Ava's Meeshee
Apr 20, 09:31 AM
Oh, right, so that justifies arrogance, parochialism and chauvinism. Carry on then.
What justifies European & European colonial sense of entitlement in forums like these?
What justifies European & European colonial sense of entitlement in forums like these?
itcheroni
Apr 15, 12:55 AM
One thing I don't hear in the raising taxes discussion is what we should do with capital gains. That's the reason billionaires pay a paltry 15%. Almost all of their income comes from the selling of assets rather than a salary. Their money works for them, rather than the rest of us who have to work for our money. And for that, we reward them with a super low tax rate. :rolleyes:
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been. The people who would have worked there can't complain the way an autoworker or public school teacher can complain. It's okay, it's not like we need jobs or anything. Let's just raise taxes enough on the top 1% of earners to employ everyone looking for a job. We can have them built a high speed rail network across the country. The only snag is our country would collapse before finishing one route. We would have a scattering of tracks as a reminder of our incompetence.
Take that, fivepoint. Where has he been btw? Haven't seen him around here in a while.
It's a bit exhausting to repeat yourself so often on these forums. Personally, I have a lot of say in regards to this article, but to lay out my ideas coherently would require too much time.
I believe what is happening in America is a natural cycle. Most empires fall because of hubris and bad economic policies. I don't need to win arguments, I need to protect myself and my family from possible hardships.
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
Do you think there are any negative consequences to this? If I were starting a business and seeking investors, it would sure be a lot harder to get investors when the capital gains rate is 35% rather than 15%. That business would never materialize. Nobody's going to complain about it though because no one can see what could have been. The people who would have worked there can't complain the way an autoworker or public school teacher can complain. It's okay, it's not like we need jobs or anything. Let's just raise taxes enough on the top 1% of earners to employ everyone looking for a job. We can have them built a high speed rail network across the country. The only snag is our country would collapse before finishing one route. We would have a scattering of tracks as a reminder of our incompetence.
Take that, fivepoint. Where has he been btw? Haven't seen him around here in a while.
It's a bit exhausting to repeat yourself so often on these forums. Personally, I have a lot of say in regards to this article, but to lay out my ideas coherently would require too much time.
I believe what is happening in America is a natural cycle. Most empires fall because of hubris and bad economic policies. I don't need to win arguments, I need to protect myself and my family from possible hardships.
KingCrimson
Apr 18, 02:57 PM
Interesting that Samsung Group is a much larger corporation to Apple, but only have $4.5 billion in cash reserves. While Apple has $50 billion and counting.
Eidorian
Jul 22, 11:14 PM
Maybe the low end MacBook will keep Yonah and get a price drop, while the higher end MacBook, black and white, will get Merom. That might lead to the most sales, to both those looking for a cheaper MacBook, and those waiting for Merom.I don't think Apple should divide a single line between Core Duo and Core 2 Duo. The average idiot customer won't be able to conprehend why Merom is performs better at the same clock speed as Yonah. Between two entirely separate product lines it's not a problem. Unless you start throwing in products with Yonah/Merom at the same clock speed. Watch those heads spin.
wizard
Mar 29, 03:29 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Hey Apple,
I don't want my iPhone 5 to be leaking radiation...
Too soon? :cool::rolleyes:
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
Hey Apple,
I don't want my iPhone 5 to be leaking radiation...
Too soon? :cool::rolleyes:
Always looking at the negative side of things. Maybe a little radiation will lead to higher power densities.
shawnce
Aug 2, 01:21 PM
As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market. Don't think larger, think more pixels per inch (resolution independent UI (http://developer.apple.com/releasenotes/GraphicsImaging/ResolutionIndependentUI.html) does need a poster child).
Now will they show up at WWDC... personally higher pixel density displays likely wont just yet (would love to be surprised however) but possibly a slight revamp of the currently display lineup (adding in iSight) isn't to far out of the realm of possibilities.
Now will they show up at WWDC... personally higher pixel density displays likely wont just yet (would love to be surprised however) but possibly a slight revamp of the currently display lineup (adding in iSight) isn't to far out of the realm of possibilities.
SiPat
Mar 29, 06:43 PM
To paraphrase all those advocating that Apple (10% market share) should licence OS X:
It is about time Kureha (70% share) licences it's technology to produce that whatyamacallit chemical for batteries.
It is about time Kureha (70% share) licences it's technology to produce that whatyamacallit chemical for batteries.
citizenzen
Apr 16, 01:23 PM
It's spending on investment rather than spending on consumption.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
cvaldes
Apr 7, 01:33 PM
All Apple did was created a premium brand. Technology was cheap and affordable in the MP3 market. You could pick up an MP3 player for under a $100 bucks until Apple came into the market with its $300 dollar iPod.
And you still can buy MP3 players that are far cheaper than what Apple offers.
Apple did not come to dominate this market with cost competition. They did it by providing a better overall consumer experience. If you judge by specs, you'd buy a Sansa instead of an iPod. However Joe Consumer doesn't care about specs.
And you still can buy MP3 players that are far cheaper than what Apple offers.
Apple did not come to dominate this market with cost competition. They did it by providing a better overall consumer experience. If you judge by specs, you'd buy a Sansa instead of an iPod. However Joe Consumer doesn't care about specs.
heisetax
Aug 2, 03:26 PM
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
Probably the main reason for few or no options is because of the 1" thick PowerBook model. That does not leave room to add anything. The next reason is just like air conditioning in new cars. The manufacture can sell it to everyone even if they don't want it. That increases profits. They use to have an external keyboard/mouse option which is also gone. So just look at the glossy screen as being different, not the norm for Apple.
