tsugaru
Mar 22, 04:03 PM
Is it necessary these days? Back in 1999 it was still difficult days to just get video going at a good rate. These days it isn't hard to get good graphics.
What would be the use of redundant graphics? It must be a very small wedge of the market.
Not everyone wants a GPU for graphics. Some want it for games. Some want it for CUDA/OpenCL. Some want it for future proofing (kind of an oxymoron with a Mac, but that's another story.)
Apple has been pushing the 'good enough' mantra on iOS users for a while now. Specs aren't the greatest, but it's good enough and the software does well. It doesn't always work that way in (real) computers. There are always customers who want/need a bit more.
And not redundant graphics. I had meant Apple should be doing the latest and greatest again regarding their GPUs, like they did way way way back when. I should have just typed it all out. I'm in a slight food induced coma now.
What would be the use of redundant graphics? It must be a very small wedge of the market.
Not everyone wants a GPU for graphics. Some want it for games. Some want it for CUDA/OpenCL. Some want it for future proofing (kind of an oxymoron with a Mac, but that's another story.)
Apple has been pushing the 'good enough' mantra on iOS users for a while now. Specs aren't the greatest, but it's good enough and the software does well. It doesn't always work that way in (real) computers. There are always customers who want/need a bit more.
And not redundant graphics. I had meant Apple should be doing the latest and greatest again regarding their GPUs, like they did way way way back when. I should have just typed it all out. I'm in a slight food induced coma now.
maccompaq
Feb 9, 02:38 PM
it's a nice gesture, but anti-virus software on osx is about as useful as tits on a boar.
You are far too generous.
You are far too generous.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 03:47 AM
Now mind you, I say this as an investor, not as an enthusiast.
Is it just me, or is going public the WORST thing a company could do? When they do that, they get these crybabies who whine "I'm an INVESTOR and I DEMAND immediate results! I insist on my short-term ROI that you deliver! Don't you realize that I have invested xxxxx dollars in your company, therefore you owe me big time!".
Well boo-frigging-hoo!
Is it just me, or is going public the WORST thing a company could do? When they do that, they get these crybabies who whine "I'm an INVESTOR and I DEMAND immediate results! I insist on my short-term ROI that you deliver! Don't you realize that I have invested xxxxx dollars in your company, therefore you owe me big time!".
Well boo-frigging-hoo!
kevin2i
Apr 30, 04:16 PM
USB3 is dead tech. You'll never see it on a Mac. Would be VERY surprised to see eSATA, as well.
eSata works great, just plug into a SATA port on the motherboard, and insert the external connector in a vacant PC-card slot. (6 Sata ports on the MB) ... of course only works if you have a Mac Pro. iMacs sure are pretty, but gotta have options (like 4 HD's plus SSD in the case).
Yup. Not sure why people are surprised that the machine with Thunderbolt came out before the drives/peripherals. Do you really think it would happen the other way around?
Compare:
"Here's a computer with a port that you can't use yet, but will be able to soon as peripherals are built. You can still use the rest of the computer, though"
to
"Here's a peripheral with a port that isn't supported by any computers yet. There should be something out soon, though"
Not really a tough decision, eh?
Haha, exactly. And the port is still a working display port right now.
eSata works great, just plug into a SATA port on the motherboard, and insert the external connector in a vacant PC-card slot. (6 Sata ports on the MB) ... of course only works if you have a Mac Pro. iMacs sure are pretty, but gotta have options (like 4 HD's plus SSD in the case).
Yup. Not sure why people are surprised that the machine with Thunderbolt came out before the drives/peripherals. Do you really think it would happen the other way around?
Compare:
"Here's a computer with a port that you can't use yet, but will be able to soon as peripherals are built. You can still use the rest of the computer, though"
to
"Here's a peripheral with a port that isn't supported by any computers yet. There should be something out soon, though"
Not really a tough decision, eh?
Haha, exactly. And the port is still a working display port right now.
Chris Bangle
Aug 31, 01:44 PM
LONDON,why would they do it in London? obviously so that tv shows and films to be made availble to all of europe except for France. Its so simple. I cant wait. And films in USA of course. Thats whats gonna happen. Its soooo obvious.
Come on top gear on itunes.
Come on top gear on itunes.
QCassidy352
Sep 13, 09:02 PM
arn very rarely posts info from his own sources. When he does, that info is always correct. I'd bet a good deal of my savings that the iphone will look very similar to that pic.
segfaultdotorg
May 3, 11:38 AM
Great update� waiting for the usual suspects to come around to list any [unreasonable] cons :p�
No coupon for a free Lion upgrade. Lame.
No coupon for a free Lion upgrade. Lame.
growlf
Mar 23, 05:08 PM
This is setting a very dangerous precedent for app removals if it goes through.
Exactly. This made me download Trapster, which warns of flooded roads, construction, etc. Perhaps you (all the people saying it should be pulled) should research the app first.
In addition, I just had the pleasure of going through a sobriety checkpoint a few weeks ago. I rarely drink - gives me an amazing headache, which has earned me the ridicule of college friends for years... it took 20 minutes to get through the checkpoint, and I felt embarrassed and harassed.
Sorry folks, we don't live in a police state. If you want to have police checkpoints everywhere to track your movements, yeah remove this. Otherwise, give those of us who don't feel like having bright lights shined at us and being talked down-to by the cops a way to avoid it.
BTW, can the government demonstrate any impact on law enforcement through the use of websites/apps that display this information? Don't blindly support things that have no data to back them up.
Exactly. This made me download Trapster, which warns of flooded roads, construction, etc. Perhaps you (all the people saying it should be pulled) should research the app first.
In addition, I just had the pleasure of going through a sobriety checkpoint a few weeks ago. I rarely drink - gives me an amazing headache, which has earned me the ridicule of college friends for years... it took 20 minutes to get through the checkpoint, and I felt embarrassed and harassed.
Sorry folks, we don't live in a police state. If you want to have police checkpoints everywhere to track your movements, yeah remove this. Otherwise, give those of us who don't feel like having bright lights shined at us and being talked down-to by the cops a way to avoid it.
BTW, can the government demonstrate any impact on law enforcement through the use of websites/apps that display this information? Don't blindly support things that have no data to back them up.
spydr
Sep 21, 09:25 PM
I have an idea:
Sell Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest in a High Definition format to test the waters. I think a lot of people would buy it in HD since they already have computers capable of decoding it. Why the need to invest in an expensive HD DVD player?
Already I hear people grumbling that downloading these sub-DVD quality movies taking couple of hours even with high speed cable connections. HD quality would be about 6-8 times larger in file size and could take a day to download. Not sure if we are there yet...in terms of bandwidth.
Sell Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest in a High Definition format to test the waters. I think a lot of people would buy it in HD since they already have computers capable of decoding it. Why the need to invest in an expensive HD DVD player?
Already I hear people grumbling that downloading these sub-DVD quality movies taking couple of hours even with high speed cable connections. HD quality would be about 6-8 times larger in file size and could take a day to download. Not sure if we are there yet...in terms of bandwidth.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 12:56 PM
Well if it gives you 64 bit memory addressing then it certainly is a newer chip I'm not sure what you where expecting an new front side bus maybe? Maybe the chip set (945) is a modest upgrade but in the case of he IMac if it were implemented would have resulted in a larger address space for the PC. That is a real change. It is interesting that Apple apparently didn't implement Napa64 in the new iMac, I do wonder why as the release dates almost coincide.
As for Santa Rosa what there is so important to you that you want to wait? Just curious as I'm far from being in a position to purchase a new PC at the moment so this discussion doesn't really matter. It is more of a technical interest than anything else.http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
That sounds like a description for the old D model but you are saying a single die. Frankly it sounds like a dead end processor to me. Communications between the two subsections should be via a separate communications path. I have this feeling that the manufactures are rushing to quad core a little to fast.
DaveYou are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
As for Santa Rosa what there is so important to you that you want to wait? Just curious as I'm far from being in a position to purchase a new PC at the moment so this discussion doesn't really matter. It is more of a technical interest than anything else.http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
That sounds like a description for the old D model but you are saying a single die. Frankly it sounds like a dead end processor to me. Communications between the two subsections should be via a separate communications path. I have this feeling that the manufactures are rushing to quad core a little to fast.
DaveYou are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
Dmac77
Mar 23, 07:16 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Don't do it Apple!
Seriously, apps like trapster have saved my ass from the doughnut eating porkers in my area (not DUI, rather speeding). Seriously don't give into the government, they just want the police to be able to slowly rape more and more of our rights and freedoms (including my right to do 75 on a empty back road if I want to).
-Don
Don't do it Apple!
