ssk2
Mar 22, 03:39 PM
Why are you comparing the Playbook that is coming out this summer to iOS 4? Chances are it will be competing with iOS 5. If you want to be fair and all.
Oh FFS... Ok, yes, if we're being pedantic, I'll wait until I try both iOS 5 and the Playbook before deciding.
Oh FFS... Ok, yes, if we're being pedantic, I'll wait until I try both iOS 5 and the Playbook before deciding.
Jimmy James
Mar 22, 02:50 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
If you can't spell "they're" correctly "you're" hardly a credible source.
Battery life is worse because of the specs. Considering that the iPad can play sufficiently high-bitrate videos, I don't see much value in reducing battery life to compete on the basis of specs.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
If you can't spell "they're" correctly "you're" hardly a credible source.
Battery life is worse because of the specs. Considering that the iPad can play sufficiently high-bitrate videos, I don't see much value in reducing battery life to compete on the basis of specs.
Silentwave
Aug 5, 07:40 PM
I think the Merom will be introduced:
Thus a MacBook Pro wil probably be announced, and made available right away, or otherwise very soon.
The Conroe and Woodcrest will probably take longer.
So, the Mac Pro and Xserve Pro (uuuuggghhh!!!... must. remain. Xserve) will be announced, but shipping in about 6 weeks.
why do you think so? Conroe chips showed up online a few weeks ago, and woodcrest has been shipping to manufacturers for some time now. Merom hasn't, Conroe is ahead of Merom in terms of shipping IIRC.
Thus a MacBook Pro wil probably be announced, and made available right away, or otherwise very soon.
The Conroe and Woodcrest will probably take longer.
So, the Mac Pro and Xserve Pro (uuuuggghhh!!!... must. remain. Xserve) will be announced, but shipping in about 6 weeks.
why do you think so? Conroe chips showed up online a few weeks ago, and woodcrest has been shipping to manufacturers for some time now. Merom hasn't, Conroe is ahead of Merom in terms of shipping IIRC.
logandzwon
Apr 19, 02:36 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
They could. Except, "Jobs unveiled the iPhone to the public on January 9, 2007 at Macworld 2007" according to Wikipedia. F700 after that; http://www.google.com/search?q=samsung+F700+announced
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
kdarling
Apr 19, 01:49 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
GoodWatch
Apr 27, 09:51 AM
Good job Apple. Now let's move on to someone else, like freakin' Sony and their Playstation network.
Why?
Why?
marksman
Mar 31, 09:04 PM
As an Apple fanboy, I'm disappointed to post this, but Android will continue to win despite the huge fragmentation problem.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
I disagree because Smartphones have become essentially computers for people, and people much more than ever want to maintain their existence when they upgrade or move on. With the iPhone this is simply easy to just get a new model of iphone and continue on. Crossing from one manufacturer of android to another with a new OS and everything else, I can't believe it is anywhere near as seamless or effortless.
I think mostly what we are seeing in the marketplace now is the android is for people who can't afford an iPhone. Other people mentioned the two for one deals and other things. It is just a marketplace where android based phones are more affordable and accessible to people who don't have as much to spend on a smartphone.
The whole android handset is crazy. Manufacturers make up new models every 3 weeks, Google renames each version of the Android operating system with some silly name... There is no cohesion or continuity in that at all. I think consumers look more for that than ever.
Android has barely been out long enough for most of the normal consumers to be on an upgrade path already and to have to cycle into a new device. Time will tell.
I think people will see a new android handset (although aqain it is confusing with 25 different makers), and expect to be able to just take it home and upgrade it.. But is that how it happens? Because it is like 2 clicks for an iPhone.
Unlike Windoze based computers, cell phone users expect to replace their phones minimally every two years. So for the most part these users just don't care whether the manufacturers bother to upgrade the OS or whether the few apps they've found need to be repurchased.
