qwerto
Aug 12, 03:07 AM
i don't think so. i'm sure apple put some sticky stuff on the processor and the motherboard so that it'll stay there basically forever.
dang, i knew it was a long shot. Oh well, time to buy some more ram for my mbp... that will suffice for now
dang, i knew it was a long shot. Oh well, time to buy some more ram for my mbp... that will suffice for now
snebes
Apr 20, 10:07 AM
If they do then the iPhone 4 will be my last iPhone. The iPhone 4 is big enough. Any larger and it won't fit as nicely in pockets.
I'm sure he just means the screen and it has been proven that a 4" screen will not increase the physical size of the phone.
Even if it went to 4.5" or 5" and made the phone slightly bigger, you probably wouldn't even notice (but this is more than extremely unlikely to happen)
I'm sure he just means the screen and it has been proven that a 4" screen will not increase the physical size of the phone.
Even if it went to 4.5" or 5" and made the phone slightly bigger, you probably wouldn't even notice (but this is more than extremely unlikely to happen)
Benjy91
Dec 9, 06:52 AM
Im hearing so many good things about Sophos, If this is their first offering to consumers, are they offering Sophos for home users on Windows?
Im using AVG 2011 Free Edition at the moment, and haven't had any problems with it, is it worth getting Sophos?
Im using AVG 2011 Free Edition at the moment, and haven't had any problems with it, is it worth getting Sophos?
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 02:54 PM
Apple needs to respond. I would prefer them to do it with an iOS overhaul and some diversification of their product line. Apple won't sacrifice margins significantly, so to expand market share they should appeal to more people and step up advertising on the cheaper previous-gen models.
Apple can't, it would wreck havoc on their margins. A cheaper phone isn't just one that you pay $50 for and then end up with the same contract as the regular one. It's a cheap phone that you can buy without a contract.
And they would also lose the people, and there are lots here, just in this thread, who talk about exclusivity and being part of a club that not everyone can join.
Ferrari doesn't make cheap cars for everyone. But while most people would rather like to drive a Ferrari than a Toyota, most people would prefer to own Toyota. They make more money even if their cars aren't as exclusive. (Also, Ferrari is now owned by Fiat.)
Apple can't, it would wreck havoc on their margins. A cheaper phone isn't just one that you pay $50 for and then end up with the same contract as the regular one. It's a cheap phone that you can buy without a contract.
And they would also lose the people, and there are lots here, just in this thread, who talk about exclusivity and being part of a club that not everyone can join.
Ferrari doesn't make cheap cars for everyone. But while most people would rather like to drive a Ferrari than a Toyota, most people would prefer to own Toyota. They make more money even if their cars aren't as exclusive. (Also, Ferrari is now owned by Fiat.)
Consultant
Apr 26, 02:51 PM
Too bad Android makers are basically giving them away to gain market share.
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
Unorthodox
Aug 2, 04:04 PM
??
Oh wait. Im not sure I understand the question.
What do you mean "get a hold of that keynote"?
You want to grab it?
Oh wait. Im not sure I understand the question.
What do you mean "get a hold of that keynote"?
You want to grab it?
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.
ipedro
May 4, 04:35 PM
I think Apple might update the firmware. It will appear a Mac App Store icon when user hold down the option key. Also it will allow user to put their Apple ID and choose a Wifi network. Isn't it a good idea? :D
I mean how many time you need to reinstall Mac OS lol
Mac App Store will be the fastest way to get what you want and this is the future. Disc is OVER!
Excellent idea. The OS and all your apps could be restored by simply logging in with your AppleID into the firmware. Everything downloads and you're working on a brand new installation. Throw in iCloud and all your iTunes media and other files backed up on iDisk are also restored.
I just looked at the Mac App Store application. It's only 7.4MB. That can fit comfortably on the firmware chip. If Lion alters the firmware to be able to run this app apart from the OS, a simple login would enable one to get their OS and all their apps without a disk or USB stick.
I mean how many time you need to reinstall Mac OS lol
Mac App Store will be the fastest way to get what you want and this is the future. Disc is OVER!
Excellent idea. The OS and all your apps could be restored by simply logging in with your AppleID into the firmware. Everything downloads and you're working on a brand new installation. Throw in iCloud and all your iTunes media and other files backed up on iDisk are also restored.
I just looked at the Mac App Store application. It's only 7.4MB. That can fit comfortably on the firmware chip. If Lion alters the firmware to be able to run this app apart from the OS, a simple login would enable one to get their OS and all their apps without a disk or USB stick.
mrsir2009
May 4, 03:07 PM
Since when is an operating system an "app"?
NAG
Apr 25, 10:19 AM
I dont know if its intentional, but your Signature link is broken, it has 1 too many h's. It begins hhttps ;)
Neat. Guess, I did a sloppy cut and paste when I switched over from the full URL to the truncated URLs that Apple provides. It's just a lolcat, so you're not missing much.
Neat. Guess, I did a sloppy cut and paste when I switched over from the full URL to the truncated URLs that Apple provides. It's just a lolcat, so you're not missing much.
ChazUK
Apr 18, 04:49 PM
+1 for great common sense that some people aer lacking on here so far...
Do you really think the Galaxy tab and iPhone 3g/3gs aer<sic> "identical"?