Seriously, apps like trapster have saved my ass from the doughnut eating porkers in my area (not DUI, rather speeding). Seriously don't give into the government, they just want the police to be able to slowly rape more and more of our rights and freedoms (including my right to do 75 on a empty back road if I want to).
-Don
cfanyc
Sep 26, 08:43 AM
if the iphone gets wifi, FAT chance of verizon carrying it, the last thing they want is to lose on their $40 month data plan.
once this comes out it should be a good time to re-evalutate my need for my treo 650 and verizon...
once this comes out it should be a good time to re-evalutate my need for my treo 650 and verizon...
vvswarup
Apr 30, 09:49 PM
Microsoft doesn't really play in the consumer / gadget / toy market, which simply means that you don't get to see most of their products unless you work in a corporate data center. And unlike Apple, Microsoft -has- data center / server products that people WANT to use and that are years ahead of the pack (Sharepoint Portal Server, Exchange Server, SQL Server, Terminal Services, just to name a few) - and a LOT of their RD goes there.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
DelisleBA.info
Apr 25, 01:17 PM
IDK about you all but I would love to see round edges and a bigger keyboard on the 15 and 17 inch models. When I say bigger I mean including the home, end, backspace, crtl key on right and page up and down keys instead of the dust trap speaker grills they have now.
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:27 PM
Sounds like you'd be interested in a nice Windows7 machine. Enjoy. :rolleyes:
HA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! What a wonderfully poignant response. You sure showed me:)
HA ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! What a wonderfully poignant response. You sure showed me:)
wnurse
Aug 23, 10:15 PM
Do you mean the cost of litigation or the potential award had Apple lost the case? It does seem like Apple wasn't very confident that they could win the case...after all Creative did file the patent before Apple, Creative was awarded the patent, and Apple was denied their patent. The iPod has brought Apple billions of dollars in revenue...a judgment against them could easily have cost them much more than $100 million.
The cost of litigation would not even remotely approached 100 million. The cost of losing (ie, having a judgement against apple), now that would have probably exceeded 100 million. When a company is not sure about it's position, the best thing is to settle. You don't see IBM settling their Linux suit, do you?. And SCOunix hasn't even paid close to 100 mil in lawyers fees yet and they are fighting a losing battle.. no, if you are sure, you don't settle.. if you not sure or have even a sliver of doubt, it's better to settle. I'm sure apple filed the countersuit and initially decided to fight in hopes of having creative go away (basically, apple was bluffing).. you have to believe they knew they were infringing.. It does not matter what we think of the patent system.. that same patent system serves apple needs too. You live by the patent system, you sometimes get caught by it. Seems fair to me.
The cost of litigation would not even remotely approached 100 million. The cost of losing (ie, having a judgement against apple), now that would have probably exceeded 100 million. When a company is not sure about it's position, the best thing is to settle. You don't see IBM settling their Linux suit, do you?. And SCOunix hasn't even paid close to 100 mil in lawyers fees yet and they are fighting a losing battle.. no, if you are sure, you don't settle.. if you not sure or have even a sliver of doubt, it's better to settle. I'm sure apple filed the countersuit and initially decided to fight in hopes of having creative go away (basically, apple was bluffing).. you have to believe they knew they were infringing.. It does not matter what we think of the patent system.. that same patent system serves apple needs too. You live by the patent system, you sometimes get caught by it. Seems fair to me.
JAT
Apr 29, 03:04 PM
both articles say the division/business unit that the x-box is in finally turned a profit. in 2010 this unit also included Office for Mac and Zune. the latest earnings release has no mention of Office for Mac in this unit but it still has windows phone and Microsoft's IP Television unit. ironically the big profit jump came after office for mac was kicked out of the unit
i'm bet x-box has been doing just fine and that windows phone and the IPTV units are the loss leaders
at some point apple is going to stop growing because the market penetration of smartphones will be at the point where you are just selling replacement phones. since AT&T opened the floodgates last year for early upgrades we'll see how things go this year
:rolleyes:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6140383.html
Microsoft itself claimed the Xbox was a loss leader. Back in back in etc. I guess you can argue that with them, too. Those other items are small potatoes in both cost and revenue in comparison. The Xbox IS that division when it comes to finance.
