liketom
Jul 19, 04:20 PM
Which is exactly why the past few weeks have been a great time to load up on Apple stock. Apple has been increasing computer sales with transitional computers. The "real" machines aren't out yet.
In other words, Apple growth won't be slowing down any time soon. In fact, it should probably accelerate over the next 12 months.
with a little help from us Mac users out here who end up buying 2 Macs or more a year ;)
i tell you this year is getting real expensive for me , Mac Mini Intel then the Black Book and later this year the new Mac Pro and just don't even talk about iPods yet :D Apple is skinting me worse then a divorce
In other words, Apple growth won't be slowing down any time soon. In fact, it should probably accelerate over the next 12 months.
with a little help from us Mac users out here who end up buying 2 Macs or more a year ;)
i tell you this year is getting real expensive for me , Mac Mini Intel then the Black Book and later this year the new Mac Pro and just don't even talk about iPods yet :D Apple is skinting me worse then a divorce
SMM
Nov 15, 06:52 PM
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
I work with business applications, many of which are database intensive. I can think of many examples which would greatly improve performance and application reliability, if I could run processes in parallel, rather than in series.
swingerofbirch
Jul 19, 04:55 PM
I've been listening live for a while and they are very tight lipped but they just said that they believe that cell phones are poor MP3 players compared to the iPod (I guess including their own cobranded cell phones?!!?). They said they realize it wont always be the case that iPods are superior to cell phones, and don't think we don't realize that etc, as if to suggest phone iPod integration.
Sony is with Ericsson.
I believe Nokia and Microsoft have some sort of alliance.
And we all know Apple for the second time decided to hitch their wagon to Motorola with the co-branded phone.
Who else is there? LG, Siemens, Samsung? Or would they do it alone? How hard can it be to make a cell phone?
Sony is with Ericsson.
I believe Nokia and Microsoft have some sort of alliance.
And we all know Apple for the second time decided to hitch their wagon to Motorola with the co-branded phone.
Who else is there? LG, Siemens, Samsung? Or would they do it alone? How hard can it be to make a cell phone?
aegisdesign
Sep 6, 06:08 PM
It costs me nothing to walk into town (about 10 minutes) or bike (5) and pick up a DVD at the municipal library for �1.50. Occasionally I'll copy it to my hard disk if I didn't have the time I thought I would have to watch it and watch it later, then delete it.
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 03:35 PM
Any chance of a new chip set with a newer GMA ?
alexhasfun28
Apr 2, 07:24 PM
This is something people need to realize once in a while. It’s not about CPU and RAM. A Droid Incredible can have an 8 megapixel camera, and the photo quality may be not be the best people expect. An iPhone 4 can have 5 megapixels in a sensor and people are delighted with the quality!
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
Specs are nice, but learning that it actually WORKS, is something other.
tMac85
Jan 11, 11:06 PM
Maybe Apple's poster actually says more but we can't see the bottom?
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
hahahahahahha
Something like: "There's something in the air... blow it out your ass Microsoft" :p
hahahahahahha
twoodcc
Apr 30, 06:07 AM
congrats to lyzardking for 7 million points!
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
i see your output is up! care to share what machines you got folding?
.jpg "selena gomez wallpaper for")
4np
Aug 25, 07:42 AM
Like this?
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
LOL!!!! :D
http://static.flickr.com/20/73218496_12cd47ab24.jpg
gawd i hope i don't get banned for that!
LOL!!!! :D
firestarter
Mar 20, 01:04 PM
It's not my place and my time has long past to be "volunteered" for such duties.
So, apparently you're old...
US will use Lybia as aerial target practice
Hey, check out this mini mushroom fireball thingie. What kind of bomb is this? It looks kind of big. Edpecially the fact that it's in the backgorund and the camera naturally makes it small. If you were up close, it's gotta be HUGE!
Yet you come across with all the maturity of an 11 year old.
:confused:
So, apparently you're old...
US will use Lybia as aerial target practice
Hey, check out this mini mushroom fireball thingie. What kind of bomb is this? It looks kind of big. Edpecially the fact that it's in the backgorund and the camera naturally makes it small. If you were up close, it's gotta be HUGE!
Yet you come across with all the maturity of an 11 year old.
:confused:
Umbongo
Nov 16, 11:44 AM
either way, its both a win-win situation
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
An unlikely scenario. Don't expect any price drops on mac pros for a long time after clovertown chips are in them.
brepublican
Sep 6, 09:40 AM
yes we can! let me show you_:
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
jace88
Jan 3, 05:43 AM
My daily driver is a Civic FD1:
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4709/evofdsignew.th.jpg (http://img405.imageshack.us/i/evofdsignew.jpg/)
My weekend car is an Evo X MR:
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/9220/45678869185b36fc843ao.th.jpg (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/45678869185b36fc843ao.jpg/)
http://img405.imageshack.us/img405/4709/evofdsignew.th.jpg (http://img405.imageshack.us/i/evofdsignew.jpg/)
My weekend car is an Evo X MR:
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/9220/45678869185b36fc843ao.th.jpg (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/45678869185b36fc843ao.jpg/)
paradox00
May 2, 05:06 PM
I like it, but right now there's 3 ways to install apps: App Store, download from internet and drag to applications folder, installer wizard (like MS Office). Also, the difference between the applications folder and LaunchPad will be confusing for most users. This whole thing needs to be unified. Either get rid of the Applications folder or get rid of LaunchPad.
