gugy
Nov 15, 10:35 AM
cool
it's coming soon to a mac near you!
it's coming soon to a mac near you!
way2l84sanity
Jul 18, 02:01 AM
Does this mean a new Video Ipod will be releaed also at the WWDC??
and if the rumors are true about the mac pro being announced also, that's alot of new goodies from Steve.
I don't like the rental model, it could find it's way into the music downloads. A $9.99 movie download at good quailty would be realy attractive. (too own)
and if the rumors are true about the mac pro being announced also, that's alot of new goodies from Steve.
I don't like the rental model, it could find it's way into the music downloads. A $9.99 movie download at good quailty would be realy attractive. (too own)
GregA
Mar 22, 04:39 PM
I don't think the classic will die, nor will conventional hard drives in laptops, until you can buy 500GB flash drives for $100.
I'm going to take my meandering thoughts further :)
Many people could live with a 32GB flash-based laptop if all their data was available via mobileme OR a nearby 220GB iPod.
I'm going to take my meandering thoughts further :)
Many people could live with a 32GB flash-based laptop if all their data was available via mobileme OR a nearby 220GB iPod.
skottichan
Mar 31, 11:12 PM
It seems that once the address bar starts glitching, spaces starts acting up too.1. The volume icon in the upper right finally displays the proper volume again.
2. The Wifi icon was stuck on displaying the time since last reboot if you were connected to a router of Apple manufacture.
3. Safari doesn't seem as RAM-heavy but the split processes (Safari vs. Safari Web Content) allows the latter to be killed if it consumes too much RAM to reset that to zero.
2. The Wifi icon was stuck on displaying the time since last reboot if you were connected to a router of Apple manufacture.
3. Safari doesn't seem as RAM-heavy but the split processes (Safari vs. Safari Web Content) allows the latter to be killed if it consumes too much RAM to reset that to zero.
ipadder
Oct 15, 10:20 PM
heres a couple of pics of the ebay case i bought for 5 bucks from the USA:
http://imgur.com/kA5eM.jpg
http://imgur.com/Mu3FK.jpg
lots of other colors too, got blue as well.
i didn't have my ipod w me at the time but i can confirm it fits as good as my other 15+ dollar cases
http://imgur.com/kA5eM.jpg
http://imgur.com/Mu3FK.jpg
lots of other colors too, got blue as well.
i didn't have my ipod w me at the time but i can confirm it fits as good as my other 15+ dollar cases
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:40 PM
Ground up rewrite = a whole load of bugs.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
I bet this'll be like when they changed iMovie...it won't over-write the old version and you can keep both Final Cuts on a single machine.
At least, I sure hope so. I mean, they have to do it that way, right?
Based on the name, this is obviously going to require heavy support from Quicktime X, which is not getting an update until Lion. Don't expect this before June.
Yeah, I will not be shocked if this ends up being a Lion-only application. They couldn't be that strict with many apps, but FCP is one that they could be with.
It'll be interesting to see how many shops use this for production work when it's finally released.
I bet this'll be like when they changed iMovie...it won't over-write the old version and you can keep both Final Cuts on a single machine.
At least, I sure hope so. I mean, they have to do it that way, right?
Based on the name, this is obviously going to require heavy support from Quicktime X, which is not getting an update until Lion. Don't expect this before June.
Yeah, I will not be shocked if this ends up being a Lion-only application. They couldn't be that strict with many apps, but FCP is one that they could be with.
cube
Mar 24, 01:59 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
And is not perfect by any means but then again Intel doesn't really deserve the credit they get. Just look at the SB GPU and the bugs in SB in general. Since on can get superior GPU performance from AMD, and that is critical for some users, why not go with an entire AMD system? Yes I know the CPU is a little behind what Intel offers but that isn't a problem in Apples low end systems. Let's face it the Mini has never had a bleeding edge processor.
This discussion gets even more interesting when you consider AMDs coming Fusion processors. If you are about to buy a system with an integrated SoC solution which would you rather have an AMD GPU or an Intel one? Yeah I realize that some people need the fastest CPUs they can get, but for many a fast GPU delivers a better experience.
On top of all of that AMD seems to have the same vision of the future where the GPU becomes a kore equal partner to the CPU on SoCs. AMD is all in with OpenCL support today and has future plans to make such code much lower in overhead. Right up Apples alley.
In any event I see a number of reasons for Apple to split sales between AMD and Intel. Long term a few AMD based machines from Apple is better for both Apple and the industry.
