FX4568
Apr 17, 08:49 PM
Are you talking about this article (http://news.cnet.com/8301-13924_3-20031434-64.html?tag=posts;msg5118115) from back in February that has been discussed ad infinitum on here?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1126201&highlight=
Are you referring to a newer cnet story? Do you have a link? Thanks, I am personally holding off and really hoping its true... we'll see!
Also clock rate is not the only factor for determining chip speed... in fact it is a very small factor. The new processor is not just .17 hz faster, its a whole new architecture. Its why the 2.0 Ghz i7 in the 2011 MBPs are faster than the a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott from 2004.
It was a video released on 4/8/2011.
I cant link it since CNET doesnt actually show URL for videos.
Go to Cnet, Videos, Apple Byte, and it will be the second video on the list.
Yea, I have been corrected in that, but the argument on GPU still stands.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1126201&highlight=
Are you referring to a newer cnet story? Do you have a link? Thanks, I am personally holding off and really hoping its true... we'll see!
Also clock rate is not the only factor for determining chip speed... in fact it is a very small factor. The new processor is not just .17 hz faster, its a whole new architecture. Its why the 2.0 Ghz i7 in the 2011 MBPs are faster than the a 3.2 Ghz Pentium 4 Prescott from 2004.
It was a video released on 4/8/2011.
I cant link it since CNET doesnt actually show URL for videos.
Go to Cnet, Videos, Apple Byte, and it will be the second video on the list.
Yea, I have been corrected in that, but the argument on GPU still stands.
Blorzoga
May 4, 05:21 AM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
Yeah, customer service reps are always soooo reliable.
Yeah, customer service reps are always soooo reliable.
iSee
May 4, 08:57 AM
We are always skeptical about such information shared by customer-facing representatives of Apple or associated companies, as those employees are essentially never provided with that level of information ahead of any official announcement.
And this case is no different. Should not even be page 2.
And this case is no different. Should not even be page 2.
Hisdem
Sep 12, 07:42 PM
Some Adidas stuff and a set of 3 Moleskine Ruled Journals. :cool:
GuitarDTO
Apr 28, 09:32 PM
FYI...if you are looking to switch to a Verizon iPhone but your contract isnt up...my store let us add a new dummy line without a data plan for 9.99 on our account (2 year contract), and we got the white iPhone for 200 so overall we are basically paying 440 for the phone instead of full retail $650. Now we still have an upgrade coming in 6 months so I can get the 5 ; )
ULFoaf
Apr 12, 12:55 PM
There was a recent announcement by Sony saying their deliveries to Apple for an 8MP camera would be delayed due to conditions in Japan. I've read other articles suggesting other iPhone components may be in short supply.
The disaster in Japan may have an impact on their release schedule. It might have been tight before, then the earthquake killed it.
The disaster in Japan may have an impact on their release schedule. It might have been tight before, then the earthquake killed it.
Evangelion
Jul 25, 10:57 AM
And you're really going to use all that are you?
What if he is?
With the exception of RAM and hard disks, most computer consumers never expand their computers.
And most computer-users use Windows, so maybe we should all switch to Windows? Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems. To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks. Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
I'm a pretty average computer user at home and with the exception of my camera, iPod and printer, I have no external devices.
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Although I will be purchasing an external firewire drive at some point, I'd much rather have a small squarish metallic box on display behind my iMac than lose an extra three square feet of floor space due to needing a bigger desk.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items. And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
Perhaps when you factor in the cost, the lost square footage of the room your computer is in should be taken into account.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
What if he is?
With the exception of RAM and hard disks, most computer consumers never expand their computers.
And most computer-users use Windows, so maybe we should all switch to Windows? Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems. To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks. Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
I'm a pretty average computer user at home and with the exception of my camera, iPod and printer, I have no external devices.
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Although I will be purchasing an external firewire drive at some point, I'd much rather have a small squarish metallic box on display behind my iMac than lose an extra three square feet of floor space due to needing a bigger desk.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items. And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
Perhaps when you factor in the cost, the lost square footage of the room your computer is in should be taken into account.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
intervenient
Apr 25, 10:36 PM
Any word about the Mac Mini? Would like to switch from MBA to a Mini and iPad combo.
Chris Bangle
Jul 28, 08:21 AM
at microsoft the name they had to choose from were probably ipod killer or zune, and someone obviously chose zune....... what an idiot. it like fords new s-max which is reffered to as smack eg smacking ure kids...
Don Kosak
Nov 10, 04:56 PM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
UniPro
Mar 15, 11:01 AM
Wow I'm sorry for everyone who left empty handed. I can't believe apple stores would open early just for 4 iPads. So pointless.
seble
Apr 25, 03:15 PM
Yeah, Im going to listen to someone like this...
Image (http://edopeno.com/images/2011/01/BrianTong.jpg)
Kill the hate! Brian Tong is awesome.
Image (http://edopeno.com/images/2011/01/BrianTong.jpg)
Kill the hate! Brian Tong is awesome.
Snowy_River
Dec 1, 08:29 PM
...
I do not agree that lower our demands for Apple with regards to security expectations. Now is Apple's chance to prevent getting an image that their competition has, with regards to holes in security. Apple themselves have advertised that Spyware, viruses, etc, are not part of the OS X experience (http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov). In my opinion, that may be received as a challenge, or incentive for someone to make that argument a fallacy.
Perhaps you missed me saying "Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence"? