FasterQuieter
Mar 22, 08:53 PM
This seems to me to be good news in 2 ways:
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
1. It makes a few foolish people think twice about purchasing an iPad 2, so I can get mine a little sooner.
2. It puts the wind up Apple's behind and they work that little bit harder to get us the iPad 3 with the ultra HD display or iPad 2 Retina Christmas Special or whatever else they might call it.
The iPhone 4 display "changed everything" as Apple like to say, and the sooner they get that thing on the iPad, the better. Then my humdrum life will finally be complete.
Horst
Aug 28, 10:49 AM
Just my 0.02 regarding Apple's customer service :
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
I buy Apple computers in the hope never to need any support by the manufacturer. Two times I had issues ( broken hinge on TiBook, 1st. gen. ACD 23" with severe color tint ) and Apple wouldn't even acknowledge such a problem exists. Needless to say, those faults are well documented as inherent design flaws of the products mentioned.
That's Apple Germany, mind you - I would never even try to contact Apple US for possible issues with the computers I bought and use over there, as customer protection in the US is virtually non-existent.
I'm a professional user, and received exceptional online and phone support by other companies for 300$ products, but no service whatsoever for 20k+ of Apple products.
I know Apple is not catering to pros, but still ....
DPazdanISU
Sep 19, 06:53 AM
Sorry but I've heard this so many times it gets pretty annoying. Dont assume to know what ppl want to use their Macbooks for. I want to use it for music production which can be very intensive on the processor, other people for graphics etc where a few seconds shaved off processing times when added up many times can make quite a difference to productivity.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
Also, when the new chips come out it will instantly knock a chunk off the resell value - yes this is always the way with technology but buying when an update is coming soon seems silly.
i agree, I need a computer to encode video in iDVD because it takes forever on my PPC. That little difference in power is a big difference.
Multimedia
Sep 13, 11:44 AM
Yes, that's true.
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.And it's also true that those people are not here. Get a clue who we are - Core Hogs!
It's also true that most of the time, most people aren't even maxing out ONE core never mind eight.
And when they do, their program won't get any faster unless it's multithreaded and able to run on multiple cores at once.And it's also true that those people are not here. Get a clue who we are - Core Hogs!
OutThere
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
Aztechian
Jul 27, 09:52 AM
Yes. I believe people who have gotten their hands on Core 2 Duo beta chips have put them in their mini's with no difference (except a massive speed boost)
Weren't the notebook CPU's soldered to the boards though?
^^^beat me to it ;-)
Weren't the notebook CPU's soldered to the boards though?
^^^beat me to it ;-)
zelet
Aug 25, 04:18 PM
I was planning to buy a .mac account for e-mail , blogs through iWeb, web pages etc. I am more aware now about it.
Don't get dotMac without some serious research. Their services are slow and they are a ton more expensive than comparable services elsewhere. Of course, the benefits are that its well integrated into OS X but you can do that with a little bit of work. YMMV
Don't get dotMac without some serious research. Their services are slow and they are a ton more expensive than comparable services elsewhere. Of course, the benefits are that its well integrated into OS X but you can do that with a little bit of work. YMMV
AtHomeBoy_2000
Apr 10, 09:37 AM
I would think this revision will support 3D video editing, right?
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
gauriemma
Jul 27, 01:25 PM
I never thought there'd come a day when I needed to know anything about what kind of chips Intel was coming out with.
geoffism
Aug 11, 10:22 AM
I don't care so much about the iPod capability, but I would like to see the result of a smartphone by Apple. I haven't jumped on the bandwagon of the Treos and Palms.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
Call me a sucker, but I'd like somehting that could do all the mundane, make my life easier, organization crap, and have it look cool as well. Oh, and not run on a crap OS.
BWhaler
Jul 14, 03:35 PM
Since apple is part of the Blu Ray consortium wouldn't you think they will use blu ray only?
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
Not a chance in the near future. Blu Ray and Sony are in utter shambles right now.
shawnce
Jul 27, 04:29 PM
What would you suggest as an alternative to "successor" to describe these future chips?
The normally accepted definition of successor is one who replaces the one that came before it (as in succession).
The normally accepted definition of "next generation" in this field implies a new architecture (aka Core 2 to Core 3, or G4 to G5).
Kentfield and Clovertown are simply a different packaging of the Conroe and Woodcrest... putting multiple Conroe or Woodcrest chips into a multiple-chip module (MCM).
Not trying to quibble just make sure folks don't read things incorrectly.
The normally accepted definition of successor is one who replaces the one that came before it (as in succession).
The normally accepted definition of "next generation" in this field implies a new architecture (aka Core 2 to Core 3, or G4 to G5).
Kentfield and Clovertown are simply a different packaging of the Conroe and Woodcrest... putting multiple Conroe or Woodcrest chips into a multiple-chip module (MCM).
Not trying to quibble just make sure folks don't read things incorrectly.
NinjaHERO
Apr 25, 02:43 PM
Yet another reason for us to look at the "Loser Pays" legal system. Maybe it will stop some of this silliness.
Virtualball
Apr 19, 02:32 PM
It appears from the F700's standpoint though the natural progression became TouchWiz.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
Wrong. Just because a company released one phone that has a similar look as the iPhone doesn't mean their current offerings are a progression of that phone. It's a true testament as to who browses this forum if you honestly think that. The F700 didn't run an advanced OS, so it probably ran Symbian or used BREW. That means all Samsung did was create a theme. How does a theme they made 3 years prior to the Galaxy S mean it's a progression on the coding and UI they built? It doesn't. Here's a list of every Samsung phone: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Samsung_mobile_phones Now, pick out one of those and say it inspired all of their new devices 3 years later.
The F700 was an iPhone clone with a keyboard. It's depressing that people are saying that the iPhone copied its own clone.
randyharris
Sep 18, 11:59 PM
It would be fantastic for the MacBook to have the Core 2 Duo, (MacBookPro is a given), the fact is, Apple needs to do this update to stay in the same ballpark as the pc notebook makers.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
Yamcha
Apr 19, 02:41 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
robwormald
Mar 22, 02:18 PM
What I'm looking forward to the most is playing with the web browsers on these machines. Our internal business applications run either in a JRE or in a web browser - on iPads we run them as full screen web apps. Works great.
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
Unfortunately Apple saw fit not to allow full screen web-apps to use the Nitro JS engine, so we're not seeing the same performance bumps there.
I demo'ed a Xoom for a few days - the web app support is frankly atrocious and was basically unusable - unfortunate as we're a Google Apps shop and the integration would have been nice. I don't hold out much hope for the other Honeycomb based tablets.
However, the reviews on the Playbook and WebOS tablets have been pretty stellar about the web browser - so I'm excited to see how webapps work on these (especially WebOS!)
citizenzen
Mar 22, 08:19 PM
It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
rtdunham
Aug 27, 10:07 AM
As far as "legalities" go, usually corporations do have to generally not take unsolicited ideas, commercials, marketing materials, etc. developed by the public. The reason for this is that they want to avoid being sued later on if they do something similar. ...the more obvious examples would be things where, for example, someone designs a new computer and sends it to Apple; Apple eventually releases something quite similar to it, and the person who sent in the design tries to sue them for taking their idea and not paying anything for it.-Zadillo
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 01:19 AM
Yes...Photoshop can only run under Rosetta on the Intel machines...there's no universal version of it.
It was just the performance was dam quick I just wasn't sure if there was an Intel version out or not, either way that is killer performance.
It was just the performance was dam quick I just wasn't sure if there was an Intel version out or not, either way that is killer performance.
kdarling
Apr 6, 03:01 PM
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
fblack
Aug 11, 01:28 PM
I'm not sure it will be as feature rich as some expect--remember ease of use seldom plays well with complexity.
However, I am eager to see what comes of this and preferably soon. As I am now on my 3rd replacement RAZR which is begining to have problems.:mad:
However, I am eager to see what comes of this and preferably soon. As I am now on my 3rd replacement RAZR which is begining to have problems.:mad:
Popeye206
Apr 11, 02:26 PM
That's why god created the internet.......:D
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
Yeah.... but it sure is fun to go to the Mall and see all the stores with just a few shoppers each until you hit the Apple store which is almost always packed with people. :)
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق