anim8or
Aug 27, 02:26 PM
I really hope that they keep the option for a matte screen open when the upgraded MacBook Pros finally arrive.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....
twoodcc
Aug 12, 09:04 PM
I don't really care if you count the Prologues as full releases or not. The fact remains...
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
GT1 + GT2 + GT3 + GT4 = 46M
...not 57M like you originally, and incorrectly, said.
but you do care. you are pointing out that you care by what you just typed. if you count the prologues, you get over 57M sold.
You brought up sales, not me. And last I checked, objectively, 100 is more than 57, regardless of how you subjectively look at it.
i disagree. let's bring math into the equation, since you seem to have missed it.
100,000,000/15 = 6,666,667.
57,000,000/8 = 7,125,000.
so GT has sold more copies per game.
No, the only thing that adds to is a stat point on the back of the box. I mean, hooray, someone's 87 CRX is in a racing game. YAY!! :rolleyes:
That is the problem with GT these days. Too much fluff, and lacking in the racing. I mean, whatever, they can make whatever kind of game they want. If they want to fill the game with 1000 cars, 800 of which most people never touch, they can do that. To me, though, they are losing what made the series great years ago.
well again this is your opinion. we all have one. i personally think that if someone is into cars, they will care about their car. not everyone can afford the cars in the game, but it might be nice to see that car that you can afford and have in real life in the game. i mean, the game is meant for people into cars.
NO WAY!!! I never knew that. :rolleyes:
just pointing out the facts. are you doing any different?
Sure, but a "Guinness Record" for it? Again, to much fluff.
they have records for everything. like how much cheese you can eat, or whatever. that's what Guinness Records are
No, it is a concept car that Citro�n paraded around at car shows. Lots of concept cars get built with the fake intention of going into production. But you know what? Almost none of them do. This Citro�n is no different.
but the intention of the car was for the game. how do you not see that? specifically for the game. in fact, it's named GT after the game
My point is, he was trying to use GT's high sales as a quantifier of the series greatness. Then, when I showed 2 examples of other racing game series with higher sales, he said they were different types of racing games, and that they don't count. Which is understandable, because they are not the same type of game. But then, ultimately, as I said before, if you don't count those other types of racing games, you're really only comparing GT to Forza, since that is the only other similar game.
But what does that prove? A game series that has been out for almost 13 years has sold more than a similar type of game series that has only been out for a little over 5 years. Big shock there. I'll be the first to admit that Forza isn't even remotely close to as big of a sales hit as the GT series. But, like I've said before, liking a game is a subjective thing, and everyone is entitled to their own choices. But sales are an objective thing, that has no relevance to somethings greatness.
how does sales have no relevance if something is great? so iPhone sales show nothing to how good it is? or iPod sales mean nothing to how well it is? of course it does. you make games to sell. if they don't sell, you stop making games. and then there wouldn't be this thread, b/c there would be no GT5.
iliketyla
Apr 6, 02:03 PM
Motorola not selling any units of a crappy product? Huh... who'd have thought.
I wish they'd start banning people who makes baseless comments like this.
I wish they'd start banning people who makes baseless comments like this.
ugp
Jun 22, 09:32 AM
ugp,
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
Yes I was. Mine was the first one generated in the district so my buddy was told by his DM. He closed my ticket out as soon as the clock struck 1PM EST here.
Just got word. My buddy was just updated that he would not be allowed nor any other store is going to be authorized to open early due to the restricted Inventory levels. Radio Shack does not want to give the wrong image of the need to open early with such low levels of product at launch.
He has not received any info on how much product he would get but the memo hinted at that there would be no extra phones sent to store to the amount of reserves they had.
Were there any PINS given in your store?
Please keep us updated. We look forward to it.
Thanks
Yes I was. Mine was the first one generated in the district so my buddy was told by his DM. He closed my ticket out as soon as the clock struck 1PM EST here.
Just got word. My buddy was just updated that he would not be allowed nor any other store is going to be authorized to open early due to the restricted Inventory levels. Radio Shack does not want to give the wrong image of the need to open early with such low levels of product at launch.
He has not received any info on how much product he would get but the memo hinted at that there would be no extra phones sent to store to the amount of reserves they had.
fatfish
Aug 7, 10:17 PM
Any ideas on whether we will be able to make our own stationary templates in mail ???
rayz
Aug 8, 03:08 AM
Well I for one was kind of disappointed. Leopard is sort of Apple's chance to prove they can out-Vista Vista, and I'm not really sure what we saw today does it. I've been following Vista somewhat closely, and it really does catch Windows up to OS X in terms of features and prettiness.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
I really think most of the features shown off today are already present in Windows (I've definitely heard about all of them before) or will be in Vista, and it's too bad Apple didn't have anything truly innovative to show us. Hopefully those secret features are something good...
The other thing that has me a little concerned is the huge amount of Vista-bashing that went on. I feel like if Leopard at this point were truly better than Vista, they'd be silent about Vista entirely and let the new system speak for itself. That would be really slick. That's not what happened however, and instead there was a lot of "look what Vista copied from us" and "check out how much better Leopard is." What I saw today, though, makes the former statement sound whiney and the latter sound foolish, since in my eyes, in terms of features, they're about on-par with each other.
I really hope Apple pulls it together. They've got to do this right, because come next year, most of the myriad reasons for switching to a Mac will be nullified by Vista.
BTW: whoever this "Platform Experience" guy is, get him off the stage and go back to Steve.
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago, and everything else is an upgrade rather than anything really new. I was expecting more from the desktop switching, but I have a feeling that will look much different when it's actually released.
But since there is some other stuff planned, then it's best to wait and see what they come up with, before declaring it a dud.
Looks like a nice solid revision so far, but not much else.
.. and given the universal unpopularity of Microsoft's Flip3D interface, I was surprised to see it showing up in the UI for TimeMachine.
maclaptop
Apr 19, 08:02 PM
You're missing the point. It's more fun to come to an Apple rumors site and irrationally bait the residents into irrationally baiting you into irrationally...well, you get the point. :rolleyes:
This post is the best I've read in ages. Well Done.
Simply Exemplary :)
This post is the best I've read in ages. Well Done.
Simply Exemplary :)
Motley
Nov 28, 06:14 PM
Hadn't seen it posted yet:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
Coming off of their deal with Zune, Universal is now considering getting money for each iPod sold.
Why Thank you Microsoft! (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyid=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml):mad:
satzzz
Aug 19, 05:52 PM
There's allready en new beta of Adobe's Lightroom, Does that one run native under on the intel machines?
mkjj
Jul 21, 06:23 AM
This time I had to create a new profile though and in the profile where the resume was everything worked fine ACCEPT !!!
Sorry, you have not got the job at MS because you can't spell EXCEPT
Regards
BillG
Sorry, you have not got the job at MS because you can't spell EXCEPT
Regards
BillG
Kranchammer
Mar 31, 06:24 PM
I would add I never understand the comparison of Smartphones running Android to smartphones running IOS.
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
Hey, you! No rationality allowed in this here thread. Vitriol, stereotypes, and blanket generalizations only!
Shame on you. ;)
Neither Google or Apple sell their phone operating systems, and the Android spectrum is made up of 50 handsets from 10 different manufacturers who are in direct competition with each other. They are not one big group working together to take on Apple. It makes absolutely zero sense to make that kind of comparison.
It is just as weird as loping off iPod and iPad IOS users...
If people want to compare smartphones, then compare actual sales of individual smartphones, each which only use one OS. People should not draw meaningless lines in the sand lumping all android based handsets together, because they are not together other than they run android. They might as well compare black phones to white phones.
I imagine if you made a chart of the top selling smartphones in the last 5 years, it would consist of the iPhone 4, the iPhone 3GS, the iPhone 3G and the iPhone.
Why not group smartphones by what kind of graphics chip they have or what type of memory chip they use? The OS is irrelevant. Nobody in the smartphone business is directly making money off any of these oses, it is a stupid way to categorize smart phones.
