0815
Apr 25, 10:33 AM
Since only I can access the info, who cares?
This is not a real issue. Ridiculous.
Guess the Apple Haters care ... since they can't attack the iOS on any other grounds they have to either make up funny arguments or overblow every tiny none-issue (and leave out the facts how it looks on their favorite platform).
And of course the press cares since there is a new thing where they can attach their favorite 'gate' to.
This is not a real issue. Ridiculous.
Guess the Apple Haters care ... since they can't attack the iOS on any other grounds they have to either make up funny arguments or overblow every tiny none-issue (and leave out the facts how it looks on their favorite platform).
And of course the press cares since there is a new thing where they can attach their favorite 'gate' to.
HecubusPro
Sep 15, 11:20 PM
I'd rather have a bigger battery and a Go 7700.
Here! Here! Though I'd be much happier to have the option to upgrade to the GeForce Go 7900 GTX. :D I just don't know how practical to the average user it would be in a MBP. For me, it would be very practical.
Here! Here! Though I'd be much happier to have the option to upgrade to the GeForce Go 7900 GTX. :D I just don't know how practical to the average user it would be in a MBP. For me, it would be very practical.
SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:42 PM
Boy, you are sniffing a serious amount of glue.:rolleyes: His motivation is to make brainwashed fanboys BELIEVE Apple is making the best darn tech gadgets in the world, such that Apple can make the most darn profits and he can get the biggest darn bonus. And with THAT, he is a genious.
What makes a product "Best" in its category is defined by different people differently. For some people "best" is a free phone because they can't afford anything else. Some people pour over the specs and select the "best".
For me, "best" is the phone that operates the most intuitively to my way of thinking. I want something that I don't need to refer back to the manual to use its features. My Android Incredible came with a 8" x 11", 73 page manual that I need to use to operate the phone... that fact speaks volumes to what separates the Android from the "best."
What makes a product "Best" in its category is defined by different people differently. For some people "best" is a free phone because they can't afford anything else. Some people pour over the specs and select the "best".
For me, "best" is the phone that operates the most intuitively to my way of thinking. I want something that I don't need to refer back to the manual to use its features. My Android Incredible came with a 8" x 11", 73 page manual that I need to use to operate the phone... that fact speaks volumes to what separates the Android from the "best."
GregA
Nov 28, 05:17 PM
A thing the size of a notebook, with an open screen for handwriting...not just like a PDA or vPod.
So for you a tablet pretty well means a Laptop, without a keyboard?
So for you a tablet pretty well means a Laptop, without a keyboard?
lkrupp
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
For once, I'd like to see a pie chart that includes iPod Touch and iPad, which also run iOS. What's the Android device equivalent of the iPod touch?
We won't see that pie chart as it would make Android look pretty bad. Oh wait, we saw it yesterday. If you compare Android to iOS then iOS has 59% of the market.
We won't see that pie chart as it would make Android look pretty bad. Oh wait, we saw it yesterday. If you compare Android to iOS then iOS has 59% of the market.
zac4mac
Jul 21, 02:42 PM
On one hand I'm bummed that new chips are hitting the street so quickly, and my expensive(Read - still paying for it) MBP is no longer top-line. It's still as blindingly fast as it was day1 and winter's just around the corner. Got my lap heater and it'll be paid for by then.
ChristianJapan
May 4, 05:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
+1 For henry72's proposal via firmware:
Had the same thought... Get a hot key into the firmware to connect to the official App Store with network settings flexible (eg IP setting; Router etc). Then all the setup can be done from the net.
For power user and enterprises I could imagine to be able to support an own App Store within your network to avoid re-downloading. Similar to the enterprise AppStore for iOS.
+1 For henry72's proposal via firmware:
Had the same thought... Get a hot key into the firmware to connect to the official App Store with network settings flexible (eg IP setting; Router etc). Then all the setup can be done from the net.
For power user and enterprises I could imagine to be able to support an own App Store within your network to avoid re-downloading. Similar to the enterprise AppStore for iOS.
ProfessorApple
Apr 5, 07:39 PM
I wonder why Apple gives a hoot? This couldn't be hurting them could it?:confused:
tdougnoles
May 7, 09:31 PM
Steve Jobs tweeted a few days ago that MobilMe was going to be free for Mac uses.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
dwd3885
Mar 28, 10:13 AM
That said, the iPhone as it stands is a nearly perfect device. .
A 'perfect' devices with a bad antenna design? Sorry, but I wouldn't touch the iPhone 4 because of its antenna design flaws and won't get an iPhone until Apple corrects that. Hardly perfect. Perfect for YOU maybe..
A 'perfect' devices with a bad antenna design? Sorry, but I wouldn't touch the iPhone 4 because of its antenna design flaws and won't get an iPhone until Apple corrects that. Hardly perfect. Perfect for YOU maybe..
wschutz
Mar 30, 05:56 PM
MacRumors is keeping up with this obvious error. I doubt Lion will be ready even by the WWDC. A summer release is what I predict.
Thanks Captain Obvious... I think that is what Apple said at the very beginning ;)
Thanks Captain Obvious... I think that is what Apple said at the very beginning ;)
philbeeney
Apr 9, 07:39 PM
My Scientific calculator says 2.
HoldFastHope
Nov 4, 11:27 PM
Jeez. You have to a moron of epic proportions to go this route for a car GPS.
Because?
I use the TomTom app with a DLO vent mount, car charger and stereo with 3.5mm input. Total cost including the mount was about AU $100.
I had a Navman S45 which cost $280, heavily discounted. It was stolen from my car (I'd hidden everything, but they broke in anyway :() and the TomTom/iPhone route is actually more convenient for me because:
1. I now get voice instructions over the car speakers
2. I don't have to worry about my GPS being stolen from my car
3. I can navigate to anyone in my address book without having to enter an address (assuming I have it to begin with)
4. I don't have to juggle car chargers. Dedicated GPS's don't last long without them, neither do iPhones that are pumping music for long periods :)
5. My nav app is now with me everywhere, I don't get the "Oh man I wish I brought my Navman" problem anymore.
Granted, I didn't pay $150+ for the cradle. But even if I did, it would still be cheaper than the S45 and does a much better job IMO. Note I have the TomTom, but any of the other two nav apps would likely be the same experience.
Maybe it's just me, but I think the convenience far outweighs the cost. Although the fact that we Australians get raped on GPS prices probably doesn't help :)
Because?
I use the TomTom app with a DLO vent mount, car charger and stereo with 3.5mm input. Total cost including the mount was about AU $100.
I had a Navman S45 which cost $280, heavily discounted. It was stolen from my car (I'd hidden everything, but they broke in anyway :() and the TomTom/iPhone route is actually more convenient for me because:
1. I now get voice instructions over the car speakers
2. I don't have to worry about my GPS being stolen from my car
3. I can navigate to anyone in my address book without having to enter an address (assuming I have it to begin with)
4. I don't have to juggle car chargers. Dedicated GPS's don't last long without them, neither do iPhones that are pumping music for long periods :)
5. My nav app is now with me everywhere, I don't get the "Oh man I wish I brought my Navman" problem anymore.
Granted, I didn't pay $150+ for the cradle. But even if I did, it would still be cheaper than the S45 and does a much better job IMO. Note I have the TomTom, but any of the other two nav apps would likely be the same experience.
Maybe it's just me, but I think the convenience far outweighs the cost. Although the fact that we Australians get raped on GPS prices probably doesn't help :)
berkleeboy210
Sep 10, 11:24 PM
Monday is going to go by soooooooooooo slow in anticipation for Tuesday.
maybe i'll just sleep until tuesday morning :rolleyes:
Bring on the Widescreen iPod, and a Home Media Device, hopefully something that my new Samsung HDTV in my room can take advantage of!
maybe i'll just sleep until tuesday morning :rolleyes:
Bring on the Widescreen iPod, and a Home Media Device, hopefully something that my new Samsung HDTV in my room can take advantage of!
MacFly123
May 6, 01:08 AM
How about the 3D transistors and 22nm chips that Intel has announced on their roadmap? They sound pretty impressive to me!
This has red flags all over!
This has red flags all over!
Machead III
Sep 11, 09:10 AM
It could be simple as having two tabs..one for the music store and the other for the movie store.
By that logic you could tab all of iLife in one app. Or tab the entire Adobe suit in a single window.
Movies and music are different media with different means of consumption, different lengths, different technology, different file sizes, different meta-information etc. etc.
Whatever their solution it has to be "as good as" two apps, almost non of the same rules apply to movies as do to music.
By that logic you could tab all of iLife in one app. Or tab the entire Adobe suit in a single window.
Movies and music are different media with different means of consumption, different lengths, different technology, different file sizes, different meta-information etc. etc.
Whatever their solution it has to be "as good as" two apps, almost non of the same rules apply to movies as do to music.
applefanDrew
Mar 27, 01:05 AM
I'm starting to wonder if a Iphone 5 is even going to come out this year i mean with the Verizon IPhone launched in February "kinda close to June - July IMO" so they might wait tell june of next year where we get AT&T and a Verizon IPhone upgrades.
just my thoughts on it. of course Apple is a secret company so we won't know tell it happens:)
There will be a new iPhone during calendar 2011
just my thoughts on it. of course Apple is a secret company so we won't know tell it happens:)
There will be a new iPhone during calendar 2011
a.phoenicis
May 4, 03:03 PM
Here's my problem with this distribution method for an OS:
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 11, 09:20 AM
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. :)
Merom definitely in the Black Macbook though, if this is true.
Great News! Still hoping for a case redesign in the MBP for mine. :)
hewsthat
Aug 11, 02:21 PM
The iMac was the first to go to intel.
I'm holding off for the new MBP because from what I've seen, the current ones still have issues. It was Apple's first Mac to go to Intel, and although they've made some changes, it's still "first generation". I'm hoping the next revision will have more than just a processor upgrade.
Correction, your both wrong...they both went intel at the same time, January 12, 2006
I'm holding off for the new MBP because from what I've seen, the current ones still have issues. It was Apple's first Mac to go to Intel, and although they've made some changes, it's still "first generation". I'm hoping the next revision will have more than just a processor upgrade.
Correction, your both wrong...they both went intel at the same time, January 12, 2006
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 02:07 PM
i thought the merom chips have the same pricing as the yonah 5 or 6 month ago. that would mean apple could switch to all merom (MB, mini, MBP). especially since they are compared to dell & co. in the windows world you are almost forced to use the better chip (merom) because the competition is fierce.
ickies
Aug 7, 05:06 PM
I absolutely cannot believe airport and bluetooth are still options on the Pros. They are standard on EVERY other model. What the hell, Apple?
I am very much a pro user and I very much have no use for airport or bluetooth. So I'm glad that it's not being forced on me.
I am very much a pro user and I very much have no use for airport or bluetooth. So I'm glad that it's not being forced on me.
-aggie-
May 3, 11:58 AM
I'm in.
Please move all the relevant responses to DP's questions to the OP. If it's not in the OP, I don't consider it to be a rule. Maybe I'm a minority, but I'm not going to read through pages of this thread trying to figure things out.
Please move all the relevant responses to DP's questions to the OP. If it's not in the OP, I don't consider it to be a rule. Maybe I'm a minority, but I'm not going to read through pages of this thread trying to figure things out.