Fusion is not just about graphics. Fusion has a DirectX 11 class GPU with true OpenCL, while Sandy Bridge and the next Atom have DirectX 10.1 class GPUs with an alpha of OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
And is not perfect by any means but then again Intel doesn't really deserve the credit they get. Just look at the SB GPU and the bugs in SB in general. Since on can get superior GPU performance from AMD, and that is critical for some users, why not go with an entire AMD system? Yes I know the CPU is a little behind what Intel offers but that isn't a problem in Apples low end systems. Let's face it the Mini has never had a bleeding edge processor.
This discussion gets even more interesting when you consider AMDs coming Fusion processors. If you are about to buy a system with an integrated SoC solution which would you rather have an AMD GPU or an Intel one? Yeah I realize that some people need the fastest CPUs they can get, but for many a fast GPU delivers a better experience.
On top of all of that AMD seems to have the same vision of the future where the GPU becomes a kore equal partner to the CPU on SoCs. AMD is all in with OpenCL support today and has future plans to make such code much lower in overhead. Right up Apples alley.
In any event I see a number of reasons for Apple to split sales between AMD and Intel. Long term a few AMD based machines from Apple is better for both Apple and the industry.
Fusion is not just about graphics. Fusion has a DirectX 11 class GPU with true OpenCL, while Sandy Bridge and the next Atom have DirectX 10.1 class GPUs with an alpha of OpenCL which runs on the CPU side.
macEfan
Nov 29, 10:30 PM
Its the Pippin 2!! this time its intel instead of Bandai!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
lets hope so!
I want a pippin, but they are all so rare and expensive... would be grate if the itv let you play games on your tv!
laurim
Mar 24, 02:13 PM
Awesome news, I recomend the ATI 5870. It can be found for only $200 and it more than holds it's own against the latest and greatest from Nvidia and ATI. It's only 6 percent slower than a 6950. The 6950 on the other hand can be flashed to a 6970 quite easily but it costs abot $260.
mmm, is that $200 5870 the one that is mac compatible? The only mac compatible version I found was almost $500. I'm not interested in trying to flash a pc card.
mmm, is that $200 5870 the one that is mac compatible? The only mac compatible version I found was almost $500. I'm not interested in trying to flash a pc card.
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
AppliedVisual
Oct 23, 11:04 PM
64 bit has to do with memory addressing, not GUI speed. Someone posted they felt it unlikely Santa Rosa (Intel 64 bit memory support chips) would be released early. But doesn't Intel have a 64 bit memory addressing system similar to the ?965? now?
64bit instructions can provide a speed boost for certain computationally-intense applications that are optimized for it. Think scientific / visualization type apps where high precision values are needed and when 64bit values are being used, suddenly on a 64bit platform with 64bit registers, the time for a multiplication operation can effectively be cut in half. That's very simplistic, but not all that far off. Over in PC Land, some 3D rendering softwares have 64bit to 128bit (Lightwave is 96bit) operation pipelines in place for their precision values. Their 64bit optimized versions are showing 15 to 35 % speed ups depending on the various task vs. the 32bit version of the software doing the same thing on a 32bit OS, so there is a boost...
While you won't see the speed advantage in your Tiger or Leopard GUI, you'll notice it if you run any calculation-intense software that's optimized for the 64bit platform. So there's a bit more there than just being able to address more memory....
If you don't need 3+ GB of portable memory NOW, you might as well wait till June 07 or buy whatever is available now and be really happy with it.
I'm starting to feel like a broken record with this one... If you do need more than 3GB of RAM now, then you're out of luck. Intel is not shipping any mobile chipsets capable of addressing anything larger than a 32bit address window (4GB). Factoring in all the memory addresses used by system overhead, BIOS, video memory, etc..., you come up with just a fuzz over 3GB that you can actually address and use, even if you install a full 4GB. This won't change until they ship Crestline -- the updated mobile chipset (i965). The Desktop i965 series has already been shipping for a while now and that works with the desktop Core 2 Duo CPUs (Conroe).
64bit instructions can provide a speed boost for certain computationally-intense applications that are optimized for it. Think scientific / visualization type apps where high precision values are needed and when 64bit values are being used, suddenly on a 64bit platform with 64bit registers, the time for a multiplication operation can effectively be cut in half. That's very simplistic, but not all that far off. Over in PC Land, some 3D rendering softwares have 64bit to 128bit (Lightwave is 96bit) operation pipelines in place for their precision values. Their 64bit optimized versions are showing 15 to 35 % speed ups depending on the various task vs. the 32bit version of the software doing the same thing on a 32bit OS, so there is a boost...
