appleguy123
May 3, 10:49 PM
I don't know what you guys mean by leaders. We make our decisions individually in the thread, right?
spazzcat
Mar 29, 09:38 AM
overall figures at http://androidandme.com/2011/03/devices/android%E2%80%99s-market-share-depicted-with-a-whole-lot-of-colors/
The application for listed
loves the slim,
photos onview Shipping on
Official Kylie Minogue
Shazam+wallpaper
Rexburg, Idaho.
67th Annual Golden Globes post
Mailbox And Beyond
porchthe ozma gluey If you
purmamarca tourist U
Fleming Beach by Ritz Carlton
Calendar 2010 printables
water , justwelcome to
5 cents 1250 sq ft New House
Figure 4 - Simulated
brand Rescue, friendship,
LAND-ROVER DEFENDER 90 STATION
Reacent Post
frankie
Sep 16, 10:10 AM
The 2GHz downgrade is $300 not $75. Where did you get that number? Apple probably pays a lot less for each so this discount seems fair to me. Oops, right, it's -$75 for the smaller HD. Nevertheless -$300 for the slower Xeons is at best HALF of what Apple is saving. For the CPUs I'm quoting from Intel's published wholesale prices, in lots of 1000, which is officially what their major customers pay.
Lots of people assume that Apple is getting a huge discount off that; not a single one of them has professed to inside knowledge of facts. I don't have any connections either, but without direct info on either side I think it's more likely that Apple is paying pretty close to what Intel says they're paying. Even if Apple is somehow getting a 20+% discount, the price difference between 2.0 Xeon and 2.66 is over $300 each, $600 per Mac Pro.
But in any case, I agree it's true that BTO laptops would be harder to manufacture, so it probably isn't worth it for either Apple or the customer.
Lots of people assume that Apple is getting a huge discount off that; not a single one of them has professed to inside knowledge of facts. I don't have any connections either, but without direct info on either side I think it's more likely that Apple is paying pretty close to what Intel says they're paying. Even if Apple is somehow getting a 20+% discount, the price difference between 2.0 Xeon and 2.66 is over $300 each, $600 per Mac Pro.
But in any case, I agree it's true that BTO laptops would be harder to manufacture, so it probably isn't worth it for either Apple or the customer.
farmboy
Mar 31, 09:00 AM
I reckon Lion will be the last of cat names used for OS X.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Sabertooth.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
Sabertooth.
ticman
Nov 20, 09:25 AM
I called two Apple stores in my state (Connecticut) and both are out. Available from their website with free shipping but a 2 to 3 week delay in shipping.
islanders
Jul 23, 11:50 PM
Also, I have been inconsistent in my post. On page 5 or so, I was crying for a roll out, then did a 180 after a little research.
Some call it speculation. It's also more fun if you don't research.
I�m going to cut my losses and leave it up to the pros.
I enjoyed the ride. Thanks for the responses!
Some call it speculation. It's also more fun if you don't research.
I�m going to cut my losses and leave it up to the pros.
I enjoyed the ride. Thanks for the responses!
tblrsa
Dec 15, 04:43 AM
Sophos does not seem to display these characteristics. That I've noticed.
True, but just recently for example AVG Free Edition literally killed tons of Windows 7 machines due to an buggy update which caused W7 to reboot into an endless loop. The AVG team got hit by an outcry from angry and desperate users in their forum. I don�t want things like that happen to my mac, i bought one to not have to bother about those issues.
True, but just recently for example AVG Free Edition literally killed tons of Windows 7 machines due to an buggy update which caused W7 to reboot into an endless loop. The AVG team got hit by an outcry from angry and desperate users in their forum. I don�t want things like that happen to my mac, i bought one to not have to bother about those issues.
cecildk9999
Nov 27, 06:15 AM
I want a device that I can check email on the go, sign documents, sketch a quick idea, circle an interesting part of an article for someone to look over, browse the web with ease, control my other computers/servers, take a picture and write some notes on it so that someone can get a better idea of what I'm thinking and countless other possibilities I haven't thought of.
I feel like this is the sort of market Apple would go for if they do consider going into some kind of 'tablet' machine. It doesn't have to move mountains, but be simplistic in form and function. I love the portability of my laptop, but would consider buying something like this if it let me do basic web surfing, play my iTunes music/videos, check email, and write with a slide-out style keyboard. But the challenge will be if they can get it at a $499 price point; that's my limit, at any rate. :(
I feel like this is the sort of market Apple would go for if they do consider going into some kind of 'tablet' machine. It doesn't have to move mountains, but be simplistic in form and function. I love the portability of my laptop, but would consider buying something like this if it let me do basic web surfing, play my iTunes music/videos, check email, and write with a slide-out style keyboard. But the challenge will be if they can get it at a $499 price point; that's my limit, at any rate. :(
kirk26
Aug 3, 12:00 PM
It's not scientific at all. No way in hell is it scientific. I should know, I'm a scientist, got a degree and everything.
I'm keeping this for my quote. Classic!