Of course it happens because if they didn't lump them together it would look absurd with Apple totally dominating the smart phone market with their latest phone every year while 100 android commodity phones all have tiny market shares just to get replaced by the next one.
How does HTC running android OS benefit or relate to a Motorola phone running android? It does not, at all.
Hey, you! No rationality allowed in this here thread. Vitriol, stereotypes, and blanket generalizations only!
Shame on you. ;)
gta50419
Mar 26, 10:51 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS?
what $500 product?
what $500 product?
7on
Sep 19, 08:21 AM
I purchased my 1.83GHz Mac Book with 1GHz of RAM on Sep 07, and apple sent me an email that it was going to be shipped on the 18th. Today I got this email from Apple "
Short Hair Styles Photos
If you#39;re planning the wedding
Cute Short Hair For Wedding
kim kardashian hair updo.
short hair updo style
short wedding hair styles
Reacent Post
Tommy Wasabi
Apr 25, 04:36 PM
Block box in your car tracks not only where you are but the speed in which you are traveling. These black boxes are used by the insurance company if you get in an accident.
The phone company tracks where you are - and it is stored and can be requested by any law enforcement agency and have the data within 10 minutes of the submission.
I wonder if people are going to sue the auto industry, the insurance industry, and the phone companies.
Oh wait, this is American, land of lawyers - give them until Friday to write their brief and file in a some courthouse located in the Eastern District of Texas.
The phone company tracks where you are - and it is stored and can be requested by any law enforcement agency and have the data within 10 minutes of the submission.
I wonder if people are going to sue the auto industry, the insurance industry, and the phone companies.
Oh wait, this is American, land of lawyers - give them until Friday to write their brief and file in a some courthouse located in the Eastern District of Texas.
aegisdesign
Sep 13, 11:55 AM
Lets not forget things like Spotlight that can now run more rigorously without affecting CPU resource much. You will get more intelligent software that can prepare for what you want to do so that when you go to do it it will be much more responsive. In other words just because some tasks cannot be easily broken up to leverage multiple cores doesn't mean that tasks such as those cannot be speculative run by software on idle cores in preparation for you doing the task.
Yes, that's definitely true. And I'd be happy to divert a whole core just to frickin WindowServer. :D
Yes, that's definitely true. And I'd be happy to divert a whole core just to frickin WindowServer. :D
mlrproducts
Aug 11, 10:20 AM
Hurry up and take my money Apple! Here is my wishlist, the first section is PLAUSIBLE:
1) Released for GSM sim cards (probable, maybe support for CDMA later on)
2) Bluetooth (well, I think this is a given)
3) Good integration with iCal, Mail, etc
Now what I WANT that might not happen:
4) Not tied to a service provider
5) Affordable LOL
6) Wifi built in
7) Modem support for dialup over GSM
8) Lightweight, small FF
1) Released for GSM sim cards (probable, maybe support for CDMA later on)
2) Bluetooth (well, I think this is a given)
3) Good integration with iCal, Mail, etc
Now what I WANT that might not happen:
4) Not tied to a service provider
5) Affordable LOL
6) Wifi built in
7) Modem support for dialup over GSM
8) Lightweight, small FF
MacRumors
Nov 28, 06:24 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Reuters reports (http://today.reuters.com/news/articlenews.aspx?type=technologyNews&storyID=2006-11-28T213349Z_01_N28267036_RTRUKOC_0_US-MEDIA-SUMMIT-UNIVERSALMUSIC-IPOD.xml&WTmodLoc=TechNewsHome_C2_technologyNews-1) that Universal Music Group Chief Executive said on Tuesday that they may seek a royalty from Apple for iPod sales:
"It would be a nice idea. We have a negotiation coming up not too far. I don't see why we wouldn't do that... but maybe not in the same way,"
Universal made news earlier this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/11/20061109124909.shtml) when it was reported that Microsoft had agreed to pay Universal Music a fee for every new Zune Music Player sold. Music studios, of course, currently get a cut from every song sold, but do not get any percentage of iPod sales.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
daneoni
Aug 26, 03:51 PM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
Megadooomer
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Except the biggest spec is missing from it: compatible with the Apple App Store. Sorry, specs are not the end all and be all of device popularity. What good are specs if few developers write the device?
