milo
Aug 11, 03:57 PM
I would be happy with the *real* replacement for the 12" Powerbook. Can't work with that gloss screen, and can't bear the integrated graphics. Apple need to get real if they want professionals like photographers to buy a new laptop. :confused:
What "pro" apps did you try to run that didn't run well on the integrated graphics?
What "pro" apps did you try to run that didn't run well on the integrated graphics?
Stella
Aug 4, 07:52 AM
Cheese with your whine?
Never buy an apple product!!!
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
Never buy an apple product!!!
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
alhedges
Mar 26, 11:09 PM
I think that Apple will introduce IOS 5 in June/July, when it introduces the iPhone 5 (assuming that's what they call it). If there is some aspect of ios 5 that they can't get ready until Fall, they may have an ios 5.3 update in the Fall. But holding off on ios 5 until the fall will simply make the iP5 less appealing...and introducing ios 5 when you don't have a product to sell is simply a waste.
And I don't buy the iPad 3 in the fall rumor, either.
And I don't buy the iPad 3 in the fall rumor, either.
LagunaSol
Apr 18, 03:34 PM
I'm surprised it's taken this long, to be honest: I've thought for a long time that Samsung's phones in particular are pretty much a blatant rip-off of Apple's industrial design and user interface.
Indeed, the haters will scream and rant about this lawsuit, but Samsung has a special knack for making their devices look exactly like Apple's equivalents.
Indeed, the haters will scream and rant about this lawsuit, but Samsung has a special knack for making their devices look exactly like Apple's equivalents.
Bez
Sep 11, 11:43 AM
A wi-fi enabled NAS-box that sits next to your TV. It will be able to play files firectly to the telly, without your computer being on.
It will be controlled by a thing that looks just like an iPod. This wi-fi device gives you access to your media, using an iPod-like menu structure. This remote tells the NAS-box what to play. Video is not streamed wirelessly, since that requires too much bandwidth. Instead, the NAS-box is connected directly to the TV.
But the NAS box can also stream audio, via Airport Express, to hi-fis. Multiple strreams can be supported, and additional remotes can be added to the system to enable users in different parts of the house to listen to different things.
You computer need not be on for all this to operate. Although it is needed for management and perhaps downloading.
I know this because I emailled Apple a year or two back to suggest it. And its such an ace idea, I am sure they listened.
:)
(Edited for typos)
It will be controlled by a thing that looks just like an iPod. This wi-fi device gives you access to your media, using an iPod-like menu structure. This remote tells the NAS-box what to play. Video is not streamed wirelessly, since that requires too much bandwidth. Instead, the NAS-box is connected directly to the TV.
But the NAS box can also stream audio, via Airport Express, to hi-fis. Multiple strreams can be supported, and additional remotes can be added to the system to enable users in different parts of the house to listen to different things.
You computer need not be on for all this to operate. Although it is needed for management and perhaps downloading.
I know this because I emailled Apple a year or two back to suggest it. And its such an ace idea, I am sure they listened.
:)
(Edited for typos)
Hastings101
Apr 7, 01:00 PM
Ha ha! Way to go Apple!!!! Kill the competition any way you can!!
Apple is doing everyone a favor saving them from the mistake of getting a RIM tablet.
Not really, this tablet looks very interesting, compared to the larger iPod Touch, oops, I mean iPad.
Apple is doing everyone a favor saving them from the mistake of getting a RIM tablet.
Not really, this tablet looks very interesting, compared to the larger iPod Touch, oops, I mean iPad.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 09:50 AM
+1. My IP is being logged right now most likely. No matter where you go, using any communication device, you can be tracked. If you're that paranoid, get off the grid. Every phone company tracks your location. This for iPhone users is just a log of it on your phone.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 06:15 PM
Multiplication is always what you do, when there is a term directly adjacent to the ().
"Oh, I did not know that!!" - Johnny Carson, The Tonight Show
I get 61,835, but I'm beginning to think someone has mucked around with the keys on my calculator.
Finally, humour.
