ergle2
Sep 17, 02:44 AM
I Doubt Merom Supplies Are Off Allocation Yet � It's Unlikely Apple Can Get All They Need yet. Therefore MacBook will get Merom later and mini last.
Indeed. The big question is when they can update the MB?
Santa Rosa is currently expected no earlier than April. Assuming the MB's can't get Merom til, say, December, is it worth going C2D for ~4 months? (Assuming Santa Rosa is on-time -- which, to be fair, Intel's been pretty good at lately).
If the current enclosure is viable for Merom, then probably, but any late? Difficult to say.
The mini's probably less of a risk in that sense, and doesn't use CPUs in the same speed-range as the notebook systems, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it move up to C2D at the same time as the MB. I agree before the MB seems unlike for commercial reasons.
Indeed. The big question is when they can update the MB?
Santa Rosa is currently expected no earlier than April. Assuming the MB's can't get Merom til, say, December, is it worth going C2D for ~4 months? (Assuming Santa Rosa is on-time -- which, to be fair, Intel's been pretty good at lately).
If the current enclosure is viable for Merom, then probably, but any late? Difficult to say.
The mini's probably less of a risk in that sense, and doesn't use CPUs in the same speed-range as the notebook systems, so it wouldn't surprise me to see it move up to C2D at the same time as the MB. I agree before the MB seems unlike for commercial reasons.
fuwafuwa
Apr 18, 04:03 PM
Not at all. They can use those components for producing Galaxy devices. And they can use free Foxconn resources (since they would not be assembling iPhones anymore) for assembling. :D
Why not, because last year sales was "quite smooth".
Why not, because last year sales was "quite smooth".
Xian Zhu Xuande
Apr 5, 02:08 PM
Disappointing. Apple could have left this one alone.
Lame. You can be sure Toyota will capitulate to the Apple strong arm.
It doesn't make sense for Toyota to make a stink over this. It just doesn't make good business sense. There's a reason why businesses aren't managed in the same ways children bicker behind schools.
Lame. You can be sure Toyota will capitulate to the Apple strong arm.
It doesn't make sense for Toyota to make a stink over this. It just doesn't make good business sense. There's a reason why businesses aren't managed in the same ways children bicker behind schools.
Cavepainter
Mar 30, 02:36 PM
I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
mmoosa
Mar 28, 09:43 AM
That's just getting complacent in my opinion, people like myself like changing phones yearly, no new iPhone means no return business, I'll try something else instead, bad move if true.
toddybody
Apr 7, 10:49 AM
Of course not purposeful. They bought what they needed and couldn't care less as long as they got what they needed.
Why would anybody care about competitors getting any components of any kind, if they get what they need?
Don't agree that Apple needs constant pressure.
Any good company gets its pressure from within (to make it's products better, to sell the next generation) and from market research and consumer communications.
I bet they know that MobileMe sucks (I gave it up as there is better stuff for free) and will do a major overhaul.
I think we will see tablets taking a big chunk out of notebooks and become the next note book generation.
The next revolutionary thing. (Dick Tracy watch that works:-)
Could be that we'll all run around with little receivers and get the info out of the cloud via Wifi type "Gas" station network free of specific carriers.
You'd go to such a station and dial yourself into your network as they all have Verizon, ATT , but they'd also have the renegades etc.
These receivers will be able to project anything one would normally watch on a screen onto anything flat (wall , paper , desktop, side of a briefcase, even your hand etc.) so the current panels could become strong projecting lenses.
Lenses can be smaller to project, so development of image sensors is next.
Go RIM , MS and start developing or Apple will.
Ha ha! Im not sure the relevancy of the last part...but I have to disagree (respectfully) with the notion that Apple doesnt require constant pressure or that any good company only listens to internal voices (users included). First of all, without competition Apple could very well become stagnant in it's HW development; a sad example of this is with the legacy use of C2D (and no folks, they could have gone to discrete options and circumvented the nVidia v Intel alley fight). Apple's also behind the curve on the GPU market, and with their aged MBP display res. Now, havent we all complained about these issues to some degree?
selena gomez who says video
selena gomez who says music
.jpg "selena gomez who says lyrics.")
selena gomez who says lyrics.
Who+says+by+selena+gomez
gomez who says video shoot
selena gomez who says music
selena gomez who says video
Selena Gomez Who Says Video
selena gomez who says video
SelenaGomezWhoSays
Selena Gomez Who Says Music
selena gomez who says music
selena gomez who says video
Why would anybody care about competitors getting any components of any kind, if they get what they need?
