sales will continue to fall. Apple needs to drastically change and improve iPod offerings if it wants to maintain its market advantage and keep the iPod fashionable.
The fact you seem to miss is that the Nano is by far the biggest selling iPod. And they did a pretty nice update to it, what more would you want in that model? They definitely will update the "big" ipod at some point, but there are some MAJOR technological hurdles to overcome, especially battery life for video and the no-touch interface. We'd all love to see it, but apple really needs to take their time and get it right if it's truly going to be groundbreaking.
iPod w/video sales probably won't do much (except for the price drop, which is pretty nice), but nanos and shuffles should sell like mad. I'd be shocked if iPod sales don't spike back up again.
I just checked on the Apple site, and there isn't a new iPod updater to include the new software updates for the original 5G iPods.
I thought updates were now going to be handled by iTunes. Maybe the updates haven't been made available to it online yet. After all, iTunes and QT haven't showed up in software update either.
Edit: The REAL question is have they updated iTunes to be a better video player? I hate watching TV or movies in the current version.
There definitely are new video features, although you'll have to see for yourself if your specific complaints are addressed.
roadbloc
Mar 29, 11:21 AM
The Nokia/Microsoft partnership will guarantee this. It is no joke. I'm already seeing them rise in popularity, plenty shops sell them now.
And just for them who say Windows Phones are rubbish, they aren't. They are pretty damn good, although I do prefer my iPhone.
And just for them who say Windows Phones are rubbish, they aren't. They are pretty damn good, although I do prefer my iPhone.
MacinDoc
Sep 9, 11:21 AM
You mean Powerbook hinges, iBook logic boards, MacBook Random Shutdown Syndrome (RSS) (http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=274), eMac logic boards (http://www.macintouch.com/readerreports/emac/topic4116.html), Powerbook memory slot, White spots and lines on Powerbook screens, chipping paint, cracked cubes, iMac G5 video and power problems,Apple repair extensions (http://www.apple.com/support/),...
I see your point!
Umm, sorry, but according to Consumer Reports' (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/index.htm)survey of 49,000 laptop users, Apple was tied for the third fewest number of laptop repairs since at 17% (compared to Sony and IBM at 16%, a negligible difference). And, according to their survey of 85,000 desktop users, all other desktop manufacturers had at least 36% more repairs than Apple, and Gateway had a whopping 91% more repairs than Apple.
Just because Apple offers extended service programs for computers beyond their warranty period does not mean that its computers are low quality, it only means that Apple is making an exceptional effort to maintain the loyalty of its customer base by doing more than the minimum required. Have you ever tried to get free service on a computer beyond its warranty period from another manufacturer?
I see your point!
Umm, sorry, but according to Consumer Reports' (http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/index.htm)survey of 49,000 laptop users, Apple was tied for the third fewest number of laptop repairs since at 17% (compared to Sony and IBM at 16%, a negligible difference). And, according to their survey of 85,000 desktop users, all other desktop manufacturers had at least 36% more repairs than Apple, and Gateway had a whopping 91% more repairs than Apple.
Just because Apple offers extended service programs for computers beyond their warranty period does not mean that its computers are low quality, it only means that Apple is making an exceptional effort to maintain the loyalty of its customer base by doing more than the minimum required. Have you ever tried to get free service on a computer beyond its warranty period from another manufacturer?
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 05:04 PM
There shouldn't even be checkpoints in the first place because they violate the 4th Amendment. Every person sitting in line at that checkpoint is accused of being drunk without reasonable doubt.
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
Agree 100%.
There's a pretty good read here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli27.html
while I don't necessarily agree with all of his points/correlations, some really do make sense.
