Half Glass
Sep 14, 10:09 AM
Co-branding is a better idea because yes, unless they make a camera that would take Canon or Nikon lenses on their own it would be a failure as a pro tool.
--HG
--HG
MagnusVonMagnum
Mar 19, 12:19 PM
You still haven't presented one argument
The sad thing is that I'm certain you really believe that. :cool:
(Sarah Maestri)
Sarah Maestri ospite della 36a
Roma 9/10/10: Alessia Fava
Sarah maestri cad images
Sarah Maestri,
Sarah, sei al corrente della
Sarah Maestri,
Io amp; Sarah Maestri | Flickr - Photo Sharing!
sarah maestri music
Il sito di Sarah Maestri:
Pellicini e Sarah Maestri.
Mastalli, Sarah Maestri
Sarah maestri art images
Sarah Maestri,
SARAH MAESTRI
sarah maestri
Qui sono con Sarah Maestri e
The sad thing is that I'm certain you really believe that. :cool:
addicted44
Apr 25, 02:07 PM
"which is already under development at Quanta in Taiwan"
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
Ummm...that doesn't mean what you are saying at all.
Apple has stated before, in one of their Keynote videos (possibly the one about the Unibody MBP), that they send their designers to Taiwan, and China, where the factories are actually located, to the designing, so they have a complete feel for the entire life of the product. So they have an idea of what the manufacturing facilities will look like, and have quick/easy access to the raw materials, and can easily test the manufacturing capabilities themselves.
Just because the design might be happening at Quanta (still a rumor) doesn't mean Apple is not doing the designing (if it wasn't their designs, why hasn't anyone else been able to make a unibody laptop yet?).
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
Ummm...that doesn't mean what you are saying at all.
Apple has stated before, in one of their Keynote videos (possibly the one about the Unibody MBP), that they send their designers to Taiwan, and China, where the factories are actually located, to the designing, so they have a complete feel for the entire life of the product. So they have an idea of what the manufacturing facilities will look like, and have quick/easy access to the raw materials, and can easily test the manufacturing capabilities themselves.
Just because the design might be happening at Quanta (still a rumor) doesn't mean Apple is not doing the designing (if it wasn't their designs, why hasn't anyone else been able to make a unibody laptop yet?).
asdf542
Apr 22, 01:01 PM
Even the 15" Zacates have optical drives. An MBP without optical drive would look bad.
Just like all of the netbooks with optical drives make the MBA 'look bad'? :rolleyes:
Just like all of the netbooks with optical drives make the MBA 'look bad'? :rolleyes:
beangibbs
Apr 25, 02:04 PM
What do you mean, "you people"
Image (http://oneguyrambling.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/600full-tropic-thunder-photo.jpg)
Win to the nth power. I spit my drink out laughing.
Image (http://oneguyrambling.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/600full-tropic-thunder-photo.jpg)
Win to the nth power. I spit my drink out laughing.
cmaier
Nov 14, 12:14 AM
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
Now you are just making things up. And are you even aware of the difference between law and equity, and the role of the chancellor in old English common law? There were no "arbitrators." What on earth are you even talking about?
I hate to rely on wikipedia, but http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law might be a good place for you to start. You'll note the section on the influence of Roman law. You'll also see quotes like this:
"Well into the 19th century, ancient maxims played a large role in common law adjudication. Many of these maxims had originated in Roman Law, migrated to England before the introduction of Christianity to the British Isles, and were typically stated in Latin even in English decisions."
You'll also note that "arbitrator" and "arbitration" doesn't appear anywhere in that article because these are not principles of English common law. The word "Christian" appears only in the above quote.
And I'm not a historian, but lawyers are actually taught about the history of common law, since we rely on precedent dating all the way back, and we still have distinctions and rules that come from the 1400's.
You are just making stuff up.
p.s.: and where in the bible does this come from:
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
Misplaced Mage
Sep 27, 07:17 PM
What I'm hoping for is that Apple uses the metallic finish of its nanos. My Sony Ericsson has a metallic blue finish but is actually made of plastic. It would be sweet to have a real metal phone. I predict Apple will launch in a single metallic color (the nano black or silver), and then within a year or less provide all the nano colors.A partially metal housing is certainly possible, but if a phone has an internal antenna there has to be a plastic "window" in the housing that the antenna can operate through.