Bill the TaxMan
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
Probably the main reason for few or no options is because of the 1" thick PowerBook model. That does not leave room to add anything. The next reason is just like air conditioning in new cars. The manufacture can sell it to everyone even if they don't want it. That increases profits. They use to have an external keyboard/mouse option which is also gone. So just look at the glossy screen as being different, not the norm for Apple.
Bill the TaxMan
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 03:06 PM
.........................................3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
way2l84sanity
May 6, 06:20 AM
It wasn't long after I bought my first Mac in may of that I read this
rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/2005/05/23/apple-in-talks-with-intel/). All of theses post sound very familiar.
rumor (http://www.macrumors.com/2005/05/23/apple-in-talks-with-intel/). All of theses post sound very familiar.
Adam-
Apr 20, 06:14 AM
You can't be sure about this.
Better battery = longer Battery life :)
Better battery = longer Battery life :)
Clive At Five
Nov 22, 12:31 PM
Okay, I've heard here a lot, that people want simple integration/syncronization with iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, & Address Book. These are all, (minus iTunes) 100% Mac-Centric. PC users would only get integration/syncronization with iTunes. What good is that to them? At that point you only have iPod + Phone.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
ucfgrad93
May 3, 05:49 PM
We may need a woman in charge, because Lord knows none of the men will ask for directions. ;)
That is what a GPS is for babe!;)
That is what a GPS is for babe!;)
Rodstermac
Sep 16, 10:53 PM
I've been reading internet articles all day. Yesterday I ordered a MacBook which is set for delivery in Oct. I read an article that said Intel shipped the processors early to the manufacturers to first upgrade their entry level laptops and, as we have seen, that is the case with Dell and HP. According to the article, there was no supply issue with the new Core 2 CPU's. The MacBook though now supposedly is in short supply right now inventory-wise - Could be back to school or possibly a "refit" !! Well, who knows what they will do but I would hope they would just start shipping them with the new Core 2 CPU's soldered in place of the Core Duo - both laptops.
Susurs
May 6, 04:23 AM
My subjective view is that it's a 'special message' to the Intel as latter lately imposes it's rules on using cpu's ... no Nvidia chips for example ...
ALUOp
May 6, 01:41 AM
This is total BS.
ARM CPUs are far far behind Intel's non-Atom series in terms of performance.
This is due to their RISC architecture. That's also why they consume less power than x86.
If you're saying in 2 years ARM's performance may catch up to current Atom, then, it may be possible.
But compared with Core i series? It's the biggest joke I've ever heard.
ARM CPUs are far far behind Intel's non-Atom series in terms of performance.
This is due to their RISC architecture. That's also why they consume less power than x86.
If you're saying in 2 years ARM's performance may catch up to current Atom, then, it may be possible.
But compared with Core i series? It's the biggest joke I've ever heard.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 16, 01:46 PM
2.16 and 2.33 Merom options
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
I agree with everything, except for the keyboard. If they put in a MB style keyboard I will go with a Rev A (or Thinkpad) for sure, no matter what else they do with the MBP. Neccessities aside, there's nothing I use more on my laptop than the keyboard, and even though I find the MB keyboard all right for touch typing, I don't find it acceptable for my constant use.
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
I agree with everything, except for the keyboard. If they put in a MB style keyboard I will go with a Rev A (or Thinkpad) for sure, no matter what else they do with the MBP. Neccessities aside, there's nothing I use more on my laptop than the keyboard, and even though I find the MB keyboard all right for touch typing, I don't find it acceptable for my constant use.
jrhone
May 7, 04:58 PM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
Soooo.....web hosting of as many sites you want as long as they are under 20GB is not worth anything? Or find my i***? Or fle sharing? Or MM galleries? Or maybe a Pro Photog can build and upload his entire site AND host it directly from Aperture? There are MANY MANY cool features of Mobile Me...if you dont need them...dont buy it..but many do...I have for years and get LOTS of use out of it...
Soooo.....web hosting of as many sites you want as long as they are under 20GB is not worth anything? Or find my i***? Or fle sharing? Or MM galleries? Or maybe a Pro Photog can build and upload his entire site AND host it directly from Aperture? There are MANY MANY cool features of Mobile Me...if you dont need them...dont buy it..but many do...I have for years and get LOTS of use out of it...
Multimedia
Aug 7, 08:55 PM
ok im super duper glad they finally released it
and i'm happy about it being quad processor and the quad 3ghz is soooo dreamy
but i have mixed feelings about the case
on one hand i'm glad they stuck with the look of the g5 powermac,
and didnt go to some plastic looking crap (i love the brushed aluminum look)
but i wish they would have made it a little different lookingIt does look completely different. Are you blind? Two Optical Ports. 5 front ports. Rear layout is completely different as well. Looks only a little like the G5.
and i'm happy about it being quad processor and the quad 3ghz is soooo dreamy
but i have mixed feelings about the case
on one hand i'm glad they stuck with the look of the g5 powermac,
and didnt go to some plastic looking crap (i love the brushed aluminum look)
but i wish they would have made it a little different lookingIt does look completely different. Are you blind? Two Optical Ports. 5 front ports. Rear layout is completely different as well. Looks only a little like the G5.
Sijmen
Aug 2, 01:45 PM
I'm pretty sure it's time for the Mac Pro. Alongside, something should happen to the Cinema Display.
The current models are
The current models are
iGary
Aug 7, 02:00 PM
Anyone drop one of these in their cart and press order yet?
Brometheus
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
I think Steve Jobs is someone who doesn't suffer idiots gladly. Note how he didn't say "there is no list of locations on people's iPhones", what he said was "we don't track anyone". The opposite of "we don't track anyone" is "Apple is tracking some people's movements". Do you have any evidence of this? Do you _believe_ it?
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.