While you won't see the speed advantage in your Tiger or Leopard GUI, you'll notice it if you run any calculation-intense software that's optimized for the 64bit platform. So there's a bit more there than just being able to address more memory....
If you don't need 3+ GB of portable memory NOW, you might as well wait till June 07 or buy whatever is available now and be really happy with it.
I'm starting to feel like a broken record with this one... If you do need more than 3GB of RAM now, then you're out of luck. Intel is not shipping any mobile chipsets capable of addressing anything larger than a 32bit address window (4GB). Factoring in all the memory addresses used by system overhead, BIOS, video memory, etc..., you come up with just a fuzz over 3GB that you can actually address and use, even if you install a full 4GB. This won't change until they ship Crestline -- the updated mobile chipset (i965). The Desktop i965 series has already been shipping for a while now and that works with the desktop Core 2 Duo CPUs (Conroe).
Leoff
Nov 27, 09:05 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
ericmooreart
Apr 21, 12:51 PM
Does this really surprise anyone? Genius, Ping, App store. Apple has been Big Brother for a long time.
Did you know every time you use the calculator on your mac it dials out to Apple? That's right the calculator.:confused: I block it and much more with Little Snitch. Wish they made it for Apples mobile products
Did you know every time you use the calculator on your mac it dials out to Apple? That's right the calculator.:confused: I block it and much more with Little Snitch. Wish they made it for Apples mobile products
BornAgainMac
Jun 23, 10:19 AM
I would have expected future Macs to have conversational speech from you to the OS and from the OS back to you in addition to mouse and keyboard input. If it was like Dashboard for touch access then I wouldn't mind that either.
I would hate to see the traditional Mac go away.
I would hate to see the traditional Mac go away.
hoveowl
Feb 6, 08:01 AM
Here in the upper midwest, we're having a nasty winter. However in a couple of months it'll be warm enough to get the top down.
kriskkalu
Jan 5, 06:31 PM
At macworld 2007 Apple will announce that you can download The Beatles music on iTunes and possible there will be a Beatles branded iPod.
TangoCharlie
Jul 14, 02:52 AM
imagine the data you could put onto those disks though!
... and what you'd loose when the disk goes bad :mad:
... and what you'd loose when the disk goes bad :mad:
skunk
Mar 21, 05:05 PM
I think this would be conterproductive to the end result though.Oh, the Humanity!
jessica.
Nov 28, 10:10 AM
http://img.shoppingnexus.com/products/hamilton-beach-hot-oil-popcorn-popper.jpg
I don't have a microwave anymore but like the occasional bowl of popcorn. :)
I don't have a microwave anymore but like the occasional bowl of popcorn. :)
skunk
Mar 27, 12:10 PM
That guy in the MSN video rasmasyean linked is a bit of a douche.A complete douche, I'd say.
the20pointmay
Apr 2, 08:20 PM
I wasn't sure this was an iPad commercial at first when I saw it during the Butler game; to me it seemed more serious than any other Apple ad that has been released before. But in that sense, you can feel similar emotions to the video they showed during the iPad 2 introduction that went through the year of the first iPad. That's not just selling a product, that's loving a product.
FireStar
Oct 22, 07:03 PM
How are the Skullcandy Slider cases?
My friend's brother has one for his 3rd Gen and it looks pretty sturdy. But when I tried to take it off I couldn't get the top piece off, only the top piece. I didn't try that hard though.
My friend's brother has one for his 3rd Gen and it looks pretty sturdy. But when I tried to take it off I couldn't get the top piece off, only the top piece. I didn't try that hard though.
bretm
Jul 20, 10:02 AM
There are more details here - http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060719/sfw089.html?.v=60
At the end of the page is a breakdown in the sales figures.
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
Not surprising. They haven't released a replacement for the G5 tower, and people have been waiting for a faster laptop for 3+ years since they never had the G5 laptop.
At the end of the page is a breakdown in the sales figures.
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
Not surprising. They haven't released a replacement for the G5 tower, and people have been waiting for a faster laptop for 3+ years since they never had the G5 laptop.
leftroom
Feb 25, 08:58 AM
left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled by an Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which controls a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which acts as a FTP server.
That's no late 2008 MacBook Pro. It can't be, because the late 2008 MacBook Pro was the first to get a unibody design. That might be the early 2008 MacBook Pro with the old classic design. Sorry to say that ;)
Nice setup though! :)
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled by an Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which controls a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which acts as a FTP server.
That's no late 2008 MacBook Pro. It can't be, because the late 2008 MacBook Pro was the first to get a unibody design. That might be the early 2008 MacBook Pro with the old classic design. Sorry to say that ;)
Nice setup though! :)