Metal housings are a pain for cell phone RF engineers because they have a nasty tendency to interfere with the radiativity (the "shape" of the radio emissions of the antenna). You generally can't use the housing itself as an antenna because it's difficult to get a uniform impedance match due to all the different ways people hold a phone, variations in skin conduction (not to mention SAR issues...), resting surfaces like metal tabletops, etc. The metal usually can't be left "floating," i.e., electrically isolated from the rest of the phone--though there are exceptions--and usually needs to be connected to the common phone ground to give it fixed RF characteristics, resulting in things like the spring fingers you sometimes see inside a phone that touch off on a point of a metal battery door.
The RAZR is an excellent example of this. The bulk of the phone housing is metal, but there are numerous internal grounding contacts for the housing, and the area around the antennas is plastic (the "chin" below the keyboard).
Metal housings are a pain for cell phone RF engineers because they have a nasty tendency to interfere with the radiativity (the "shape" of the radio emissions of the antenna). You generally can't use the housing itself as an antenna because it's difficult to get a uniform impedance match due to all the different ways people hold a phone, variations in skin conduction (not to mention SAR issues...), resting surfaces like metal tabletops, etc. The metal usually can't be left "floating," i.e., electrically isolated from the rest of the phone--though there are exceptions--and usually needs to be connected to the common phone ground to give it fixed RF characteristics, resulting in things like the spring fingers you sometimes see inside a phone that touch off on a point of a metal battery door.
The RAZR is an excellent example of this. The bulk of the phone housing is metal, but there are numerous internal grounding contacts for the housing, and the area around the antennas is plastic (the "chin" below the keyboard).
Peace
Sep 5, 04:46 PM
ok, just made a quick mockup of what i would like to see announced next week :cool:
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes sharing.Just have a Mini next to the TV.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
Only one problem with that..
You can already do it with iTunes sharing.Just have a Mini next to the TV.
And it would be hard to go to one room and start the movie then go to the other room and start watching it.
If there is a media device it will be set-top box or Mini style that sits next to the main TV.
firsttube
Sep 13, 09:40 PM
seems as if the clickwheel being at the very bottom would make it a bit easier to drop, no?
cube
May 3, 12:46 PM
DP 1.2 has up to 17.28 Gbps.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
Only one channel is for DisplayPort.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
Only one channel is for DisplayPort.
PeterQVenkman
May 3, 11:02 AM
We finally agree on something! Been waiting for ability to hook up two ACD's to iMac since I converted to Mac in 2009. I hated the possibility of having to go Mac Pro for triple displays.
At this price point and with these features - they may push even more customers away from the mac pro and towards the iMac. Even for some pretty heavy lifting, it's going to be a beast of a machine.
I can say from experience that the i7 SB is a wonderful CPU. It competes with or beats the top end 6 core processors in apps that are not heavily multi-threaded.
Check it out.. 2x 30" Dell's connected to the 27 iMac
Image (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/05/imac-2011-05-03-600-58.jpg)
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/03/apple-imac-hands-on-with-dual-30-inch-displays-video/
It's pretty nice that those dell 30 inchers are almost exactly the same size as the iMac.
At this price point and with these features - they may push even more customers away from the mac pro and towards the iMac. Even for some pretty heavy lifting, it's going to be a beast of a machine.
I can say from experience that the i7 SB is a wonderful CPU. It competes with or beats the top end 6 core processors in apps that are not heavily multi-threaded.
Check it out.. 2x 30" Dell's connected to the 27 iMac
Image (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/05/imac-2011-05-03-600-58.jpg)
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/03/apple-imac-hands-on-with-dual-30-inch-displays-video/
It's pretty nice that those dell 30 inchers are almost exactly the same size as the iMac.
silverblue3
Aug 28, 12:15 PM
Assuming they release it tomorrow, would it be available at the apple store right away(not the online store)? :confused:
Bernard SG
Apr 28, 09:09 PM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Man, if those success stories were sure bets, how come nobody went for it long before Apple?
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Man, if those success stories were sure bets, how come nobody went for it long before Apple?
dolph0291
Mar 30, 01:11 PM
Interesting. Microsoft calls these files "Programs" and always has. Nothing called an application exists in Windows, it only has programs. Seems maybe MS is a little late to this game, and they're gonna piss all over it for everyone else.
Dustman
Apr 15, 07:40 AM
LOL, and yet you still haven't given any examples.
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Dude, take a chill pill. Your arrogance is making you seem like a 12 year old throwing a temper tantrum.
I see Thunderbolt starting off strong, but USB 3 taking over and likely showing up on more devices than TB. USB 3 will likely become more popular, but TB is always going to be there as an option. I do not see it being built in to every PC on the market though like USB 3 will.