Check your IMOS battery. I think it's failing. :p
"Oh, I did not know that!!" - Johnny Carson, The Tonight Show
I get 61,835, but I'm beginning to think someone has mucked around with the keys on my calculator.
Finally, humour.
Check your IMOS battery. I think it's failing. :p
kavika411
Mar 29, 08:44 AM
I dont understand the point of this. Is storage really an issue on peoples computers? I understand the mobile app, but why not just store the files locally?
I believe that storage will be half the equation for the future MobileMe. I believe the other half will be some sort of wireless synching to the cloud - if you so choose - and not to your computer as we've done for too many years now.
I believe that storage will be half the equation for the future MobileMe. I believe the other half will be some sort of wireless synching to the cloud - if you so choose - and not to your computer as we've done for too many years now.
digitalbiker
Aug 4, 09:33 PM
It seems to me that the future of running Windows on our Macs is to not run Windows on our Macs.;)
Actually, I think Apple would be far more successful in letting Microsoft develop a better version of Virtual PC for OS X. Then people could run their Windows apps at near native performance. The machine would be a little safer from a virus infection stand point and Apple wouldn't have MS all over their back with lawsuits.
Microsoft would make money on their software and Apple would make money on their hardware as well as software.
Whats wrong with that! Everyone is happy. No revolution or bloody war. Just plenty of apps and great hardware.:D
Actually, I think Apple would be far more successful in letting Microsoft develop a better version of Virtual PC for OS X. Then people could run their Windows apps at near native performance. The machine would be a little safer from a virus infection stand point and Apple wouldn't have MS all over their back with lawsuits.
Microsoft would make money on their software and Apple would make money on their hardware as well as software.
Whats wrong with that! Everyone is happy. No revolution or bloody war. Just plenty of apps and great hardware.:D
Michaelgtrusa
Apr 5, 01:05 PM
Not surprised! Toyota should not take it!
Silentwave
Jul 29, 11:16 PM
Oh I hope for these to be false, I hate cell phones and I don't want to hate an apple product. But if they did make a phone it would require the following features.
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
As a photo geek I would have to disagree with you here. I don't believe myself that the lens quality for something so small would be good enough, and I especially don't believe that the sensors @ 5mp that small would be up to it. You'd have ridiculous amounts of noise in almost any photo, and optical aberrations would be easily picked up. Pixel density would be incredible. They have trouble getting good performance out of 6mp sensors that are several times as large as the one that would be here, and lenses on those same point and shoot digital cameras often will show massive amounts of chromatic aberrations particularly around strong light sources and highlight-shadow transitions even with lenses that are many many times larger.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
-At least 5 megapixel camera, I'd love to minimize the amount of things in my pocket by combing my camera and my cell phone ( i hate the beast but my mother makes me carry it) but there isint a camera phone good enough to actually use to take a picture other than an imac G5 in an elevator.
As a photo geek I would have to disagree with you here. I don't believe myself that the lens quality for something so small would be good enough, and I especially don't believe that the sensors @ 5mp that small would be up to it. You'd have ridiculous amounts of noise in almost any photo, and optical aberrations would be easily picked up. Pixel density would be incredible. They have trouble getting good performance out of 6mp sensors that are several times as large as the one that would be here, and lenses on those same point and shoot digital cameras often will show massive amounts of chromatic aberrations particularly around strong light sources and highlight-shadow transitions even with lenses that are many many times larger.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
MistaBungle
Mar 30, 05:48 PM
Excellent. Downloading and cannot wait to load.
Ed91
Mar 31, 03:23 AM
iCal has been visually overhauled to look like the iPad version
At first I thought that this was awful. It doesn't really seem to fit with the rest of the OS, but then I realised that Apple is moving from an OS-centric view to an app-centric view, where the OS should be out of sight and mind.
I hope this type of skeuomorphic design in Lion sticks to full screen apps, when the OS can't be seen.
At first I thought that this was awful. It doesn't really seem to fit with the rest of the OS, but then I realised that Apple is moving from an OS-centric view to an app-centric view, where the OS should be out of sight and mind.
I hope this type of skeuomorphic design in Lion sticks to full screen apps, when the OS can't be seen.