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
nwcs
Mar 25, 10:39 PM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
Just what I think anyway.
Um, there's only been one release since leopard. Too soon to know if Lion will wow or not.
BC2009
Apr 7, 11:50 PM
As an example; lets say the local BB store got a 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G's in this morning. That is about $830K in sales. And lets say they average sales without the iPad 2 for the same day LY was $500K. Next year that manager would be looking at needing a $1.3M+ to make his goal.
Good example, bad math. 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G = $830 x 100 = $83,000, not $830K. If Best Buy stores were pulling in $1M+ per day or even $500k+ per day then their stock would go through the roof.
I concur with you on the whole bean counter thing. I work for a large company and its amazing to me how much money bean counters waste in their attempts to save a few pennies. We once spent over $10,000 in time (when computing hourly wage by salary) to purchase a $100 piece of software because the bean counters tried to make us jump through hoops to prove we really really could not do without it. It was sad.
Good example, bad math. 100 iPad 2 64GB 3G = $830 x 100 = $83,000, not $830K. If Best Buy stores were pulling in $1M+ per day or even $500k+ per day then their stock would go through the roof.
I concur with you on the whole bean counter thing. I work for a large company and its amazing to me how much money bean counters waste in their attempts to save a few pennies. We once spent over $10,000 in time (when computing hourly wage by salary) to purchase a $100 piece of software because the bean counters tried to make us jump through hoops to prove we really really could not do without it. It was sad.
The Beatles
Apr 25, 03:16 PM
Asinine
how did they think the location based features on any app worked? This is just a cashed file for those purposes.
And what about all the location based advertising? So it takes this to make people understand that the world has changed? This is old news and ridiculous that people are now making a scene about it. How about signing electronically at a credit card purchase machine. How about giving someone a check with your account number on the bottom of it. How about electronically giving your personal and sensitive info over the internet.
This is how it is people. You bought in to it a long time ago. Its what it takes to move forward. And the only reason why this is a bad thing is because people fail to police themselves. Including the people that attain this info, and thats why we will eventually have some negative repercussion from this collection of data.
But to pin point apple and create a federal case out of something that the government already new was happening is ridiculous.
how did they think the location based features on any app worked? This is just a cashed file for those purposes.
And what about all the location based advertising? So it takes this to make people understand that the world has changed? This is old news and ridiculous that people are now making a scene about it. How about signing electronically at a credit card purchase machine. How about giving someone a check with your account number on the bottom of it. How about electronically giving your personal and sensitive info over the internet.
This is how it is people. You bought in to it a long time ago. Its what it takes to move forward. And the only reason why this is a bad thing is because people fail to police themselves. Including the people that attain this info, and thats why we will eventually have some negative repercussion from this collection of data.
But to pin point apple and create a federal case out of something that the government already new was happening is ridiculous.
savar
Sep 13, 07:14 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Man, I don't know why people keep saying this. On OS X, *all software utilizes the extra cores*. The only way it wouldn't is if you have less than 8 processes running, which I guarantee you that you don't. (System alone requires 20-30 processes to run.)
Granted, 8 cores won't make Mail open up faster, but there are still plenty of ways to use those cores, and that's only going to increase as apps are re-written to be more heavily multi-threaded.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
Man, I don't know why people keep saying this. On OS X, *all software utilizes the extra cores*. The only way it wouldn't is if you have less than 8 processes running, which I guarantee you that you don't. (System alone requires 20-30 processes to run.)
Granted, 8 cores won't make Mail open up faster, but there are still plenty of ways to use those cores, and that's only going to increase as apps are re-written to be more heavily multi-threaded.
0 comments:
Post a Comment