dadoftwogirls
Mar 26, 10:02 PM
Problem I have is timing. Why does Apple continue to release the new iPhone / iPad yet we have to wait months afterwards for the iOS update to take advantage of them? :confused: Last year it took until November for the original iPad update. Now they're going to offer the iPhone 5 with a several month lag for the iOS 5 upgrade?
thogs_cave
Aug 11, 09:57 AM
Damn, and I just got my new MacBook yesterday
Plus if my MacBook gets lonely and depressed he can talk to my 1st gen PowerMac G5
Shasta
I really doubt that the MacBook will be updated that quickly. It wouldn't make much sense, but then again we are talking Apple.
And, don't worry. My MacBook and 1st-gen G5 get along just fine. :D
Plus if my MacBook gets lonely and depressed he can talk to my 1st gen PowerMac G5
Shasta
I really doubt that the MacBook will be updated that quickly. It wouldn't make much sense, but then again we are talking Apple.
And, don't worry. My MacBook and 1st-gen G5 get along just fine. :D
CellarDoor
Aug 11, 11:49 AM
...And please, for the love of all things holy, retire the Powerbook G5 "joke". It never was funny and it certainly isn't funny now.
Agreed.
Agreed.
Teddy's
Sep 11, 09:30 AM
And Radiohead.
I wonder about these two -- three before Dave Matthews Band came aboard -- everytime there's a major music announcement.
If they add the "album only" feature to *All* Radiohead's songs, more bands will follow. Mostly for marketing reasons. There are lots of those crappy "Radiohead wannabes - ohhhhhh our songs should not be outside their album":mad:
Now, I can't wait for tomorrow's event!
I wonder about these two -- three before Dave Matthews Band came aboard -- everytime there's a major music announcement.
If they add the "album only" feature to *All* Radiohead's songs, more bands will follow. Mostly for marketing reasons. There are lots of those crappy "Radiohead wannabes - ohhhhhh our songs should not be outside their album":mad:
Now, I can't wait for tomorrow's event!
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.)
mentalward
Mar 30, 07:30 PM
So nobody has answered yet whether this requires you to reinstall Lion or if you just install an "update" through the Mac App Store somehow. I am not at home so I can't test it out myself yet.
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
There you go
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
There you go
Jape
Nov 18, 05:41 AM
The apple store is looking better and better, once again it has been pushed bac to dec 2. I wonder when the Magellan car kit is coming out and how much that will cost.
SA22C
Nov 5, 06:54 AM
Every platform has issues and my guess is that Apple's less-than-stellar response time to exploits and the ever-rising Mac marketshare means that our time with no viruses/malware is going to come to an end. I'm glad there's a free solution out there and I'll be more than happy to try it out.
dba7dba
Apr 18, 05:07 PM
Odd, the link you included in your argument states the Prada was "announced" on December 12, 2006.
The iPhone was announced on January 9, less than one month later.
And the Prada looks more like a BlackBerry than an iPhone to me. The Prada and iPhone are almost nothing alike, aside from the size and shape of the earhole.
LG Prada won a DESIGN award (meaning image was released) for LG Prada in Sep 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
EXCERPT
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. 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.”
The iPhone was announced on January 9, less than one month later.
And the Prada looks more like a BlackBerry than an iPhone to me. The Prada and iPhone are almost nothing alike, aside from the size and shape of the earhole.
LG Prada won a DESIGN award (meaning image was released) for LG Prada in Sep 2006.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
EXCERPT
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. 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.”
Gasu E.
Mar 29, 03:37 PM
I dont understand the point of this. Is storage really an issue on peoples computers? I understand the mobile app, but why not just store the files locally?
You can access it from any device, and it's still there if your house burns down.
You can access it from any device, and it's still there if your house burns down.
ellsworth
Apr 5, 01:48 PM
"maintain their good relationship with Apple,"
Really?
Toyota sells cars not electronic/computer/idevices.
What'ever. Glad I bought a Subaru :)
(Yes, I know Toyota has a large stake in Subaru)
Really?
Toyota sells cars not electronic/computer/idevices.
What'ever. Glad I bought a Subaru :)
(Yes, I know Toyota has a large stake in Subaru)
iansilv
May 7, 10:09 AM
Honestly, I am about to not renew. It's just not that useful. The only thing I would keep it for is the online idisk, and with dropbox or novadrive coming up with better and cheaper alternatives, I see no reason to continue to use it. However, if Apple makes it free, then they can use that as another feature of their products in general. They could sell the idisk storage, or give away 5 gigs or something, like drop box does.
Tilpots
Apr 9, 09:44 PM
Then we can end this on agreement. I don't believe in it too. My wife should keep her job if and only if she continues to do it well not because its near impossible to fire tenured staff. But don't think I missed your sarcasm...
Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up. :)
Yeah for common ground! Our relationship just hit an inception point and I think things are looking up. :)
WildCowboy
Jul 21, 01:54 PM
This definitely increases the chances of Apple introducing new MBPs at WWDC. Could be a huge event!
My PB is only a year and half old, but Merom-based MBPs are looking awfully tempting...
My PB is only a year and half old, but Merom-based MBPs are looking awfully tempting...
rans0m00
Mar 29, 01:30 PM
Glad they have moved forward with it and who cares if they might have copied off an Apple rumor. I am looking forward to Apple going with their cloud service if it integrates with the current ipod interface. Like I can just pick cloud library or local. Or even better just list them all together with an option to not list suspected duplicates. The fact Amazon was able to release this so effort free shows how much future planning they have done compared to Apple. Also I am not so big on paying the energy bill to keep my desktop on 24/7 so I can access my files not to mention I have DSL so my upload speeds are good enough for audio but I could not stream video without a huge decrease in quality.
GeekLawyer
Mar 28, 09:33 AM
I'm not so sure about that interpretation.
Not introducing the new iPhone would be a serious break from Apple practice.
But I guess it's possible. My iPhone 4 still feels "magical" to me. Maybe Apple will hold pat with iPhone 4 - what with the CDMA version and the white model being "new" this year.
It would be a serious break from past practice.
And on Macs...
"Now that we've shown you Lion, with all these great features from iOS that we're bringing Back to the Mac, here's a look at our newest iMac that takes fullest advantage, yada, yada, yada."
Not introducing the new iPhone would be a serious break from Apple practice.
But I guess it's possible. My iPhone 4 still feels "magical" to me. Maybe Apple will hold pat with iPhone 4 - what with the CDMA version and the white model being "new" this year.
It would be a serious break from past practice.
And on Macs...
"Now that we've shown you Lion, with all these great features from iOS that we're bringing Back to the Mac, here's a look at our newest iMac that takes fullest advantage, yada, yada, yada."
Dagless
Apr 10, 11:19 AM
Brackets; 12.
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
48/2; 24.
*12.
=288.
Lots of votes for 2! Am I wrong?
snberk103
May 5, 11:02 PM
I don't think it matters. If you are in an Science or Engineering, unit conversions are the least of your worries. That was my point. Metric or not-metric in our daily lives have little bearing on those in rigorous math-oriented disciplines. I might be wrong, but I'd like to hear why.
Yes, you are correct - once you are in science or engineering. But how many children never get there because of a system that over-complicates even simple calculations. All it takes is a couple of bad years/teachers/experiences to put a kid totally off of math. Truly brilliant kids will likely overcome these set-backs, but most kids are not brilliant.... they are good to competent. And good to competent engineers are needed as much as the ones who put landers on the Mars... oh, wait wasn't there a problem with one of those that involved non-metric measurements? (what is the smiley for "snarky" and "tongue in cheek"?)
Yes, you are correct - once you are in science or engineering. But how many children never get there because of a system that over-complicates even simple calculations. All it takes is a couple of bad years/teachers/experiences to put a kid totally off of math. Truly brilliant kids will likely overcome these set-backs, but most kids are not brilliant.... they are good to competent. And good to competent engineers are needed as much as the ones who put landers on the Mars... oh, wait wasn't there a problem with one of those that involved non-metric measurements? (what is the smiley for "snarky" and "tongue in cheek"?)
iRobby
Apr 21, 04:51 PM
Is this an IOS device?:eek::eek::eek::eek::eek::eek:
Rodimus Prime
Apr 26, 03:20 PM
How is that not relevant??? What is the point of showing market share then? No really, what is the point? Doesn't it factor heavily into what market a company wants to develop software for? Since the same apps run on all those Apple devices then why would you not want to include those?
you forget a lot of apps really are designed for things that will always be with you and need data connection so the phone is more relevent. You forget that a lot of people own both iPod and an Android phone.
I will be one of those people soon. My iPod will be reduced complete down to just a music devices. I do not use the apps much on it for killing time as I do not always have it with me but my phone I will have with it
you forget a lot of apps really are designed for things that will always be with you and need data connection so the phone is more relevent. You forget that a lot of people own both iPod and an Android phone.
I will be one of those people soon. My iPod will be reduced complete down to just a music devices. I do not use the apps much on it for killing time as I do not always have it with me but my phone I will have with it
Eidorian
Aug 11, 10:51 AM
That is just marketing. In reality, Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest are all based on exactly the same archicture, with Merom optimised for low power consumption and Conroe optimised for clock speed.Core Duo (Yonah) is derived off of Pentium-M much more directly then Core 2 Duo (Merom). You are correct though. Same chips, just picked to fit each form factor application.
I was responding to a link to a Conroe chip. Hence why I said that there is no Mac that the *linked Conroe* chip can be put into *apart from maybe the Mac Pro* which has the right socket.
Again, you're just reading my post incorrectly.Woodcrest is a LGA771 (Socket J). Conroe is LGA775 (Socket T) You are correct that no current Mac can take Conroe.
However, there are Macs that can take Merom, faster Yonah, and faster Woodcrest chips. I guess that was the miscommunication.
