GekkePrutser
Apr 6, 11:31 AM
There are with 18 Watts. Besides, wouldnt be the first time intel made special Cpus for Apple. So it isnt impossible an i3 even less than 18 special made for apple.
I think you mean the 380UM? But those aren't Sandy Bridge, they're Arrandales, and hopefully Apple won't go near them (they have left them alone so far even though they were already available at the time of the last update)
In Sandy Bridge there's only the i5/i7's mentioned already, and a celeron of 1.1 Ghz (called B847). That one's not even labeled i3. I really hope that one won't make it to the MBA. But even then there's only one so hopefully they'll offer an upgrade to i5/i7 in that case as the high-end CPU.
I think you mean the 380UM? But those aren't Sandy Bridge, they're Arrandales, and hopefully Apple won't go near them (they have left them alone so far even though they were already available at the time of the last update)
In Sandy Bridge there's only the i5/i7's mentioned already, and a celeron of 1.1 Ghz (called B847). That one's not even labeled i3. I really hope that one won't make it to the MBA. But even then there's only one so hopefully they'll offer an upgrade to i5/i7 in that case as the high-end CPU.
Doctor Q
Jul 14, 02:54 PM
... and the other one HD-DVD! :eek: ;) :DWhy all the smilies? Having the ability to install other-format optical drives is what AppleInsider is talking about.
Westside guy
Aug 7, 03:50 PM
Hey nice to see osx will have system restore =D
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
Time machine isn't even similar to MS's System Restore. Time Machine is basically like having CVS or Subversion underneath the file system. It rocks. I don't believe there's ever been anything like it on a client-type computer (a similar feature was present in the server OS VMS, I believe).
You might want to do some reading about CVS and Subversion.
Edit: Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be surprising to find that CVS/Subversion code is the foundation for Time Machine.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:19 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
sirgant
Nov 29, 02:44 AM
What on earth are these people at music studio's thinking!!! Did they get royalties for every stereo sold? NO, so neither should they get anything for iPod or any hardware sales. Only for the products THEY supply, should they get money, being the music and movies/ video's, in other words the content.
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
This is typical behaviour of music studio's and I sincerely hope that Apple will not budge, nor should any other company. Of course MS is eager to pay as they need their Zune to succeed, and Universal is riding along for a slice of the pie, but who will loose out in the end is the consumer, as these royalties are eventually going to get calculated such that we will pay them......
We should all start protesting all record companies to clean up their act, in the mean time, the general consumer should to, copying of music is stealing, the prices on iTunes are fair and reasonable, so lets be nice and buy them properly, and the record companies can then make sure there is more for us to buy (some real refreshing new music would be nice, instead of all this "X factor, American idol, etc etc manufactured stuff....) , and not just fill their pockets as they are trying to do all the time
It's not music studios, but record companies, they are not the same entities.
A couple of things to clarify. I am actually a producer, who has a pre-existing deal with MCA/Universal Music Publishers.
1. Doug Morris, Chairman of Universal is a greedy bastard, who I wouldn't trust as far as I could throw him.
2. Artists, Songwriters & Producers are already getting screwed by major labels, not accounting properly, holding millions of dollars, using creative accounting practices etc.
3. The percentage breakdown with ITMS and labels is basically 65/35 as it is rounded off to the 100 in favor of the labels.
4. The real culprit here is Microsoft, who is whoring out Zunes in order to get a foothold on the marketplace. Consumers can speak with their pocketbooks, don't buy the crappy Zune players, but support your artists & songwriters who make a living off of sales, by purchasing music.
Thanks
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 06:03 PM
According to Wikipedia It was released in Feb before the iPhone was released..
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
The iPhone was revealed on January 9th 2007. It didn't ship until June due to regulatory approval.
Multimedia
Aug 26, 07:50 PM
I Just Hope Apple Joins The Rest Of The Manufacturers In This Mass Announcement. I'm afraid they won't due to EGO problems. :rolleyes: In this case, I wish they wouldn't "Think Differently".
applebb
Apr 7, 11:27 PM
You people don't know the facts and are jumping to conclusions. You need to realize that this is a RUMOR site....