I think what you're looking for is Mac OSXI which will come after Lion. Lion is likely the (paid) beta test for merging iOS and OSX elements with the goal of creating a unified OS, but they still have to maintain the core features of OSX, even if they've become redundant. The next iteration will likely be a clean break and drop many redundant features.
If Microsoft thinks they can make a desktop and tablet friendly version of Windows (Windows 8) I have no doubts that Apple can actually succeed on that front (and no, I don't think macs will ever be restricted to the mac app store only).
I think what you're looking for is Mac OSXI which will come after Lion. Lion is likely the (paid) beta test for merging iOS and OSX elements with the goal of creating a unified OS, but they still have to maintain the core features of OSX, even if they've become redundant. The next iteration will likely be a clean break and drop many redundant features.
If Microsoft thinks they can make a desktop and tablet friendly version of Windows (Windows 8) I have no doubts that Apple can actually succeed on that front (and no, I don't think macs will ever be restricted to the mac app store only).
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
DrFrankTM
Sep 1, 01:45 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
I don't really know about the ideal price difference, but for some people, it wouldn't matter much. If you want a system with a lot of screen space, then you can get two 1920x1200 monitors. Sure, it will cost you, but if you need the space, then you'll go for the 23-inch. Also, to watch movies, a big screen is better than two small ones. It all depends on what you need the computer for...
%25252BMade%25252Bby%25252BZach.jpg "selena gomez and demi lovato")
walshlink
Mar 28, 03:00 AM
Really newbie? You logged in to tell me that?
I guess you missed the point.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Get a life
I guess you missed the point.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Get a life
screensaver400
Apr 2, 10:35 PM
The book being read in iBooks is Kook: What Surfing Taught Me About Love, Life, and Catching the Perfect Wave, by Peter Heller.
kdjc00
Mar 28, 01:19 PM
it will be interesting to see where apple takes that capabilities of this features to expand its gaming line. i hope it expands it to the apple tv. HD 1080p games would be great..
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 7, 03:28 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
Hooka
Jan 13, 05:07 PM
Come on, people!!
In my opinion, their quote, "There's something in the air," is nothing other than an allusion to the fact that they're going to introduce a 3G iPhone. We have all known that this was coming eventually; Jobs even said that the only thing stopping them from introducing it was low battery life.
I would be very surprised if they do any updating to iPhone except for software. The holidays were just around the corner, I doubt Apple will want to give back another $100 bucks to everyone who just bought an iPhone in November or December.
It's going to be a piece of hardware I can guarantee that.
In my opinion, their quote, "There's something in the air," is nothing other than an allusion to the fact that they're going to introduce a 3G iPhone. We have all known that this was coming eventually; Jobs even said that the only thing stopping them from introducing it was low battery life.
I would be very surprised if they do any updating to iPhone except for software. The holidays were just around the corner, I doubt Apple will want to give back another $100 bucks to everyone who just bought an iPhone in November or December.
It's going to be a piece of hardware I can guarantee that.
chillywilly
Sep 6, 03:25 PM
I really think the next option is to even take out the Combo drives on all low end Macs and just add a SuperDrive to every model.
Even if you don't burn that many DVDs, it makes more sense to include it instead of having something that's pretty much outdated that's semi-difficult to replace for most users (the mini is the easiest out of all non-Pro and laptop models to replace the optical drive).
I don't like the idea that Apple has dropped options on lower end models, esp the SuperDrive option on the low end mini. There's not that many advantages that make the extra $200 all that inviting.
Even if you don't burn that many DVDs, it makes more sense to include it instead of having something that's pretty much outdated that's semi-difficult to replace for most users (the mini is the easiest out of all non-Pro and laptop models to replace the optical drive).
I don't like the idea that Apple has dropped options on lower end models, esp the SuperDrive option on the low end mini. There's not that many advantages that make the extra $200 all that inviting.
Kingsly
Aug 6, 11:40 PM
More pix of the same... in case anyone cares!
1) WWDC2006!!
2) the now infamous banners�
3) me, with the now infamous baners�
4) Nifty computer bags� they are giving out
5) delicious gelato� :p
1) WWDC2006!!
2) the now infamous banners�
3) me, with the now infamous baners�
4) Nifty computer bags� they are giving out
5) delicious gelato� :p
rmwebs
Mar 22, 04:31 PM
Disk space aside, there's nothing wrong with the current iPod Classic. It doesnt need bluetooth, microphones, cameras, etc - the hint is in the name...CLASSIC.
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
Wany bluetooth? Get a iTouch. You arent going to be listening to your library of 50,000 song on the way to work I'm sure it wouldnt kill you to load 10,000 onto an iTouch for the car. :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment