ClimbingTheLog
Nov 24, 01:32 AM
They do know whom they're talking about right? I mean they say PC manufacturers yet palm are producing windows mobile pieces of junk. Windows mobile is the biggest piece of shite operating system - it would not be hard to come up with something a lot better (for Apple at least). And the Palm OS is very dear to my heart, but not exactly cutting edge and palm don't even own that anymore.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
To illustrate your point, PalmOne (if that's what the PalmOS Group is called this month...) is doing the aforemnetioned ground-up rewrite of PalmOS now (it should be available to devs soon if they're on schedule) and it's based on Linux. Stable, massively featureful, full PalmOS 5 backward-compatibility, and futureproof.
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.
Palm are washed out, end of story.
To illustrate your point, PalmOne (if that's what the PalmOS Group is called this month...) is doing the aforemnetioned ground-up rewrite of PalmOS now (it should be available to devs soon if they're on schedule) and it's based on Linux. Stable, massively featureful, full PalmOS 5 backward-compatibility, and futureproof.
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.
Cougarcat
Mar 27, 01:01 AM
So the sources are Gruber who stated it was a guess and TechCrunch who are, well, TechCrunch.
Also, Gruber later clarified that his guess was not the "iPad 3" per se, but an additional iPad model of some kind, such as possibly a retina display.
Also, Gruber later clarified that his guess was not the "iPad 3" per se, but an additional iPad model of some kind, such as possibly a retina display.
coder12
Mar 28, 11:09 AM
It's important that Apple starts to devote some serious time to it's operating systems as well. I don't see any major drawbacks to delaying any potential new hardware introductions.
I'm feeling the same way on this. I want Gingerbread and HPre OS to lust after iOS again!
I'm feeling the same way on this. I want Gingerbread and HPre OS to lust after iOS again!
McBeats
Apr 5, 04:46 PM
compared to sony, apple is damn near supporting the jailbreak community
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
totally agreed...
------
Anyway it's ********** ugly!
EXACTLY. Sorry Toyota, but it's pretty rough.
-aggie-
May 5, 07:30 PM
Great. Nothing has happened, since I left.:(
puma1552
May 3, 02:49 AM
I'll preface by saying I'm an engineer, so I see the merits of the metric system.
However, the reason I think Americans have such a problem with it is because there is no analog for one foot. You go from decimeters (which nobody actually uses) straight to a meter.
It can be very difficult to get a feel for how tall someone who is 165 cm is.
However, the reason I think Americans have such a problem with it is because there is no analog for one foot. You go from decimeters (which nobody actually uses) straight to a meter.
It can be very difficult to get a feel for how tall someone who is 165 cm is.
amanset
Aug 2, 12:40 PM
To be clear... that was for the standalone iSight camera not the embedded iSight camera's available in the iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 09:39 PM
So if the parentheses are solved first why not just put them in front? Why go through all the semantics? Do scientists purposely make it this hard when solving equations?
So people can learn how to do math properly. If teachers quized students with the "easy" version of questions, they would never really learn anything but the basics. The harder something is to do, the more you learn how to reason, how to think, how to work through problems and solve them. It's like asking why kids learn more and more vocabulary words when, in the end, they probably will just use the most common ones.
So people can learn how to do math properly. If teachers quized students with the "easy" version of questions, they would never really learn anything but the basics. The harder something is to do, the more you learn how to reason, how to think, how to work through problems and solve them. It's like asking why kids learn more and more vocabulary words when, in the end, they probably will just use the most common ones.
Christina1971
May 7, 10:27 AM
Huh? If they aren't making any money for it now (with relatively few people paying for the service) how would it make sense to give it away for free (with many many more people not paying for it?)
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 09:01 AM
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
If buying a different brand of phone means you wont feel the need to come on these boards telling everyone how bad Apple are, then you definitely wont be the only one celebrating....
Al together now.. Hip Hip Hip .... Hooray!!
If buying a different brand of phone means you wont feel the need to come on these boards telling everyone how bad Apple are, then you definitely wont be the only one celebrating....