One of the most glaring problems with the drunk-driving laws in this country is that they clearly discriminate against and ruthlessly penalize only one class of dangerous drivers. Drunk drivers are subject to arrest, thousands of dollars of fines, lengthy jail or prison sentences, loss of driving "privileges," alcohol abuse counseling, probation, et cetera. Other dangerous drivers are not subject to these draconian penalties. If Grandma gets pulled over by the police for careening in and out of the median, for example, she will not be wrenched from her Cadillac, handcuffed, incarcerated, counseled, or fined into bankruptcy. At worst, so long as she has not hurt anyone, she will be escorted home and possibly lose her "privilege" to drive on government roads in the future (she will not lose the "privilege" of paying for government roads, however). Similarly, a man who chooses not to wear his DMV-mandated glasses or contact lenses while driving does not have to worry about getting stopped at "corrective lens checkpoints" manned by nightstick-wielding troopers searching for un-bespectacled drivers to humiliate, arrest, fine, and send to jail. On the contrary, this type of dangerous driver is merely instructed to wear his glasses if he is stopped by the police, and he is issued a perfunctory (and revenue-generating) citation. He certainly does not have to worry about the possibility of going to state prison for several years when he decides to drive without his glasses � unless he actually hurts someone.
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
Agree 100%.
There's a pretty good read here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli27.html
while I don't necessarily agree with all of his points/correlations, some really do make sense.
One of the most glaring problems with the drunk-driving laws in this country is that they clearly discriminate against and ruthlessly penalize only one class of dangerous drivers. Drunk drivers are subject to arrest, thousands of dollars of fines, lengthy jail or prison sentences, loss of driving "privileges," alcohol abuse counseling, probation, et cetera. Other dangerous drivers are not subject to these draconian penalties. If Grandma gets pulled over by the police for careening in and out of the median, for example, she will not be wrenched from her Cadillac, handcuffed, incarcerated, counseled, or fined into bankruptcy. At worst, so long as she has not hurt anyone, she will be escorted home and possibly lose her "privilege" to drive on government roads in the future (she will not lose the "privilege" of paying for government roads, however). Similarly, a man who chooses not to wear his DMV-mandated glasses or contact lenses while driving does not have to worry about getting stopped at "corrective lens checkpoints" manned by nightstick-wielding troopers searching for un-bespectacled drivers to humiliate, arrest, fine, and send to jail. On the contrary, this type of dangerous driver is merely instructed to wear his glasses if he is stopped by the police, and he is issued a perfunctory (and revenue-generating) citation. He certainly does not have to worry about the possibility of going to state prison for several years when he decides to drive without his glasses � unless he actually hurts someone.
macboy62
Sep 14, 06:57 AM
Okay, check out this phone and then tell me what you would like to see on your iPhone.
http://www.vodafone.jp/mb/en/product/3G/905sh/index.html
http://www.vodafone.jp/mb/en/product/3G/905sh/images/sub_image02.jpg
http://www.vodafone.jp/mb/en/product/3G/905sh/index.html
http://www.vodafone.jp/mb/en/product/3G/905sh/images/sub_image02.jpg
SFStateStudent
Mar 30, 11:50 AM
I'm thinkin' Apple should have gone with "iApp Store" (u heard it here FIRST! Let me get a trademark/patent on that) b/c Microsoft is just a big ole' COPYCAT...lol :D
itsmenyc
Mar 29, 03:07 PM
Just out of idle curiosity: is IDC ever right? Ever nearly right?
No, never. They should be IDK not IDC! :D
No, never. They should be IDK not IDC! :D
LarryC
Apr 22, 02:49 PM
SSDs still need to get cheaper before I plunk down money on a MBA. The capacities need to increase too. Ah..maybe a few years from now.
Exactly.
Exactly.
lifeinhd
Mar 23, 06:59 PM
Just downloaded both mentioned in the article, thanks for the heads-up MR.
Typical, guilty until proven innocent, isn't that always the way.
Typical, guilty until proven innocent, isn't that always the way.
WillEH
Apr 19, 05:19 PM
What do Apple want out of this? more money?
Hwangsta
Apr 4, 11:43 AM
A mall cop having to shoot someone in the head...he'll probably need some counseling.
Sabenth
Aug 23, 05:35 PM
Cameront9 thats what iam thinking whats this zen gona use that an ipod in its current format dosnt use except wifi and xbox live stuff
Cheffy Dave
Apr 22, 03:17 PM
Because part of releasing a new, backwards approaching, IGP in the 13" MBP required saving face for both its MacBook "PRO" name and Intel's IGP capabilities itself.