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 05:07 PM
It never ceases to amaze me at how many Android users have to flock to a site called "MacRumors" because they feel then need to lead us poor blinded Apple "fanboys" to the bright shining city on a hill that is Android paradise.
Android has taken fanboyism to epic new proportions. You can't go anywhere on the Web these days without the Android Brigade screaming at you about how awesome, "free" and "open" it is and how you should get on board. Just post the comment "ANDROID FTW!!!" on Engadget and watch the upvotes ensue. And while they're celebrating their epic market share gains, they are referring to iOS users as "sheep." Riiiight.
I thought the Apple vs Microsoft holy war was bad (and we have at least one pro MS astroturfer on this Apple-oriented site), but Google seriously has a mindlock on some of these people. (I'm not referring to all Android users, mind you, only the ranting/raving types (which seem to be the majority these days).
Android has taken fanboyism to epic new proportions. You can't go anywhere on the Web these days without the Android Brigade screaming at you about how awesome, "free" and "open" it is and how you should get on board. Just post the comment "ANDROID FTW!!!" on Engadget and watch the upvotes ensue. And while they're celebrating their epic market share gains, they are referring to iOS users as "sheep." Riiiight.
I thought the Apple vs Microsoft holy war was bad (and we have at least one pro MS astroturfer on this Apple-oriented site), but Google seriously has a mindlock on some of these people. (I'm not referring to all Android users, mind you, only the ranting/raving types (which seem to be the majority these days).
dethmaShine
Apr 20, 07:44 AM
No, it was shown at IFA 2006 for the first time but "officially presented" a few months later.
It wasn't shown; it was announced. Get your facts right.
ANd you design hardware in a couple of weeks?
Doesnt really matter LG prada wich has simular concept and specs was designed AND shown over a month before iphone was ever shown.
LG can see the future?
Apple copies, samsung copies, LG copies,... everybody does it only only always wants to make believe everyone copies from them.
No. I don't think that's possible; but samsung didn't ship it until later. So, that could have been a testing unit meant for a future release. Samsung had touch screen plans but could have easily ripped off the design. No big deal there.
It wasn't shown; it was announced. Get your facts right.
ANd you design hardware in a couple of weeks?
Doesnt really matter LG prada wich has simular concept and specs was designed AND shown over a month before iphone was ever shown.
LG can see the future?
Apple copies, samsung copies, LG copies,... everybody does it only only always wants to make believe everyone copies from them.
No. I don't think that's possible; but samsung didn't ship it until later. So, that could have been a testing unit meant for a future release. Samsung had touch screen plans but could have easily ripped off the design. No big deal there.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Because they hoped people will grow up and educate themselfs. That never happened obviously.
Obviously. ;)
Obviously. ;)
Pro31
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
If you bought 2 Xooms would you have a Mazda?
AppleScruff1
Apr 11, 05:46 PM
Iphone 5 on Sprint?
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
Verizon will buy Sprint since AT&T is buying TMobile.
iris_failsafe
Nov 28, 06:33 PM
Those idiots never learn...
They will bring their industry to its knees until one day noone will use them...
I don't think Stevo we'll even or should discuss the subject...
They will bring their industry to its knees until one day noone will use them...
I don't think Stevo we'll even or should discuss the subject...
maclaptop
Apr 12, 11:03 PM
The sheer amount of people posting here, saying they're moving from iPhone if the new model is delayed significantly is quite telling really.
We're a community that thrives on tech news, but the average joe doesn't care and if his/her contract is up dior renewal between June and the release date and there's no new iPhone to fill that void, chances are they AREN'T going to hang around for iPhone 5.
I've had iPhones on the 'odd numbered cycles' (ie. 1 and 3) and I really am thinking of switching. I don't want the hassle of having to wait 2/3/4/however many months. Call me fickle, or having no patience, but MY OPINION is that Apple just isn't keeping up with competition.