Huntn
May 3, 09:19 AM
Metric system should be in the U.S.. No point in keeping an odd system.
For manufacturing, my impression is that the U.S. does use metric. Maybe that is because most stuff is manufactured overseas or for something like automobiles, they are marketed worldwide.:o However for living around town, I like my miles, inches, gallons, and pounds.
For manufacturing, my impression is that the U.S. does use metric. Maybe that is because most stuff is manufactured overseas or for something like automobiles, they are marketed worldwide.:o However for living around town, I like my miles, inches, gallons, and pounds.
Multimedia
Aug 11, 10:16 PM
It would be cool for them to keep the yonah in the low-end MacBook. That way with the price drop they could get back to a $999 entry-level notebook.
Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.
Great News! Still hoping for a case redesign in the MBP for mine. :)You can buy the Yonah entry MacBook on the SAVE page of the Apple online store for $949 already. Been so for months. They are not going to keep putting Yonah in anything. Merom cost them the same money. No incentive to keep putting 32-bit processors in anything any longer than they must because the future is Leopard and Leopard is all about full 64-bit support.
MacBook Pro is very likely redesigned for Merom including that easy HD swap out capability that's already in the MacBook Pro Jr. - I mean MacBook. :eek: :D
Here's how I see Apple using Merom:
MacBook Pro gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T7600 - 2.33 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) 15" Top $2499 & 17" $2799
Core 2 Duo T7400 - 2.16 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) 15" Bottom $1999
MacBook Gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T7200 - 2.00 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Superdrive Black $1499 & White $1299
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Combo White $1099
Mac mini gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Superdrive $799
Core 2 Duo T5500 - 1.66 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Combo $599
I wish they would stop selling Combo Opticals. They could use Single Layer Superdrives as a differentiator instead.
Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.
Great News! Still hoping for a case redesign in the MBP for mine. :)You can buy the Yonah entry MacBook on the SAVE page of the Apple online store for $949 already. Been so for months. They are not going to keep putting Yonah in anything. Merom cost them the same money. No incentive to keep putting 32-bit processors in anything any longer than they must because the future is Leopard and Leopard is all about full 64-bit support.
MacBook Pro is very likely redesigned for Merom including that easy HD swap out capability that's already in the MacBook Pro Jr. - I mean MacBook. :eek: :D
Here's how I see Apple using Merom:
MacBook Pro gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T7600 - 2.33 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) 15" Top $2499 & 17" $2799
Core 2 Duo T7400 - 2.16 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) 15" Bottom $1999
MacBook Gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T7200 - 2.00 GHz (4 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Superdrive Black $1499 & White $1299
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Combo White $1099
Mac mini gets these two:
Core 2 Duo T5600 - 1.83 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Superdrive $799
Core 2 Duo T5500 - 1.66 GHz (2 MiB L2, 667 MHz FSB) Combo $599
I wish they would stop selling Combo Opticals. They could use Single Layer Superdrives as a differentiator instead.
KnightWRX
May 6, 07:33 AM
What I really wanted to say is that Google is going to run their datacentres on ARM
There you go again with facts. Citation needed. I think what you want to say here is :
"There was some speculation last year that Google might switch to ARM for their datacenters and servers after an acquisition of an ARM technology company".
There is no way you can state what you are stating as a fact right now. ;)
But the fact that Google bought a company developing ARM processors and also hired engineers from PA Semi that previously worked on Apple's A4 chips
Yes, that is a fact you can state.
means that they ARE going to produce their own ARM chips
Not all acquisitions end up in workable projects. Google does a lot of acquisitions, some of them just end up as IP port-folio fodders, some of them get recycled into products, some of them just get abandonned. Who knows what Google is planning ?
either for their own Android phones or more likely for their datacentres.
How is it more likely for their datacenters, in light of Google's staff saying ARM isn't ready for the datacenter ? I'd say at this point, it's more likely for the Chrome OS based netbooks that will probably never see the light of day officially beyond the Cr48.
There you go again with facts. Citation needed. I think what you want to say here is :
"There was some speculation last year that Google might switch to ARM for their datacenters and servers after an acquisition of an ARM technology company".