When they go shopping and see a brand new Android phone running a better OS with more apps than they had before, they will simply buy it. Especially since there will continue to be two for one offers and lots of competition.
Like Apple computers, iPhones will be superbly engineered, but that hasn't mattered in the computer arena and it won't matter in the cell phone arena.
BTW, I expect Apple to eventually command 20% of the world's computer, cell phone, and tablet market with 50% (or more) of the profits, so it's not like Apple won't be successful. It's like combining all of the luxury cars together under one manufacturer.
I disagree because Smartphones have become essentially computers for people, and people much more than ever want to maintain their existence when they upgrade or move on. With the iPhone this is simply easy to just get a new model of iphone and continue on. Crossing from one manufacturer of android to another with a new OS and everything else, I can't believe it is anywhere near as seamless or effortless.
I think mostly what we are seeing in the marketplace now is the android is for people who can't afford an iPhone. Other people mentioned the two for one deals and other things. It is just a marketplace where android based phones are more affordable and accessible to people who don't have as much to spend on a smartphone.
The whole android handset is crazy. Manufacturers make up new models every 3 weeks, Google renames each version of the Android operating system with some silly name... There is no cohesion or continuity in that at all. I think consumers look more for that than ever.
Android has barely been out long enough for most of the normal consumers to be on an upgrade path already and to have to cycle into a new device. Time will tell.
I think people will see a new android handset (although aqain it is confusing with 25 different makers), and expect to be able to just take it home and upgrade it.. But is that how it happens? Because it is like 2 clicks for an iPhone.
charlituna
Apr 5, 10:34 PM
Problem is, its still Final Cut and will still suck at managing media.
Guess you want us to believe you are one of the folks blessed with an advance look
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
It's called 3rd party software and an external burner. Us big boys do it that way all the time.
Guess you want us to believe you are one of the folks blessed with an advance look
I'm not trolling, this is an honest question. But isn't a Final Cut pretty much worthless for commercial use without a way to put the results on Blu-Ray?
It's called 3rd party software and an external burner. Us big boys do it that way all the time.
yoak
Apr 6, 08:20 AM
Delivery on drives is such a nice concept but unfortunately like the quoted poster mentions drives are not ideal archive media... Tapes are still miles better in terms of long term robustness.
Now if SSD prove to be robust enough to be used in archival processes then i can see a completely tapeless environment taking the stage.
I agree with both of you that it�s not good enough for archive, but it let us by pass a "generation" or two for delivery. Then we can archive it on tape later.
Now if SSD prove to be robust enough to be used in archival processes then i can see a completely tapeless environment taking the stage.
I agree with both of you that it�s not good enough for archive, but it let us by pass a "generation" or two for delivery. Then we can archive it on tape later.
chatin
Aug 20, 02:21 PM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
shamino
Jul 20, 09:32 AM
Is having more cores more energy efficient than having one big fat ass 24Ghz processor? Maybe thats a factor in the increasing core count.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Actually, this is well documented.
There are serious electrical and physical problems with jacking up clock speeds much further than they are now. Intel managed to push their chips to 3.4GHz, but the power consumed was tremendous.
When you can't ramp up the clock speed, your next best alternative is to go for as much parallelism as you can - increase the number of instructions you can execute in a single clock.
Chip makers achieve this in a wide variety of ways, including multiple CPU packages on a motherboard, multiple cores per CPU package, multiple threads per core, and multiple functional units per thread.
And yes, a single CPU at 3GHz can easily consume more power than two CPUs (or two cores) at 1.5GHz.
As for your theoretical 24GHz processor, such a thing is simply not possible with today's technology. (Well, there were some university experiments that hit insanely fast speeds, but don't expect commercial products any time soon.) Given the heat/power curves of today's chips, I wouldn't want to think about the cooling requirements of a 24GHz chip if you could somehow manage to build one.