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
I heartly concur, which is why my wife and I jumped on two 11" MBA refurbs now. I don't care for any Intel graphics. As wild as you are for the 13" MBA we are for the 11'MBA. I agree the sweet spot, at least until 2012 will be the 2010 MBA. We have gone minimalist and are thrilled:cool::D:apple::apple:
If the resolution is upgraded to 1440x900, the IGP is going to perform worse in comparison to the prior 13" MBP...
I also fear Apple's ridiculous 10.6.7 downgrade was somehow to show the MBA's IGP isn't as bad as it is going to be with SB IGP. Look at OpenGL performance on it, as it dropped 30% from 10.6.6. Now, we have seen Apple screw these things up before, but they also market their new products based upon prior products and list an OS X version tested on the prior gen. If they reverse course with 10.6.8 or 10.7, in the new MBA, then they might show only a 20% loss in IGP performance vs. the prior Nvidia 320m... when in reality, it might be more like a 50% plus loss in performance.
The big thing here, that NOBODY likes to think about is the 13" MBP uses a standard voltage CPU, while the MBA will use either ULV and LV or just ULV depending on who we believe. The ULV SB IGP operates at a greater than 50% loss than the Nvidia 320m. We can see this from competing products, that yes are running Windows but still have better OpenGL capabilities in the first place.
I think the big advantage to this downgrade will be buying clearance and refurbished Nvidia-based MBAs for 25% discounts... Unless Apple somehow fits a standard voltage SB CPU in the 13" MBA, I think most will be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m at discounts.
Apple has been down the path of using a low voltage Intel CPU and IGP in the MBA before, and it was the worst Mac created since the Intel transition. It wasn't until Nvidia 9400m that the MBA became even usable. Yes, the SB IGP is better than prior Intel IGPs, but it's still utterly disappointing in LV/ULV variants. I guess the smart buyers will be buying clearance MBAs with Nvidia 320m and skip Sandy Bridge for a more reliable Ivy Bridge model. It depends on how each person uses the MBA, but I believe the vast majority are much better off with Nvidia and C2D. I just hope Apple doesn't destroy the MBA brand to try to make Intel's inferior IGP work... especially in LV and ULV variants.
I heartly concur, which is why my wife and I jumped on two 11" MBA refurbs now. I don't care for any Intel graphics. As wild as you are for the 13" MBA we are for the 11'MBA. I agree the sweet spot, at least until 2012 will be the 2010 MBA. We have gone minimalist and are thrilled:cool::D:apple::apple:
paradox00
Apr 14, 04:53 PM
Very true, but in the end, USB2 won out.
Cere, on page one, you DID state that TB would (a) be mac only and (b) die and you've been backtracking terribly ever since.
When you make a statement such as "unfortunately, also bingo" you are giving your full endorsement to that statement and you have accepted that as your own opinion with no ifs, ands or buts. In case you've forgotten, you gave your full endorsement to this quote:
USB3=native to all platforms
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
Since then, you've argued that what you really meant was that PC manufacturers wont support it (without proof to back up your claims) and made poor comparisons to Firewire.
Let's compare the two for a second:
FW was pushed by Apple
TB is being pushed by Apple, but more importantly Intel (whose chips power most PCs)
FW had a high per port licensing cost
TB uses a royalty free port and support will be built into future Intel chipsets (making PC implementation virtually inevitable)
FW was slower than USB on paper, but faster in reality
TB blows USB 3.0 out of the water, both on paper and in reality
Why do you keep insisting they are the same and will share the same fate? On top of that, as I mentioned earlier (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12392173&postcount=63) (and no one, including yourself has attempted to refute) TB isn't even a direct competitor with USB, it's more of a complimentary technology. You've done nothing in this thread but blow hot air.
Cere, on page one, you DID state that TB would (a) be mac only and (b) die and you've been backtracking terribly ever since.