Office for Mac...it has almost zero cost. A few programmers.
i'm bet x-box has been doing just fine and that windows phone and the IPTV units are the loss leaders
at some point apple is going to stop growing because the market penetration of smartphones will be at the point where you are just selling replacement phones. since AT&T opened the floodgates last year for early upgrades we'll see how things go this year
:rolleyes:
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6140383.html
Microsoft itself claimed the Xbox was a loss leader. Back in back in etc. I guess you can argue that with them, too. Those other items are small potatoes in both cost and revenue in comparison. The Xbox IS that division when it comes to finance.
Office for Mac...it has almost zero cost. A few programmers.
MacinDoc
Sep 10, 09:57 PM
According to the Page 2 Rumors there are some significant speed ups to OpenGL in the next update to 10.4 due to multithreading. Apple has had 4 processor systems for over a year now. I would think they have some ideas about how to make use of it.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it appears that the improvement was significantly overstated. Macrumors has now updated that thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232126).
Sorry to burst your bubble, but it appears that the improvement was significantly overstated. Macrumors has now updated that thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=232126).
azakmi2
Mar 7, 03:14 AM
The only way your iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch is vulnerable to these things is if YOU jailbreak it. Even then, the number of jail broken IOS devices is and will remain too small a target to go after. This is why Apple has a walled garden, and why the Android model is destined to follow the PC down the virus/botnet hell hole. It's also why AV vendors would prefer that you bought Android or Windows mobile.
__________________________________________________
Duplicate File Finder (http://www.duplicate-finder-pro.com) Is The Only Program That Finds And Removes Duplicate Files From Your PC......
__________________________________________________
Duplicate File Finder (http://www.duplicate-finder-pro.com) Is The Only Program That Finds And Removes Duplicate Files From Your PC......
Kariya
Apr 25, 01:22 PM
Umm, you do realize the processor can be 10000000x faster, the system is still completely hammed by the 5600rpm hard drive they put in there. Most tasks are faster on an Air then a 17" Pro. And if you're doing heavy lifting get a Mac Pro. People who bought the new processors don't enjoy the benefits 90% of the time.
You must be a spec sheet reader, not someone who intelligently analyzes what they buy.
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
You must be a spec sheet reader, not someone who intelligently analyzes what they buy.
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
cozmot
Mar 21, 02:16 PM
The point is that MisterMe said nothing that your response would have fit. You can infer all you want, but it's very clear that MisterMe was talking about the market share myth, and was not inferring that Macs are immune to malware.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
Steve121178
Apr 20, 11:03 AM
Indeed. You couldn't dumb down that statement if you tried.
Go hang at dailykos.com. Macrumors appears to be above your pay-grade.
How is the coffee?
Go hang at dailykos.com. Macrumors appears to be above your pay-grade.
How is the coffee?
acslater017
Sep 5, 05:19 PM
OK hear me out on this one - WHAT IF Apple, in all its wisdom and foresight, avoids the format war (Blu-ray vs HD-DVD) altogether by NOT using a physical format? Of course, they're backing up Blu-ray...but in order to avoid putting their eggs in that basket, and seeing that consumers are hesitant to invest in either format...they do something GENIUS like sell DOWNLOADABLE HD movies on their iTunes store and release a stream-to-TV device!
This would attract everyone because it:
1) does not require an investment in a high-def player.
2) allows for lower prices to purchase/rent movies.
3) basically lets Apple avoid having to take sides by investing millions and millions into new disc drives
4) lets consumers watch the content on their computer and TV. and if they wish to invest in a Blu-ray burner, they can. If they don't, they can still enjoy HD movies!
eh? EEEHH?
This would attract everyone because it:
1) does not require an investment in a high-def player.
2) allows for lower prices to purchase/rent movies.
3) basically lets Apple avoid having to take sides by investing millions and millions into new disc drives
4) lets consumers watch the content on their computer and TV. and if they wish to invest in a Blu-ray burner, they can. If they don't, they can still enjoy HD movies!
eh? EEEHH?
charlituna
Apr 11, 09:27 AM
What I don't get is why can't Apple enable any iOS device (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad) as an Airplay target device? Obviously iOS supports it as Apple TV can be a target for Airplay from iTunes.
They could do it but AirPlay targets are supposed to have good sound and the speakers on those items do not. So it makes sense that they haven't cause the idiot masses would hear that lousy sound and think their whatever was busted.
They could do it but AirPlay targets are supposed to have good sound and the speakers on those items do not. So it makes sense that they haven't cause the idiot masses would hear that lousy sound and think their whatever was busted.
0 comments:
Post a Comment