Of course, breakthroughs do happen, and higher clock speeds might become practical in the future. But multi-core tech isn't going away - we'll simply end up with multiple cores at higher clock speeds.
Peace
Aug 5, 05:15 PM
No MacRumors IRC channel?
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
http://www.macrumorslive.com/irc/login/
skunk
Mar 1, 06:37 AM
No it doesn't, not when people brag about how much they sleep aroundThat is their problem, not yours.
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failingsYou could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Your link supports the idea that Greek society supported pederasty. If they have such a failing what is to say they don't have other failingsYou could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
rape and paedophilia both involve lack of consent. Although paedophilia has to do with that the mind is attracted to pre-pubescent children in the same way that homosexuality causes attraction to the same sex. Both cases are untreatable.What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
M-O
Apr 25, 01:35 PM
wow, this has officially been blown out of proportion!
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 02:18 PM
Because Apple is not tracking you. Apple does not get any of that data, they will never see or touch it. It is data that is stored locally on your phone out of reach from everyone except you. "Apple tracks you" would mean that the phone is sending the data 'home', but it doesn't. APPLE HAS NO IDEA WHERE THE F YOU ARE OR WERE (and they probably couldn't care less)
Prove it.
Prove it.
AidenShaw
Aug 23, 08:15 AM
My Quad G5 is dead silent all the time. Those noisy Quads should have been sent off for repair. I was told the Quad in the Santa Clara Apple Store was also very loud. That is not normal. Properly serviced they run very silent.
dbA ? A system with 9 fans isn't going to be silent, period.
Are your systems in a room with a lot of ambient noise? (A wind-tunnel G4 sounds quiet at Best Buy, yet in my den I can clearly hear the fluid-bearing drive in my Yonah dual... ;) )
dbA ? A system with 9 fans isn't going to be silent, period.
Are your systems in a room with a lot of ambient noise? (A wind-tunnel G4 sounds quiet at Best Buy, yet in my den I can clearly hear the fluid-bearing drive in my Yonah dual... ;) )
bedifferent
Apr 27, 08:39 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
apachie2k
Sep 19, 06:55 AM
i wanna a lot of ram in my new 64 bit mbp!! and umm what else....:confused: :eek:
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:53 PM
Very nice, indeed... (of course, i expect that Apple release something much more beautiful than waht you did :D :p :D)
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
aswitcher
Aug 6, 07:34 AM
MBP owners don't need to worry yet. AnandTech (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=1)
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Thats great news. I was wondering if a 6 week old machine was going to be left in the dust by the new chips. Santa Rosa april 2007?
"The biggest performance gains are associated with 3D rendering and media encoding tasks. While Core 2 Duo does look nice, as long as you've got a good notebook today you'll probably want to wait until Santa Rosa before upgrading (at the earliest). With Santa Rosa, clock speeds will go up slightly but more importantly we'll get access to a faster FSB. Unfortunately a side-effect of keeping Core 2 Duo fed with a faster FSB is that while performance may go up, battery life may go down. For Apple users this means that early adopters of the new MacBook or MacBook Pro won't be too pressured to upgrade again by the end of this year. Of course Apple has this way of making incremental changes irresistible."
Thats great news. I was wondering if a 6 week old machine was going to be left in the dust by the new chips. Santa Rosa april 2007?
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 10:29 AM
More like arguing about where the dessert forks and soup spoons go in the place settings. I don't think lifeboats have even entered into the conversation.
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
I believe the 'long form' is rearranging the deck chairs. :)
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:13 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Macnoviz
Jul 21, 02:23 AM
I think that the surprise will be next month when Steve J is talking about Leopard. He'll mention something like, "You might have read a bit about a new chip from Intel called Kentsfield. You might like to know that Leopard is designed to take full advantage of Kentsfield when it's released." He really doesn't need to say anything else - that alone will drive MS nuts.
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
Maybe they will want to implement it pushing the release back to december:D
No comments:
Post a Comment