intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
Full of Win
Apr 11, 11:40 AM
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
rezenclowd3
Dec 1, 11:31 PM
I hate to link to IGN, but here goes:
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
----------
Also from this (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1136979p1.html) article:
"The first update, Yamauchi said, is coming this Saturday and will include restrictions for weight and power in online races.
Yamauchi went on to say that his team would be "upgrading every week, every month." "
GT5 damage explained (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1137446p1.html)
Confusion seems to have stemmed from its differing implementation across the game's extensive garage, a point that Sony further clarified. "Standard models have minor deformation and scratches," said Sony, "Premium cars have greater visible level of damage, and Premium racing models have the highest level of damage."
----------
Also from this (http://ps3.ign.com/articles/113/1136979p1.html) article:
"The first update, Yamauchi said, is coming this Saturday and will include restrictions for weight and power in online races.
Yamauchi went on to say that his team would be "upgrading every week, every month." "
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues because if you are using facebook/twitter and whatever else you are using to broadcasting your information. If you don't want advertisers to use your information, stop using social networking sites and search engines and stop being connected.
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
boncellis
Aug 27, 09:12 PM
Sifting through this thread can make one either optimistic or irrational, depending on who you ask. One point I found absent among the discussion was the possibility of a Core 2 Duo machine coinciding with the September 16th iPod offer end date.
Makes sense to me, but then I tend to get shouted down a lot in this forum. ;)
Makes sense to me, but then I tend to get shouted down a lot in this forum. ;)
NoSmokingBandit
Aug 14, 11:35 PM
I have enough skill to win the faster races, i just have more fun with a "real" car instead of something with neck-snapping acceleration and tires that stick to the road if you take a hair-pin at 200mph.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
dclocke
Sep 19, 08:24 AM
That isn't exactly what I said, I don't have a problem with people discussing new and upcoming products and features and when we might see them. Count me in.
Its the people that are getting so worked up, annoyed at Apple, threatening to dump the platform and move to Windows, claiming Apple are three months behind Windows systems and generally bitching.
Its all pointless as the same people will start up again with the next technology advances as soon as the Macbook range is updated with Merom.
There's something to be said for that. I apologize if I misunderstood your post...
Its the people that are getting so worked up, annoyed at Apple, threatening to dump the platform and move to Windows, claiming Apple are three months behind Windows systems and generally bitching.
Its all pointless as the same people will start up again with the next technology advances as soon as the Macbook range is updated with Merom.
There's something to be said for that. I apologize if I misunderstood your post...
Riemann Zeta
Apr 27, 09:42 AM
Whether or not the behavior of this cache was in fact "a bug", I think the update that flushes the cache files when Location Services is disabled will settle the issue.
hcuar
Sep 19, 11:50 AM
Except that:
...
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Umm... No... your not throwing down $2500+ for a "top-of-the-line laptop". Your throwing down $2500+ for a Macbook Pro. Seriously... quit comparing a PC laptop merely because it has a "better" processor. It's still a Winblows machine.
That being said... fine... go buy a PC laptop. Have fun with all the ******** that comes with that.
...
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Umm... No... your not throwing down $2500+ for a "top-of-the-line laptop". Your throwing down $2500+ for a Macbook Pro. Seriously... quit comparing a PC laptop merely because it has a "better" processor. It's still a Winblows machine.
That being said... fine... go buy a PC laptop. Have fun with all the ******** that comes with that.
AZREOSpecialist
Apr 11, 12:16 PM
80%* of potential purchasers won't have access to LTE for at least another year from then. Given that 3G was added only after it was widely available, why would Apple take such a risk with the huge numbers of June/July iPhone users coming to the end of their contracts for such a minority market?
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
Because this isn't the same market when Apple first introduced the iPhone and then, later, the 3G version. There is a lot more competition now and intense pressure on Apple to stay ahead of the curve. That absolutely means getting the newest, bleeding edge technology into the iPhone before the competition.
[*made up statistic, but I bet it's not far wrong! :D ]
Because this isn't the same market when Apple first introduced the iPhone and then, later, the 3G version. There is a lot more competition now and intense pressure on Apple to stay ahead of the curve. That absolutely means getting the newest, bleeding edge technology into the iPhone before the competition.
Full of Win
Mar 31, 07:19 PM
Exactly. What we need are more objective, balanced and rational sounding opinions like yours.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
What he said was spot on. Gruber is the archetypical Apple sycophant, second only to Andy Ifatso from MacBreak Weekly.
Alexsaru
Sep 13, 06:54 AM
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
puuukeey
Sep 13, 12:32 PM
http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B0007US79Y.01._AA240_SCLZZZZZZZ_.jpg
MORE POWER!
MORE POWER!
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
iOS was developed for the phone first.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 08:19 PM
It is obvious the UN has taken sides here, no doubt about it. Do you disagree with that decision?
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
The U.N. Security Council perhaps, but not the entire assembly. It would have been interesting to open that issue up to debate and seen how all the members would have voted.
