maclaptop
Apr 12, 07:51 AM
Maybe they need to wait in order to get 28/32nm A5 chips. No point in having an iPhone 5 with a 3 hour battery life
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
Or maybe their waiting while the new antenna engineers they hired try and convince Steve to leave them alone to do their job.
They want to put the antenna inside where it belongs.
Jobs ego can't handle it.
yg17
Apr 27, 08:49 AM
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2711155/posts?q=1&;page=101
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
There you have it. The birthers aren't satisfied. I knew it.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:36 AM
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Yeah, just get the cheapo HDMI cable. I'm not spending $50+ for some ripoff cable to play my H.264 lossy compressed "HD" videos.
I got two HDMI cables off eBay for $5 each :cool: and they're good.
I like Apple's approach on the iPad 2 vs my experience with the iPhone 4 - where I and 20+ of my closest friends packed the Reston Apple Store in order to see if we could score the iPhone 4 from that mornings delivery.
Can't you also get them from AT&T? Also, the Apple Store in Santa Monica never has a line for new iPhones or iPads for some reason. I guess they work fast?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Yeah, just get the cheapo HDMI cable. I'm not spending $50+ for some ripoff cable to play my H.264 lossy compressed "HD" videos.
I got two HDMI cables off eBay for $5 each :cool: and they're good.
I like Apple's approach on the iPad 2 vs my experience with the iPhone 4 - where I and 20+ of my closest friends packed the Reston Apple Store in order to see if we could score the iPhone 4 from that mornings delivery.
Can't you also get them from AT&T? Also, the Apple Store in Santa Monica never has a line for new iPhones or iPads for some reason. I guess they work fast?
sunfast
Aug 17, 09:07 AM
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are �570. Apple are charging �530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around �300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
Forgive the � for those that think in $.
Aren't there 2 chips though?
Forgive the � for those that think in $.
Aren't there 2 chips though?
mactoday
Apr 6, 10:55 AM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
Actually 320m performs better then Intel 3000, so the dude is right that graphics chip in SB is slower.
Actually 320m performs better then Intel 3000, so the dude is right that graphics chip in SB is slower.
dmarcoot
Apr 6, 03:37 PM
I hope that number keeps rising; we need competition to not let Apple rest on it's laurels.
First they need to make a product worthy of rising. A sub par product and user experience will not push Apple.
At any rate, clearly Apple is not resting on laurels with the rest of computing industry as far back as they are in quality, price, experience and their available software ecosystems.
First they need to make a product worthy of rising. A sub par product and user experience will not push Apple.
At any rate, clearly Apple is not resting on laurels with the rest of computing industry as far back as they are in quality, price, experience and their available software ecosystems.
Bob Knob
Nov 28, 06:47 PM
While I usually don't go for boycotts this time I would make an exception, if this was to go through I'd boycott buying anything from Universal. It wouldn't matter if it was an artist I had listened to for years, I'd simply never buy anything they release from that point on.
eMagius
Aug 7, 07:36 PM
As others have said, Time Machine is likely either a direct port of Sun's ZFS, or an equivalent implementation in HFS+.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
I don't think we can say exactly how things work underneath. Windows 2003 offers differential snapshots without making massive changes to NTFS, for example. It would be neat if Apple did throw its weight behind ZFS, but I'm pretty sure it's not going to happen with 10.5.
According to today's keynote, Apple has finally added support for network drives. But I wonder -- does this mean only other Leopard Macs, or any shared drive that the Mac can connect to? Can I index a Windows shared drive from my Mac, or even a Unix NFS mount? Or is it only other Macs? Once again, if it's limited to other Leopard Macs, then this would be useless for a lot of people (mostly ME! :D).
I don't see how this would work for anything other than other Leopard (maybe Tiger, with a software update) Macs. Spotlight has to have the indexes pre-generated, after all.
Finally, gotta wonder what those "top secret" features are, and why so secret?
Call me a cynic, but I'd say Apple either hasn't implemented them yet or hasn't thought of them yet.
emotion
Jul 20, 08:25 AM
New MacPro rev2.
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
Very funny :)
8 cores = 24Ghz
(with Free fire extinguisher and ear plugs) :p
Very funny :)
jwsmiths
Jul 14, 03:05 PM
For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
Except Conroes don't support dual processor configuration. Woodcrest does, hence the reason it will be in the Pro line machines while Conroe is put into new iMacs.
notjustjay
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
Sure there is a difference, but is it noticable? Is it worth the cost?
A Ferrari costs a lot more than a Ford Fiesta. It's better built and has a lot more power under the hood. But if all you're ever doing is driving at 20 mph, then it doesn't matter, the Fiesta has all the power you need and you'll save a pile of money. Now, you don't want to go rock bottom and buy a junker that might break down, but as long as it runs smoothly at 20 mph, any car will do the job.
You don't want ultra-cheap crappy cables that can develop loose connections or come poorly shielded, as that can cause dropouts. But neither do you need pure silver or oxygen-free shielding or whatever. Any HDMI cable will either fail outright or do the exact same job as any other for the given application.