Right, and no where was this specified at this point in the conversation. You are simply fitting it in for your argument. FireWire was not mentioned in the original post.
I knew what article I posted and I knew what it contained and it served its purpose perfectly fine. I don't need to show you who's going to use it because it's going to be native in Ivy Bridge ALONGSIDE USB 3 as the title would suggest. There's no reason NOT to use it as the superior IO and it's already there. This isn't rocket science.
Wow, what a surprise. The OP decided to choose the route that served him better for the discussion. :rolleyes:
I explained why ThunderBolt wouldn't be another FireWire. You weren't having it and decided to pull strawman attacks.
Pointing out spelling errors and telling someone that they belong on the short bus are two different things. :rolleyes: Sounds like you have some self-esteem issues if you feel the need to tell someone they're mentally retarded over an IO discussion.
Dude, take a chill pill. Your arrogance is making you seem like a 12 year old throwing a temper tantrum.
I see Thunderbolt starting off strong, but USB 3 taking over and likely showing up on more devices than TB. USB 3 will likely become more popular, but TB is always going to be there as an option. I do not see it being built in to every PC on the market though like USB 3 will.
pianoman
Sep 12, 02:26 PM
for me, the hardest part will be deciding whether or not to go with the 30 or go with the 80. i'll have to check it out at the store when they get them in stock.
i'm not sure if i want to keep my nano just because...
decisions, decisions
i'm not sure if i want to keep my nano just because...
decisions, decisions
Machead III
Aug 31, 01:18 PM
Let's face it, many people are already regularly downloading movies by nefarious means, and are perfectly happy waiting a couple of days to obtain a ~700mb file over the course of a few days.
All Apple need to do is apply the same logic as they did to music, to movies. The situation is identical. People will pay for faster download times, previews, wider selections and peace of mind. You could easily get a movie into a good-enough-quality video file of around 800mb-1gb - sure, not VIDEO_TS quality, which is why they'd have to be a bit cheaper than retail DVDs. But it'd work, I know as a film maniac I'd use it pretty regularly.
It may rely on a few extra things though. Let's say, a video iPod with a big capacity, maybe a new video file format (.avi is perfect but Apple obviously don't dig it) and IT HAS TO BE SAID bigger godamn hard drives in Apple portables.
Even with a video iPod, a Movie Store is going to interest lappy users perhaps most of all, and the current 60gb standards in MacBook just doesn't cut it for ****.
All Apple need to do is apply the same logic as they did to music, to movies. The situation is identical. People will pay for faster download times, previews, wider selections and peace of mind. You could easily get a movie into a good-enough-quality video file of around 800mb-1gb - sure, not VIDEO_TS quality, which is why they'd have to be a bit cheaper than retail DVDs. But it'd work, I know as a film maniac I'd use it pretty regularly.
It may rely on a few extra things though. Let's say, a video iPod with a big capacity, maybe a new video file format (.avi is perfect but Apple obviously don't dig it) and IT HAS TO BE SAID bigger godamn hard drives in Apple portables.
Even with a video iPod, a Movie Store is going to interest lappy users perhaps most of all, and the current 60gb standards in MacBook just doesn't cut it for ****.
batitombo
Apr 20, 11:09 AM
who cares?
3N16MA
Apr 25, 12:59 PM
Liquid metal? Carbon fiber? No SuperDrive option? Yes that is a lot of question marks.
rtdunham
Aug 23, 08:29 PM
They still can. Apple can turn around tomorrow and buy Creative for what it's worth and would have in essence paid itself the $100M. :D
in a corporate acquisition, there's a purchase price, and at settlement the buyer pays the purchase price plus the value of assets such as cash, so the scenario you describe, while possible, is not likely the way it would unfold. imho.
in a corporate acquisition, there's a purchase price, and at settlement the buyer pays the purchase price plus the value of assets such as cash, so the scenario you describe, while possible, is not likely the way it would unfold. imho.
Micrll
Aug 28, 12:56 PM
I just want them to bump up the Macbook so then I can go ahead and buy my fist Mac. I just want to buy it when its the most current.
pavetheforest
Sep 15, 10:01 PM
I would ditch my verizon plan the instant it came out...
Piggie
Apr 15, 02:40 PM
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
daneoni
Apr 25, 01:00 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
Erm...i'm guessing they bought it for Quad-Core/AMD 6750 rather than Thunderbolt. Also really? hideous?
:rolleyes:
Erm...i'm guessing they bought it for Quad-Core/AMD 6750 rather than Thunderbolt. Also really? hideous?
No comments:
Post a Comment