As much as I like Apple products, I believe you have some very valid points. My iPhone 4 is a good phone, but its not Apples best work. Its well documented that the engineers discovered the antenna fault well in advance of launch, advised Steve Jobs and he waived it off, ignoring them. Its that cavalier attitude that will at some point come back and bite them.
Yet Steve has cultivated a massive cadre of followers that will live in defense and denial, while worshipping his every move. They have closed their minds to anything outside of Apples walled garden. I can see how attractive they find it, simple and easy.
That said the choices like Android are the very reason our free enterprise system works so well. If the Google OS was as bad as it's made out to be in this forum, I can assure you there would not be the thousands of posts about it, that appear in this forum.
Viva Le Choice
We're a community that thrives on tech news, but the average joe doesn't care and if his/her contract is up dior renewal between June and the release date and there's no new iPhone to fill that void, chances are they AREN'T going to hang around for iPhone 5.
I've had iPhones on the 'odd numbered cycles' (ie. 1 and 3) and I really am thinking of switching. I don't want the hassle of having to wait 2/3/4/however many months. Call me fickle, or having no patience, but MY OPINION is that Apple just isn't keeping up with competition.
As much as I like Apple products, I believe you have some very valid points. My iPhone 4 is a good phone, but its not Apples best work. Its well documented that the engineers discovered the antenna fault well in advance of launch, advised Steve Jobs and he waived it off, ignoring them. Its that cavalier attitude that will at some point come back and bite them.
Yet Steve has cultivated a massive cadre of followers that will live in defense and denial, while worshipping his every move. They have closed their minds to anything outside of Apples walled garden. I can see how attractive they find it, simple and easy.
That said the choices like Android are the very reason our free enterprise system works so well. If the Google OS was as bad as it's made out to be in this forum, I can assure you there would not be the thousands of posts about it, that appear in this forum.
Viva Le Choice
andiwm2003
Jul 27, 01:19 PM
How about a new Mac at WWDC?
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
prepare to be disappointed.
and your prices are $500 to low anyway.
Lower Model:
CConroe E6300 - 1.86 GHz � FSB1066 � 2 MB cache - ($185)
1GB RAM
160GB Serial ATA hard drive
Double-layer SuperDrive (DVD+R DL/DVD�RW/CD-RW)
One open PCI-Express expansion slot
One open Optical drive slot [maybe] (i.e. for 2nd DVD drive)
Graphics Card with 128MB SDRAM
Built-in AirPort Extreme and Bluetooth 2.0, USB/FW800
Remote [(?] I think this box will still be small enough to fit into home entertainment setups.]
Keyboard, Mighty Mouse...................................................... $999
Some Options:
Conroe E6600 - 2.40 GHz � FSB1066 � 4 MB cache � (+$100)
Wireless Keyboard/Mouse +$60
Add DVD/CD ROM drive (in 2nd slot) + $50
250GB SATA hard drive +$75
+1GB RAM (2GB total) +$100
+3GB RAM (4GB total) +$300
Slightly Better Graphics Card with 256MB SDRAM + $50
Much Better Graphics Card +$200+
prepare to be disappointed.
and your prices are $500 to low anyway.
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.
tekmoe
Jul 27, 02:57 PM
Actually, the merom in not completely compatible with the yonah chips. There will have to be some redesign on Apple's part that is supposed to delay the new MBPs. This article somewhat explains it:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
Also, since Apple is now kind of competeing with PCs who get the newest and fastest, it would be in Apple's best interest to get these chips in MBPs asap. Also, it is easy to see that a lot of people are waiting to purchase a new Apple laptop with this technology. MBP's current sales are going to slump from here on out until this technology is put into some new computers.
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
Also, since Apple is now kind of competeing with PCs who get the newest and fastest, it would be in Apple's best interest to get these chips in MBPs asap. Also, it is easy to see that a lot of people are waiting to purchase a new Apple laptop with this technology. MBP's current sales are going to slump from here on out until this technology is put into some new computers.
this blog was also written by jason o'grady, aka the PowerPage rumor site. his writing means nothing to me.
gmfeier
Apr 11, 12:59 PM
I was already pushing it to wait this long with my 3G. I don't think I can wait another 4 months+ from June.