What I always wonder is what diplomatic efforts were used to pressure Qaddafi? There were no (as far as I know) threats of economic embargoes, freezing of assets, or other less violent methods to coerce Qaddafi. We didn't need to convince him to step dow. We simply needed to convince him that he needed to tone down, defend himself against the armed insurrection, but not cast a wider and violent campaign against innocent civilians.
I need a clearer demonstration that serious steps were taken before resorting to war. War should be used as the last resort and only when it's clear that all other options have failed.
puuukeey
Nov 28, 10:39 PM
https://home.comcast.net/~puuukeey/evil2.gif
Major Majors
Aug 7, 08:45 PM
I had no idea what the "open in dashboard" image was for, but I called it out on the Apple Discussion board 9 months ago. Apparently this has been in the works for Safari for QUITE some time
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=987980#987980
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=987980#987980
studiomusic
Apr 5, 11:09 PM
Already have my tickets... I was looking forward to Kevin Smith and Philip Bloom, but FCP is a welcome announcement.
Hopefully they'll give a bunch of copies of it for the Supermeet Super Raffle.
Hopefully they'll give a bunch of copies of it for the Supermeet Super Raffle.
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:05 PM
The only way this iPhone or whatever it is called will be successful is if they team up with a carrier or carriers and offer promotions on it like all the other cell phone manufactures do. I am not sure about Europe or other parts of the world, but people are used to getting a decent phone for not much money either at their initial contract or every 2 years when the contract is up. Selling an unlocked phone at some outrageous price ($200-300) is not going to cut it when I can go down and get a decent phone for around $50 with rebates from the cell provider and whoever made the phone.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:05 PM
Update this august... not likely. It will be all pro. Any consumer will be Paris Expo. The imac G5 was launched there. why not a Core 2 Duo iMac?
Why not? Cost...
The prices of the Yonahs just dropped precipitously, thereby increasing Apple's margins on their line of computers in mid product cycle. They'll be selling fewer iMacs anyway because everyone will want the fanciest MB Pros and Mac Pros with the super fast Intel chips. To make up for selling fewer iMacs, they'll be raking in higher margins on each computer.
Look for consumer model speed bumps ahead of the holiday season.
Why not? Cost...
The prices of the Yonahs just dropped precipitously, thereby increasing Apple's margins on their line of computers in mid product cycle. They'll be selling fewer iMacs anyway because everyone will want the fanciest MB Pros and Mac Pros with the super fast Intel chips. To make up for selling fewer iMacs, they'll be raking in higher margins on each computer.
Look for consumer model speed bumps ahead of the holiday season.
wizard
Mar 26, 10:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
It is pretty incredible that the ignorance around Mac OS releases never stops. For one thing if you loose data on a computer, the only person to blame is the one staring at you in the mirror.
Even the whine about nothing worthwhile for the user is a bit old and reflects what we heard about SL. Yet SL on my early 2008 MBP was a drastic improvement for the user right out of the box and just got better with each update. User facing features are the only reason to update, fixes to underlying facilities can go a long way to justifying the software update.
As to the server integration, it hasn't and never will be a product worth $500. It is great that Apple is adding support to the base install but people need to realize a few things. One is that Mac OS is UNIX, people need to get that through their heads. Thus Apples server product only really adds in what is already seen in many UNIX intallations in a base install. Speaking of which much of that functionality is well established open source. Second the pricing of "server" software seems to be tailored to fit the mentality of the corporate world, where they feel they need to pay big bucks for something trivial. It is no wonder that Linux as established itself as a server OS in the SOHO world and at some of the more forward thinking larger corporations. As others have pointed out the basics of UNIX have been around for ages now, very little new territory is being cleared here, thus little justification for up charges on server software.
Finally it is a bit cowardly to avoid the future because you see nothing of value there for you personally. It is frightenly similar to the attitude seen in those that cut their own wrists.
danz1123
Jun 11, 11:21 AM
Anyone know if I place a preorder on the 19th what the chances are I'll be able to make a reservation for the 24th?
boncellis
Jul 20, 09:06 AM
I wonder just how Apple would react to news that the next processor update is ahead of schedule. Presumably their plans are carefully laid out, and if a PC competitor can jump on Intel updates faster than they can without having to conform to a similar timeline, then Apple might get burned, if only slightly.
That's one aspect of the transition that I've always wondered about. Apple has often marketed new "products" more than "updates" in the past, but with Intel's speed of development, perhaps Apple will now focus more on updates and minimize redesigning/new releases. I don't think it's bad, just something of a departure from what I've grown accustomed to.
That's one aspect of the transition that I've always wondered about. Apple has often marketed new "products" more than "updates" in the past, but with Intel's speed of development, perhaps Apple will now focus more on updates and minimize redesigning/new releases. I don't think it's bad, just something of a departure from what I've grown accustomed to.
thunng8
Apr 9, 05:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
I have already mentioned that the 40w difference measured was when it was running cinebench which does not tax the gpu at all. Gpu tdp should not be a big factor.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
But in the case of the Sb quad core the figure seems to be in excess of 50%, not 20%
CPU isnt the only component drawing power. AMD 6750M has higher TDP compared to 330M as well
I have already mentioned that the 40w difference measured was when it was running cinebench which does not tax the gpu at all. Gpu tdp should not be a big factor.