I was responding to a link to a Conroe chip. Hence why I said that there is no Mac that the *linked Conroe* chip can be put into *apart from maybe the Mac Pro* which has the right socket.
Again, you're just reading my post incorrectly.Woodcrest is a LGA771 (Socket J). Conroe is LGA775 (Socket T) You are correct that no current Mac can take Conroe.
However, there are Macs that can take Merom, faster Yonah, and faster Woodcrest chips. I guess that was the miscommunication.
wordoflife
Apr 9, 09:33 PM
The answer is 288. Anyone who think's it is two doesn't know math.
They know math, just not the order of operations. Or they are putting the whole equation into a scientific calculator, Google, or spotlight. If they did the problems in a calculator, google or spotlight with the correct order of operations, then theyd get the correct answer.
They know math, just not the order of operations. Or they are putting the whole equation into a scientific calculator, Google, or spotlight. If they did the problems in a calculator, google or spotlight with the correct order of operations, then theyd get the correct answer.
aswitcher
Jul 30, 07:14 AM
i dont think this will be a dream feature phone but it will work wonderfully with iSync and .Mac, iTunes, iPhoto, Frontrow (BT controller), Mail, iCal, AddressBook etc
I hope it has a 2 megapixel camera and at least half a gig of ram.
I hope it has a 2 megapixel camera and at least half a gig of ram.
callmemike20
Apr 18, 07:39 PM
I don't think anything will get done with the extreme left and extreme right fighting it out.
With America's bleak looking future (S&P put a warning out today), something definitely has to be done. These small $10bil cuts over 10 years is not nearly enough. Those cuts are the same as me using pennies from those "Give a penny, take a penny" trays. They are moot and mean nothing.
The US needs is a complete overall of its spending and tax code.
Spending: Post every single line item on the internet so the people can see where the money is going. Place mandatory cuts on everything. Each department should be given a % of the country's income and that's all they get. NO MORE ISSUING DEBT.
Taxes: Throw away the 1 million pages of tax codes and create something much more simple. Tax income (not necessarily rates) will have to go up in order for America to survive.
-However, if income taxes go up, then make sales tax illegal. Since we are having problems with sales tax on online purchases in individual states, then just get rid of the program all together. It doesn't make sense anymore unless we have a VAT, which Americans can't afford. Sales tax is a double tax anyway. I already paid taxes on the money used to buy the goods, so why pay again?
-EVERYONE needs to pay taxes. No more of this "45% of people don't pay anything." There should be a mandatory minimum rate that you cannot drop below no matter how many deductions you have. This could be as simple as your taxes cannot drop any more than 33% of your current tax bracket. So, If you are in a 10% bracket, your taxes will be no less than 7.66%.
-Capital gains tax should only affect people making more than 50% (or some other %) of their income from capital gains. This will allow the average family to invest their money and contribute to the marketplace without being taxed on money that they already paid taxes on. Sure, they may make money or lose money on their investment, but let's cut them a break since they are using hard earned money. As for people who make more than 50% of their income from capital gains, tax them at the regular income rates.
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort. I want to see a massive effort by both parties to fix our current deficit issue. Taxes are inevitable, but lets make a good effort to reduce spending before that happens. I want to see the government act responsibly before I give them more money.
With America's bleak looking future (S&P put a warning out today), something definitely has to be done. These small $10bil cuts over 10 years is not nearly enough. Those cuts are the same as me using pennies from those "Give a penny, take a penny" trays. They are moot and mean nothing.
The US needs is a complete overall of its spending and tax code.
Spending: Post every single line item on the internet so the people can see where the money is going. Place mandatory cuts on everything. Each department should be given a % of the country's income and that's all they get. NO MORE ISSUING DEBT.
Taxes: Throw away the 1 million pages of tax codes and create something much more simple. Tax income (not necessarily rates) will have to go up in order for America to survive.
-However, if income taxes go up, then make sales tax illegal. Since we are having problems with sales tax on online purchases in individual states, then just get rid of the program all together. It doesn't make sense anymore unless we have a VAT, which Americans can't afford. Sales tax is a double tax anyway. I already paid taxes on the money used to buy the goods, so why pay again?
-EVERYONE needs to pay taxes. No more of this "45% of people don't pay anything." There should be a mandatory minimum rate that you cannot drop below no matter how many deductions you have. This could be as simple as your taxes cannot drop any more than 33% of your current tax bracket. So, If you are in a 10% bracket, your taxes will be no less than 7.66%.
-Capital gains tax should only affect people making more than 50% (or some other %) of their income from capital gains. This will allow the average family to invest their money and contribute to the marketplace without being taxed on money that they already paid taxes on. Sure, they may make money or lose money on their investment, but let's cut them a break since they are using hard earned money. As for people who make more than 50% of their income from capital gains, tax them at the regular income rates.
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort. I want to see a massive effort by both parties to fix our current deficit issue. Taxes are inevitable, but lets make a good effort to reduce spending before that happens. I want to see the government act responsibly before I give them more money.
No comments:
Post a Comment