When you make a statement such as "unfortunately, also bingo" you are giving your full endorsement to that statement and you have accepted that as your own opinion with no ifs, ands or buts. In case you've forgotten, you gave your full endorsement to this quote:
USB3=native to all platforms
TB=Mac Only
Sounds like TB just died.
Since then, you've argued that what you really meant was that PC manufacturers wont support it (without proof to back up your claims) and made poor comparisons to Firewire.
Let's compare the two for a second:
FW was pushed by Apple
TB is being pushed by Apple, but more importantly Intel (whose chips power most PCs)
FW had a high per port licensing cost
TB uses a royalty free port and support will be built into future Intel chipsets (making PC implementation virtually inevitable)
FW was slower than USB on paper, but faster in reality
TB blows USB 3.0 out of the water, both on paper and in reality
Why do you keep insisting they are the same and will share the same fate? On top of that, as I mentioned earlier (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12392173&postcount=63) (and no one, including yourself has attempted to refute) TB isn't even a direct competitor with USB, it's more of a complimentary technology. You've done nothing in this thread but blow hot air.
cere
Apr 14, 01:33 PM
"You mean like FW was faster than USB and USB2? And yes, it will work with any USB device. You think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? Really?"
^ You implying it will be DOA. For someone criticizing reading comprehension I sure have to do a lot of work for you.
Here's the gist of your worthless posts:
Insult
Insult
Strawman argument
Insult
What a joke.
I was asking you what I thought would be an easy question for you to answer. I'll ask again, it will work with any USB device, do you think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? I'll wait.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle difference from a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.
^ You implying it will be DOA. For someone criticizing reading comprehension I sure have to do a lot of work for you.
Here's the gist of your worthless posts:
Insult
Insult
Strawman argument
Insult
What a joke.
I was asking you what I thought would be an easy question for you to answer. I'll ask again, it will work with any USB device, do you think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? I'll wait.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle difference from a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.
kim0785b
Oct 27, 01:22 PM
Apple Green Ipod,
gugy
Sep 26, 11:00 AM
wow, That's really bad. Cingular is sucks like pretty much every carrier in the US.
I hope at least they have the iphone to the major carriers. Just cingular is a joke. Verizon, T mobile and Sprint need to be included if they want the iphone to be a success.
I hope at least they have the iphone to the major carriers. Just cingular is a joke. Verizon, T mobile and Sprint need to be included if they want the iphone to be a success.
addicted44
Apr 22, 10:21 AM
Why do I get the feeling that the people downvoting this are the same who were upvoting Amazon's service, despite Apple's service being "like Amazon's, except licensed from the labels"? Who wants to bet Amazon gets screwed when they go back to renegotiate their deal with the labels?
(Its like the people who were anti-patents, and downvoted news of Apple suing Samsung, but upvoted news of Samsung suing Apple for patents).
(Its like the people who were anti-patents, and downvoted news of Apple suing Samsung, but upvoted news of Samsung suing Apple for patents).
pondosinatra
Mar 23, 09:09 AM
Umm, ok. :rolleyes:
Based on your signature you're quite the Apple fan huh?
I bet you think the iPad makes a better e-book reader than the Kindle as well huh?
Based on your signature you're quite the Apple fan huh?
I bet you think the iPad makes a better e-book reader than the Kindle as well huh?
aswitcher
Sep 15, 06:36 PM
I'll be very tempted if it has;
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
3MP
All the display info in the latest iPods
BT
4-8 GB
Full iLife intergration (iSync, iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, Address book (with pictures), Mail)
Earphones (Pref BT and acts as hands free)
Desire
3G?
iChat with BT for Audio?
Widgets?
WiFi
IR remote feature
Light / Flash
Coolerking
Sep 8, 09:14 AM
Hell no, Leopard will run on G4s, G5s, Core Duos, Core 2 Duos, maybe even the old G3s but we'll have to wait and see on that one.
Thanks. Judging by what some people have said it sounded like you needed Core 2 Duo to run Leopard.
Thanks. Judging by what some people have said it sounded like you needed Core 2 Duo to run Leopard.
ciTiger
Apr 20, 10:01 AM
WOW this is a major privacy breach.
0 comments:
Post a Comment