Al together now.. Hip Hip Hip .... Hooray!!
mcrain
Apr 19, 12:10 PM
Everyone does pay taxes. The statement that 40+% of the population paid no taxes is a lie. They may have paid no Federal Income Taxes, but that does NOT mean they paid no taxes.
Bengt77
Aug 4, 06:42 PM
We can all hope! ;)
Cheers
Yeah, that's probably what it will turn out to be: hope, rather than reality. But when an iMac comes out with any Core 2 Duo processor and Leopard pre-loaded, I'm buying. An updated graphics card is higly welcome, as is more standard RAM, but the processor and OS are most important to me. Too bad Leopard is still quite some time off...
Does anyone know, if a new OS comes out soon after the release of a new computer model/revision, how long that 'soon' may be for Apple to offer a free upgrade to that new OS to all buyers of that particular computer? (Is that still understandable English? Worse, is it still English?)
Cheers
Yeah, that's probably what it will turn out to be: hope, rather than reality. But when an iMac comes out with any Core 2 Duo processor and Leopard pre-loaded, I'm buying. An updated graphics card is higly welcome, as is more standard RAM, but the processor and OS are most important to me. Too bad Leopard is still quite some time off...
Does anyone know, if a new OS comes out soon after the release of a new computer model/revision, how long that 'soon' may be for Apple to offer a free upgrade to that new OS to all buyers of that particular computer? (Is that still understandable English? Worse, is it still English?)
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
-aggie-
May 6, 09:38 PM
I'm not sure I want to take *any* of your suggestions, seeing how your sole goal is to lead us to hell.
As for the separate groups moving through rooms, I don't see how the larger group can enter one room, then proceed into another room without setting off a trap before tail-end charlie follows along to explore the room. Are you assuming that constant "moving" turns keeps one from falling into a trap?
I'm a bit confused :confused::confused: It's easy to be confused when your swill serving wench of a wife won't even make you a fookin sammich for gawds sake!
That�s just it. DP�s messed up, unless I�ve totally misread the rules. If you don�t explore the room, you set off the trap. This is why I couldn�t figure out this splitting and speeding things up junk.
As for the separate groups moving through rooms, I don't see how the larger group can enter one room, then proceed into another room without setting off a trap before tail-end charlie follows along to explore the room. Are you assuming that constant "moving" turns keeps one from falling into a trap?
I'm a bit confused :confused::confused: It's easy to be confused when your swill serving wench of a wife won't even make you a fookin sammich for gawds sake!
That�s just it. DP�s messed up, unless I�ve totally misread the rules. If you don�t explore the room, you set off the trap. This is why I couldn�t figure out this splitting and speeding things up junk.
kavika411
Mar 29, 08:53 AM
there is no subscription
you buy music from amazon you download an mp3. or you upload your own and listen to it on an android phone. if you stop using the service you still have your music on your computer
I may have missed it, but what I'm trying to understand with Amazon's offering, and with what we think Apple will roll out, is whether you can push non-purchased music (i.e. CDs you ripped) into the cloud. That may not interest other people, but I'd like to be able to do that.
you buy music from amazon you download an mp3. or you upload your own and listen to it on an android phone. if you stop using the service you still have your music on your computer
I may have missed it, but what I'm trying to understand with Amazon's offering, and with what we think Apple will roll out, is whether you can push non-purchased music (i.e. CDs you ripped) into the cloud. That may not interest other people, but I'd like to be able to do that.
shelterpaw
Aug 7, 03:32 PM
I like it to show up ready to go.
Plus, I know for sure the apple chosen ram will be flawless...
This is a rev. A. ;)I wasn't trying to put a digg on you, you're machine is awesome, but not everyone can put down the amount of money you did and aftermarket helps. But you're super stoked nonethelss. :D
Plus, I know for sure the apple chosen ram will be flawless...