I'm keeping this for my quote. Classic!
zoran
Aug 2, 04:01 PM
??
ampd
Aug 7, 05:51 PM
Well after using a Powerbook G4 for the longest time which was given to me for work, i decided that today I would make my first mac purchase and bought the new mac pro... I finally made the complete leap and soon I will be fully rid of Windows as I will be running only Gentoo and OS X. I'm overjoyed that I will be getting my first mac however I know I won't be so happy seeing the credit card bill...heres what I got:
Two 3GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
Apple Wireless Keyboard and Apple wireless Mighty Mouse
Both Bluetooth 2.0+EDR and AirPort Extreme
250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s (Ill be adding in my 2 750gb hds)
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT 256MB (single-link DVI/dual-link DVI)
1GB (2 x 512MB)
1 x SuperDrive
Two 3GHz Dual-Core Intel Xeon
Apple Wireless Keyboard and Apple wireless Mighty Mouse
Both Bluetooth 2.0+EDR and AirPort Extreme
250GB 7200-rpm Serial ATA 3Gb/s (Ill be adding in my 2 750gb hds)
NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT 256MB (single-link DVI/dual-link DVI)
1GB (2 x 512MB)
1 x SuperDrive
fswmacguy
Apr 18, 02:52 PM
Release the hounds
Or what? You'll release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark they shoot bees at you?
Or what? You'll release the dogs? Or the bees? Or the dogs with bees in their mouth and when they bark they shoot bees at you?
ravenvii
May 4, 04:23 PM
the worst part is that we don't know if and how many points he had at the beginning, and/or if any monster or trap was pre-placed in the mansion. Nor we know the 'price-list" and stats of monsters and trap (all of which i think we should)
Actually, I can answer a few of those questions.
The villain isn't given any points prior to the start of the game, so as of round 1, he has 2 turns (points). There are no monsters nor traps pre-placed in the mansion.
As for the price-list and stats, that's secret.
As for your re-written rules, I'm taking your suggestion and cleaning it up, then putting it in the OP. With full credit, of course. ;)
Actually, I can answer a few of those questions.
The villain isn't given any points prior to the start of the game, so as of round 1, he has 2 turns (points). There are no monsters nor traps pre-placed in the mansion.
As for the price-list and stats, that's secret.
As for your re-written rules, I'm taking your suggestion and cleaning it up, then putting it in the OP. With full credit, of course. ;)
Shivetya
May 6, 05:22 AM
WOW.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
s8film40
Apr 5, 01:12 PM
I can understand Apple's concern here it could give the impression to an uneducated user that it is OK to jailbreak their phone since they are being encouraged to by what would seem like a legitimate source. I don't think it's much of an issue for Scion owners though as they are probably used to sub-par performance.
dagomike
Nov 3, 01:04 PM
So, Apple online is now shipping these?
Coincidentally I called today to cancel my order and they wouldn't let me. They said it was prepared to ship, but still telling me it will ship December 4th. What a painful conversation that was, but now I suppose it makes sense.
Coincidentally I called today to cancel my order and they wouldn't let me. They said it was prepared to ship, but still telling me it will ship December 4th. What a painful conversation that was, but now I suppose it makes sense.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
firestarter
Mar 31, 02:31 PM
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
Wow, a dollar a year!
Wow, a dollar a year!
H00513R
May 7, 10:10 AM
I don't want more people bogging down the system. I want them to improve their mail service with tagging, grouping and searching options. Oh, and I want .mac back! :)
KnightWRX
May 4, 06:58 PM
It's bootable (the, ahem, pirated versions of Lion are distributed as dmgs.)
That doesn't mean the App Store version is. Only that the "pirated" versions are. They could have been made bootable after the fact.
That doesn't mean the App Store version is. Only that the "pirated" versions are. They could have been made bootable after the fact.
J@ffa
Sep 11, 06:41 AM
If Front Row is going to power the streaming device, Apple are going to have to get it to people. Rolling it as a new OS feature as part of the 10.4.8 update sounds like the way to do that, no?
ehoui
May 5, 07:41 PM
Which is why, of course, US News reports that 6 out of the top 10 universities for engineering and IT are not in the US? Once upon a time the US owned that list.
Fine, but prove to me it's because of the metric system.
Fine, but prove to me it's because of the metric system.
neko girl
May 5, 11:14 PM
I don't know what a centimeter is when I'm eyeballing something.. and I don't want to. I run in miles, I measure in inches, I weigh in pounds. I'm not doing conversions to kilos or megas all the time in real life, so um..
Well.
I do more conversions metric to imperial than imperial to imperial. The imperial system isn't that hard to use, and I don't think it's mattered before what the rest of the world does anyway.
(:
Well.
I do more conversions metric to imperial than imperial to imperial. The imperial system isn't that hard to use, and I don't think it's mattered before what the rest of the world does anyway.
(:
daneoni
Aug 11, 12:18 PM
For all who are saying Merom is not necessarily better..64 bit who needs it/no apps for it....marginally faster....waste of time waiting for it. We know we dont NEED it but we still WANT it.
Think of your cellphones they have tons of features most of us hardly use but we still like the fact that we have those features should we need em. Its ancient geek behaviour we want the best/fastest/superior no matter how marginal or ridiculously illogical/impractical.
:D
Think of your cellphones they have tons of features most of us hardly use but we still like the fact that we have those features should we need em. Its ancient geek behaviour we want the best/fastest/superior no matter how marginal or ridiculously illogical/impractical.
:D
0 comments:
Post a Comment