Don't agree that Apple needs constant pressure.
Any good company gets its pressure from within (to make it's products better, to sell the next generation) and from market research and consumer communications.
I bet they know that MobileMe sucks (I gave it up as there is better stuff for free) and will do a major overhaul.
I think we will see tablets taking a big chunk out of notebooks and become the next note book generation.
The next revolutionary thing. (Dick Tracy watch that works:-)
Could be that we'll all run around with little receivers and get the info out of the cloud via Wifi type "Gas" station network free of specific carriers.
You'd go to such a station and dial yourself into your network as they all have Verizon, ATT , but they'd also have the renegades etc.
These receivers will be able to project anything one would normally watch on a screen onto anything flat (wall , paper , desktop, side of a briefcase, even your hand etc.) so the current panels could become strong projecting lenses.
Lenses can be smaller to project, so development of image sensors is next.
Go RIM , MS and start developing or Apple will.
Ha ha! Im not sure the relevancy of the last part...but I have to disagree (respectfully) with the notion that Apple doesnt require constant pressure or that any good company only listens to internal voices (users included). First of all, without competition Apple could very well become stagnant in it's HW development; a sad example of this is with the legacy use of C2D (and no folks, they could have gone to discrete options and circumvented the nVidia v Intel alley fight). Apple's also behind the curve on the GPU market, and with their aged MBP display res. Now, havent we all complained about these issues to some degree?
Stevesbodyguard
May 4, 03:03 PM
I googled it...sounds like a dying fad...
Agreed...I give it another 2 months till nobody even remembers this whole "App Store" thing.
Agreed...I give it another 2 months till nobody even remembers this whole "App Store" thing.
GGJstudios
Dec 28, 03:55 PM
Does this mean I shouldn't bother installing Sophos for my mpb?
So many conflicting opinions.
Read this, then decide for yourself: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
So many conflicting opinions.
Read this, then decide for yourself: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
.jpg "selena gomez who says lyrics.")
ECUpirate44
Mar 28, 10:29 AM
If no new iPhone until 2012, then this further exemplifies Android = WINNING!
This makes no sense and thus hope it's just another BS rumor.
I agree. If theres no iPhone in that mean Android wins the smartphone market for the year. Apple would also lose many of the customers to Android whose contracts are up in the summer and they would be locked into 2 year deals with their droids meaning no iPhone in 2012 for them either.
This makes no sense and thus hope it's just another BS rumor.
I agree. If theres no iPhone in that mean Android wins the smartphone market for the year. Apple would also lose many of the customers to Android whose contracts are up in the summer and they would be locked into 2 year deals with their droids meaning no iPhone in 2012 for them either.
Umbongo
Apr 23, 07:41 AM
How does having the PSU on the bottom keep it cool?...
Hot air rises, so the heat generated by the PSU will just rise and fill up the case.
Unless I'm missing something or the laws of physics have changed in recent years?
Second post explains it: http://forums.legitreviews.com/about11789.html
Hot air rises, so the heat generated by the PSU will just rise and fill up the case.
Unless I'm missing something or the laws of physics have changed in recent years?
Second post explains it: http://forums.legitreviews.com/about11789.html
aristobrat
Apr 25, 08:56 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
No. Re-read the three sentences he typed. He said that Apple is not tracking anyone. That infers that the database of locations is not being used to track a users location.
No. Re-read the three sentences he typed. He said that Apple is not tracking anyone. That infers that the database of locations is not being used to track a users location.
ptysell
May 6, 12:29 AM
Can always have a system with ARM AND x86 CPUs.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 11:46 PM
I said November for Merom MacBook Pros.
You said “September Maybe.”
Which leaves August unlikely, and December pushing it.
However I will stand by my original post, that if I was planning to upgrade to a MBP Merom, I would be prepared to wait until December. As most experts have predicted a switch before the new year.
Otherwise I think everyone understands both schools of thought here, which have already been suggested numerous times in previous post.