This is a rev. A. ;)I wasn't trying to put a digg on you, you're machine is awesome, but not everyone can put down the amount of money you did and aftermarket helps. But you're super stoked nonethelss. :D
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 09:41 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
vand0576
Aug 11, 10:41 AM
so once these are released, what are the chances if my MBP was broken Apple Care would replace it with a new Core 2 Duo one?
Absolutely slim to none. When my 4G monochrome iPod broke down after both the releases to the iPod photo and iPoc 5G, I thought for sure I'd get an upgrade but it's not the case. I'm sure somehow they still have 4G ipods in stock. My guess is they hold them for two years after the last sale of the product, so that the applecare is meant to replace, not upgrade.
No chance your computer will be simply replaced. They would work on it, not upgrade it. Intel still makes the chips, and remember Apple has to buy them in lots of 1,000. They have plenty.
Absolutely slim to none. When my 4G monochrome iPod broke down after both the releases to the iPod photo and iPoc 5G, I thought for sure I'd get an upgrade but it's not the case. I'm sure somehow they still have 4G ipods in stock. My guess is they hold them for two years after the last sale of the product, so that the applecare is meant to replace, not upgrade.
No chance your computer will be simply replaced. They would work on it, not upgrade it. Intel still makes the chips, and remember Apple has to buy them in lots of 1,000. They have plenty.
emulator
Apr 6, 04:46 AM
You're an idiot
And you registered for this, noob? foff!
And you registered for this, noob? foff!
Coolerking
Sep 11, 12:51 PM
Whats the Paris expo, Never heard of that before, are you sure it exists? :confused: :confused: :confused:
Read up son!
:)
http://www.apple-expo.com/
Read up son!
:)
http://www.apple-expo.com/
toddybody
Apr 25, 10:43 AM
The info circulating around is false.
Steve
PS shouldn't you be at your gym right now? It's Monday morning, after all.
Good one. Like anyone on MR goes to the gym! Pshh!
Steve
PS shouldn't you be at your gym right now? It's Monday morning, after all.
Good one. Like anyone on MR goes to the gym! Pshh!
Don't panic
May 5, 09:10 AM
Assuming the goblin costs one point, let's say the villain does this:
R1T1 Collect 1 point
R1T2 Collect 1 point, summon Goblin
R2T1 Collect 1 point
R2T2 Collect 1 point
Villain now has 3 points left, see?
you guys make the rules, so anything you decide, we play by.
but that is not as you described it before: the collection of a point was equivalent to an action, and cost a turn.
actions were presented as mutually exclusive to each other, and the villain has to make a strategic decision whether to wait, and get points or to do something, and use the points without accumulating more.. You made this very clear in several posts.
for any of his turns the villain can
1,2) summon and place a monster trap (provided he collected enough points) OR
3) move OR
4) heal OR
5) collect point
if collecting point goes on all the time, regardless of other actions, than this should be clearly stated and not presented as an alternative.
this new interpretation makes a big difference, likely tens of points through the game.
R1T1 Collect 1 point
R1T2 Collect 1 point, summon Goblin
R2T1 Collect 1 point
R2T2 Collect 1 point
Villain now has 3 points left, see?
you guys make the rules, so anything you decide, we play by.
but that is not as you described it before: the collection of a point was equivalent to an action, and cost a turn.
actions were presented as mutually exclusive to each other, and the villain has to make a strategic decision whether to wait, and get points or to do something, and use the points without accumulating more.. You made this very clear in several posts.
for any of his turns the villain can
1,2) summon and place a monster trap (provided he collected enough points) OR
3) move OR
4) heal OR
5) collect point
if collecting point goes on all the time, regardless of other actions, than this should be clearly stated and not presented as an alternative.
this new interpretation makes a big difference, likely tens of points through the game.
Nightarchaon
Apr 23, 04:34 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Frazzle
Nov 5, 05:15 AM
If Apple made this carkit themselves, I bet that everyone here would accept the price with no questions asked.
I'm glad that this device is not selling in Europe for the usual Apple rate of 1 dollar = 1 euro.
I'm glad that this device is not selling in Europe for the usual Apple rate of 1 dollar = 1 euro.
No comments:
Post a Comment