When does the EVO 2 come out?
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
When does the EVO 2 come out?
Not sure I believe the rumors, but as long as my 3G still works, I'll wait. $200 every 3 years is better than $200 every 2 years.
jhedges3
Aug 11, 02:40 PM
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I couldn't care less about whether my phone works well in the EU. What is your data on the percentage of consumers that travel the world to such an extent that they purchase their phones with inter-country usability as their primary consideration?
What maters to me more, not most, is that the phone works well were I make the majority of calls, New York. The majority of people I know do the same. Some people are willing to sacrifice network for phone and a few extra dollars a month, they pref TM and similar carriers. Others want to have better network and get VW and pay for that accordingly.
It seems to me that there is some level of implicit, or not so implicit, EU v US on both sides here. To the person in the EU they should have it first cause, LEST WE NOT FORGET, most of them are using a standard with 81% of the world.
But does anyone really believe that App would bring a phone to market without making it widely available to US consumers, regardless of whether we�re in the 19% minority? Is there any history of this? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods late here? Have they ever, for example, released new gen iPods in Sweden first and had the rest of us in the US buying them on eBay from the lucky ones in Stockholm? It simply wouldn�t make sense.
But it�s not even worth fighting over. The availability of any App phone will be sufficient to include nearly all of us; which is to say that if they release such a product all dedicated App consumers will be able to get one on some carrier at some cost.
georgee2face
Mar 22, 02:17 PM
I hear that the PlayBook is really easy to hold one-handed. If you know what I mean.
it un-nerves me that I think I do! :)
it un-nerves me that I think I do! :)
~Shard~
Jul 15, 01:31 PM
The point is that Apple doesn't have an option for potential buyers that want a high performance, customisable and upgradable consumer level product (not all-in-one). There are no Apple product to compare those $1199 Conroe PCs to. The closest thing is the iMac.
Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...
A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:
Exactly. As I said above, a PowerMac is overkill (on both price and power) for many users. The iMac might suit their needs from this perspective, however many people do not like the fact that they are not upgradeable (apart from the RAM). What if I want a larger HDD in my iMac? What if I want two HDDs? What if I want to swap in a new burner? What if the HDD fails? It would be nice to pop a new one in, not have to buy a whole new machine. And then there's the display. If the HDD goes, as in my example above, how many people would like to throw away that nice 20" display which still works perfectly? Or, vice versa, what if the display goes? The rest of the computer is perfectly fine...
A Conroe mini-tower would be perfect for many people. The gap between Mac mini/iMac and PowerMac is simply too large for many people. :cool:
Piggie
Mar 23, 02:40 AM
When will RIM realize that nothing they can create, have created, or ever will create can be as good as something created by Apple? Some companies: Google, Microsoft, and RIM will just never learn.
Steve Jobs = Genius
It depends how you define "Good" does it not?
For some people an iMac or an iPad would be a useless device, and a PC with a Honeycomb tablet could be the ideal combination for them.
It's all down to what you want something to do.
Steve Jobs = Genius
It depends how you define "Good" does it not?
For some people an iMac or an iPad would be a useless device, and a PC with a Honeycomb tablet could be the ideal combination for them.
It's all down to what you want something to do.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 12:23 PM
Funny also that we heard a DAMN THING from the media regarding the fact that ONLY CONGRESS can declare war.
It's funny too how a GOP controlled House of Representatives found it so important to spend time debating whether to defund NPR, but couldn't find the time to debate the value of using the military in Libya.
Though, for what it's worth, I'd much rather we returned to the constitutional practice of getting approval from congress before committing ourselves to military intervention.
It's funny too how a GOP controlled House of Representatives found it so important to spend time debating whether to defund NPR, but couldn't find the time to debate the value of using the military in Libya.
Though, for what it's worth, I'd much rather we returned to the constitutional practice of getting approval from congress before committing ourselves to military intervention.
No comments:
Post a Comment