Although, I think Apple will hurt themselves more in the long run if they announce an update and can’t meet demand.I agree with you about November. But not for MBP - for Merom in MacBooks. I think since Merom is already shipping early it's a safe bet we'll see Merom MacBook Pros running @ 2.33GHz in September. November would have to be the drop dead date for Merom MacBooks still running @ 2GHz since above that speed they are way too expensive to go into MacBooks.This better not be the case. There is NO way I'm waiting untill then for a MacBook Pro. I don't think apple will wait that long, I think WWDC is likely, and if not I would say at Paris.Exactly. The Tuesday September 12 Paris Apple Expo Keynote is the latest MBP will be announced as "shipping today".
You said “September Maybe.”
Which leaves August unlikely, and December pushing it.
However I will stand by my original post, that if I was planning to upgrade to a MBP Merom, I would be prepared to wait until December. As most experts have predicted a switch before the new year.
Otherwise I think everyone understands both schools of thought here, which have already been suggested numerous times in previous post.
Although, I think Apple will hurt themselves more in the long run if they announce an update and can’t meet demand.I agree with you about November. But not for MBP - for Merom in MacBooks. I think since Merom is already shipping early it's a safe bet we'll see Merom MacBook Pros running @ 2.33GHz in September. November would have to be the drop dead date for Merom MacBooks still running @ 2GHz since above that speed they are way too expensive to go into MacBooks.This better not be the case. There is NO way I'm waiting untill then for a MacBook Pro. I don't think apple will wait that long, I think WWDC is likely, and if not I would say at Paris.Exactly. The Tuesday September 12 Paris Apple Expo Keynote is the latest MBP will be announced as "shipping today".
toddybody
Apr 25, 07:57 AM
Is that why you bought the iPad? One would think if you have an iPad, you'd already see the error in judgement that you made there. Just because Apple stuff looks cool doesn't mean it's sacrificing function - to the contrary.
If you've used an iPhone, or iPad, for any period of time you'd know that.
Other computer makers put wavy lines, green blinking lights and all sorts of other kitsch on their machines - by kitsch I mean design features that have no function, that are there only to look "good".
When has Apple made a device that didn't work very well??? You'd have to go all the way to the Newton for that. And that happened while Steve Jobs was away, not a co-incidence. Ever since the iPod, it's been hit after hit.
Well, I think the previous commenter's point has some validity. A great example of this "form over function" is the iMac. Mobile graphics (and poor ones at that), horrendous thermal management, limited stand orientation...but one damn fine looking computer:D Dont get me wrong, Apple does amazing things with their products. (Im obviously a fan :D) But I do think design is paramount to their efforts (not that function ever takes backseat, it just can be slightly lessoned on some releases). Now, IMO...they knocked both form and function out of the park with the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and 2010 MBA. Bravo
If you've used an iPhone, or iPad, for any period of time you'd know that.
Other computer makers put wavy lines, green blinking lights and all sorts of other kitsch on their machines - by kitsch I mean design features that have no function, that are there only to look "good".
When has Apple made a device that didn't work very well??? You'd have to go all the way to the Newton for that. And that happened while Steve Jobs was away, not a co-incidence. Ever since the iPod, it's been hit after hit.
Well, I think the previous commenter's point has some validity. A great example of this "form over function" is the iMac. Mobile graphics (and poor ones at that), horrendous thermal management, limited stand orientation...but one damn fine looking computer:D Dont get me wrong, Apple does amazing things with their products. (Im obviously a fan :D) But I do think design is paramount to their efforts (not that function ever takes backseat, it just can be slightly lessoned on some releases). Now, IMO...they knocked both form and function out of the park with the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and 2010 MBA. Bravo
tundrabuggy
Apr 18, 03:17 PM
couldn't Samsung simply get back at Apple by NOT making Apple's stuff? I mean, come on.
You would think that on the surface. People asked, if Apple wants to kill Flash, why doesn't Adobe just kill, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, Dreamwever, Premiere and InDesign on the Mac, that would cripple Apple as a creative platform for designers, well, Adobe does not want to kill more than 50% of its revenue stream.....the answer is money! Samsung loves the profitability of making Apples stuff! They do not want to lose that golden goose.
You would think that on the surface. People asked, if Apple wants to kill Flash, why doesn't Adobe just kill, Photoshop, Illustrator, After Effects, Dreamwever, Premiere and InDesign on the Mac, that would cripple Apple as a creative platform for designers, well, Adobe does not want to kill more than 50% of its revenue stream.....the answer is money! Samsung loves the profitability of making Apples stuff! They do not want to lose that golden goose.
Yaboze
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
Steve needs to provide a better answer because this one makes him look like a liar.