Do you really think the Galaxy tab and iPhone 3g/3gs aer<sic> "identical"?
jace88
Jan 12, 05:56 AM
Ouch that sounds bad but good thing I don't use Time Machine. I'm thinking of downloading/installing this on my MBA! Reviews on the net (e.g. CNET) make it sound quite good.
cdembek
Mar 27, 07:10 AM
The problem with the cloud based approach is the current limits on data usage. If your not on wifi I can see a good amount of folks going through 2GB of data quick.
boncellis
Aug 11, 02:05 PM
I've said all along the imac will get conroe. With woodcrest in the mac pro, I'd say it's pretty well guaranteed. The imac only got a laptop processor because it was the only choice. From here on out it'll get the desktop processor it deserves.
I also think the macbook will get merom sooner rather than later. The two lines will still be differentiated by size, screen res, casing, backlit keys, dedicated graphics, and express card slot. The macbook needs to compete against PC laptops, not the macbook pro. The processors will pretty similar on the G4 laptops before intel (1.33/1.42 for the ibook, 1.5/1.67 for the powerbook) and yet there were still plenty of compelling reasons to go for the powerbook. Same thing still applies.
Your rock solid reasoning has won me over. I wasn't sure about what chips would be used where, but I think you have me convinced.
I just hope the Mini sees an upgrade relatively soon inasmuch as the phantom mid-range tower has yet to materialize. I may have to break down and get the Yonah one.
I also think the macbook will get merom sooner rather than later. The two lines will still be differentiated by size, screen res, casing, backlit keys, dedicated graphics, and express card slot. The macbook needs to compete against PC laptops, not the macbook pro. The processors will pretty similar on the G4 laptops before intel (1.33/1.42 for the ibook, 1.5/1.67 for the powerbook) and yet there were still plenty of compelling reasons to go for the powerbook. Same thing still applies.
Your rock solid reasoning has won me over. I wasn't sure about what chips would be used where, but I think you have me convinced.
I just hope the Mini sees an upgrade relatively soon inasmuch as the phantom mid-range tower has yet to materialize. I may have to break down and get the Yonah one.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 09:23 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
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.
I think Steve is outright lying about this.. I don't think most people aren't fond of this, including myself..
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.
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.
I think Steve is outright lying about this.. I don't think most people aren't fond of this, including myself..
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.
lilo777
Mar 29, 10:42 AM
And Amazon thinks crippling ioS compatibility will be good business? FAIL.
I agree. I am absolutely convinced that Amazon's decision has nothing to do with the fact that their new cloud service gives free storage for MP3 files purchased from Amazon. Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
I agree. I am absolutely convinced that Amazon's decision has nothing to do with the fact that their new cloud service gives free storage for MP3 files purchased from Amazon. Those idiots at Amazon probably still think that iOS is a close ecosystem where Apple restricts competitors in order to be able to rip off their loyal customer base.
cav23j
Mar 26, 10:49 PM
In the keynote, didn't Jobs say 2011 was the year of the iPad 2? I thought that pretty much smashed the rumors of an iPad 3 this year.
means nothing
people are reading too much into that slide
means nothing
people are reading too much into that slide
drir1990
Apr 20, 01:33 AM
I'd love to see a three tier release. 3gs at the budget end, iPhone 4 in the midrange and the 5 at the top end.
Looking forward to whatever enhancements Apple bring with it.
I don't see that happening. Apple tends to avoid complicated product lines. That is one too many options in my opinion.
Looking forward to whatever enhancements Apple bring with it.
I don't see that happening. Apple tends to avoid complicated product lines. That is one too many options in my opinion.
apunkrockmonk
Mar 26, 10:06 PM
Problem I have is timing. Why does Apple continue to release the new iPhone in the summer yet we have to wait months afterwards for the iOS update to take advantage of it? :confused:
If they were to actually do it this way this year it would be the first time they ever did it that way. Every prior iPhone came with a new iOS
iPhone - iOS 1
iPhone 3G - iOS 2
iPhone 3Gs - iOS 3
iPhone 4 - iOS 4
If they were to actually do it this way this year it would be the first time they ever did it that way. Every prior iPhone came with a new iOS
iPhone - iOS 1
iPhone 3G - iOS 2
iPhone 3Gs - iOS 3
iPhone 4 - iOS 4
war
Nov 22, 09:40 AM
I wish Apple would keep features at a minimum. My current phone has so many features that I don't use. I don't care if it can surf the internet nor do I care if it can take pictures. Could I just get a phone with a great address book that syncs really well with my mac? I just want an excellent way to keep control of my contacts, that's it. Any mobile phone companies out there listening? Stop putting features in that I don't care about.
RalfTheDog
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
aohus
Apr 18, 04:53 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.
Check your sources before trying to 'correct' someone. You just got outcorrected buddy.
Seeing how ridiculous this lawsuit is, I think LG should sue all smartphone makers that have a capacitive touch display on their phones. LG was the first to do it with the LG Prada. I think they have a case :P /sarcasm.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.
Check your sources before trying to 'correct' someone. You just got outcorrected buddy.
Seeing how ridiculous this lawsuit is, I think LG should sue all smartphone makers that have a capacitive touch display on their phones. LG was the first to do it with the LG Prada. I think they have a case :P /sarcasm.
Stella
Apr 7, 10:16 AM
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point, my point was 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock for a prolonged period of time'. This is very different from Apple being found guilty etc etc.
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point, my point was 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock for a prolonged period of time'. This is very different from Apple being found guilty etc etc.
Me1000
Aug 2, 09:10 PM
does anyone else notice that on intels site, the core2 duo is only refered to in PC's????