There is no way you can state what you are stating as a fact right now. ;)
But the fact that Google bought a company developing ARM processors and also hired engineers from PA Semi that previously worked on Apple's A4 chips
Yes, that is a fact you can state.
means that they ARE going to produce their own ARM chips
Not all acquisitions end up in workable projects. Google does a lot of acquisitions, some of them just end up as IP port-folio fodders, some of them get recycled into products, some of them just get abandonned. Who knows what Google is planning ?
either for their own Android phones or more likely for their datacentres.
How is it more likely for their datacenters, in light of Google's staff saying ARM isn't ready for the datacenter ? I'd say at this point, it's more likely for the Chrome OS based netbooks that will probably never see the light of day officially beyond the Cr48.
CFreymarc
Apr 20, 02:03 AM
Not a summer update? Surprising.
I'll bang this gong again. Now someone reliable is showing a similar form factor, this is not the iPhone 5, this is iPhone 4G.
iPhone 4G announced WWDC this summer
iPhone 4G ships in September world wide with domestic USA shipment in August.
Bang a gong, get it on!
I'll bang this gong again. Now someone reliable is showing a similar form factor, this is not the iPhone 5, this is iPhone 4G.
iPhone 4G announced WWDC this summer
iPhone 4G ships in September world wide with domestic USA shipment in August.
Bang a gong, get it on!
MacAddict1978
Apr 25, 10:42 AM
And with the patriot act the telecos let the government move in and access data without warrants. Yet everyone seems fine with this. However, the instant your phone has a database of cell phone towers it is something nefarious. Sigh. It really would be nice if the real privacy concerns were addressed and not this low hanging fruit of a cache on your phone.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes. (No wonder the batteries don't last on droid for more than 3-5 hours). I wish I could find the link to the article I read that in. It's certain models that have been found to do it.... right down to your GPS coordinates. Why does Google need to know this? And their users are now inadvertently spying on other people. Google has no rights to info on my wi-fi network just because someone drove past my house with an Android phone in the car.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
http://youtu.be/7YvAYIJSSZY
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes. (No wonder the batteries don't last on droid for more than 3-5 hours). I wish I could find the link to the article I read that in. It's certain models that have been found to do it.... right down to your GPS coordinates. Why does Google need to know this? And their users are now inadvertently spying on other people. Google has no rights to info on my wi-fi network just because someone drove past my house with an Android phone in the car.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
http://youtu.be/7YvAYIJSSZY
tom5304
May 7, 04:44 PM
Oh and a two letter email address is priceless.
Yes, because typing "gmail.com" is so exhausting. :D
Yes, because typing "gmail.com" is so exhausting. :D
kev0476
Jul 30, 08:24 PM
i get 3g data for 12.75 a month, unlimited.
Just with the sprint = cheapest internet.
That deal is through my dad's work. sprint seems very interested in salt lake city, best coverage in slc, entire university of utah is full reception, even underground.
but then again, i did just buy the samsung a-900 a month ago. wow, karma is still kicking my ass. (i've done some bad things in the past :p )
Just with the sprint = cheapest internet.
That deal is through my dad's work. sprint seems very interested in salt lake city, best coverage in slc, entire university of utah is full reception, even underground.
but then again, i did just buy the samsung a-900 a month ago. wow, karma is still kicking my ass. (i've done some bad things in the past :p )
-aggie-
May 3, 08:19 PM
From what you wrote in the rules, the healing treasure could be awhile.
I think whoever understands this game the best (e.g., DP) should make our first decision. We can evaluate it after and learn from it. We�re obviously learning in this game. BTW, my fav video games are the leveling types with HP/AP (don�t have XP in this one). We could do a lot with this format if it�s successful
I think whoever understands this game the best (e.g., DP) should make our first decision. We can evaluate it after and learn from it. We�re obviously learning in this game. BTW, my fav video games are the leveling types with HP/AP (don�t have XP in this one). We could do a lot with this format if it�s successful
funnypicture1
Jan 24, 06:58 PM
Thread over, tstreete wins.
Congf You.
Congf You.