Ok, so there's a DB on your phone and the computer it syncs to. How do we know it's not being used in some nefarious way? Why isn't it regularly wiped?
I ran the app on my Macbook and it showed where I was since I had the phone....it was scary...:eek:
Ok, so there's a DB on your phone and the computer it syncs to. How do we know it's not being used in some nefarious way? Why isn't it regularly wiped?
I ran the app on my Macbook and it showed where I was since I had the phone....it was scary...:eek:
Cobrien
Aug 7, 05:07 PM
Geez, have you seen the specs you can upgrade to.
2TB hard drive and 16000MB ram, omggfg.
2TB hard drive and 16000MB ram, omggfg.
hotrock3
Mar 30, 10:55 AM
Anyone who needs to quote wikipedia shouldn't be allowed to contribute!
Now thats a FACT!
That seems quite rude. Wikipedia happens to have a wealth of base level knowledge. I understand that one should not cite it when doing in depth research but when looking for general knowledge it is a great source.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
Now thats a FACT!
That seems quite rude. Wikipedia happens to have a wealth of base level knowledge. I understand that one should not cite it when doing in depth research but when looking for general knowledge it is a great source.
Many of my professors have realized this and told us that if we need a different explanation of something to look it up on Wikipedia because it tends to use more common language than out text books. The do not allow citing Wikipedia no matter how well the article is sourced.
Just like any book you look at using for research you must weigh the quality before choosing to use it.
That being said, any college level class in history that covers the Cold War will talk about Alfred Sauvy and his contribution to how we talk about the world during that time period.
dextertangocci
Jul 30, 01:46 AM
my t-mobile contract expires in september..
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
Don't panic
May 6, 08:37 PM
it's quicker because we can explore two room each round instead of one, so we gain one turn.
the draw back from the strategy is mainly that one of the groups might loose out on a treasure, but since we already explored this rooms, and we have to re-search them only for traps, that part is moot.
this will apply only fron the next round, but by the rules we have to be two groups by then.
we will still be 'together, and we can merge back in a group any time.
anyways. without further ado,
We split
ucfgrad is now his own (single) group
Loras group moves to the next (previous room).
ufcgrad, now you should move to the room with us, and as soon it's our round again, you should explore the room. after that, I will move our group to the next room, then in your second tunr you move and in our second turn we explore that room.
the draw back from the strategy is mainly that one of the groups might loose out on a treasure, but since we already explored this rooms, and we have to re-search them only for traps, that part is moot.
this will apply only fron the next round, but by the rules we have to be two groups by then.
we will still be 'together, and we can merge back in a group any time.
anyways. without further ado,
We split
ucfgrad is now his own (single) group
Loras group moves to the next (previous room).
ufcgrad, now you should move to the room with us, and as soon it's our round again, you should explore the room. after that, I will move our group to the next room, then in your second tunr you move and in our second turn we explore that room.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 06:15 PM
Multiplication is always what you do, when there is a term directly adjacent to the ().
"Oh, I did not know that!!" - Johnny Carson, The Tonight Show
I get 61,835, but I'm beginning to think someone has mucked around with the keys on my calculator.
Finally, humour.
Check your IMOS battery. I think it's failing. :p
"Oh, I did not know that!!" - Johnny Carson, The Tonight Show
I get 61,835, but I'm beginning to think someone has mucked around with the keys on my calculator.
Finally, humour.
Check your IMOS battery. I think it's failing. :p
eenu
Aug 11, 03:25 PM
and higher price than MB.
Jesus! How much more expensive do you want it to be! the price diff is already almost £500 from top whitebook to bottom MBP!
Jesus! How much more expensive do you want it to be! the price diff is already almost £500 from top whitebook to bottom MBP!
millerb7
May 6, 07:57 AM
Quite true... Most but not all... And Apple prizes themselves on having a "professional" line. So some products would have to remain out, but Apple usually likes to stick to one thing...
But I really think we are still a few years away from it...
Quite not true... as the fact of google already running datacenters on arm is just a fallacy.
But I really think we are still a few years away from it...
Quite not true... as the fact of google already running datacenters on arm is just a fallacy.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 08:56 AM
Redundant power supplies are generally not a standard feature for most x86 servers sold. It isn't a must (requirement); it is an optional feature need if want to sell to the relatively small subset of the market that wants them. (e.g, none of Google's, Microsoft's ,etc search/cloud servers have dual power supplies and they number in the many, many thousands. )
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
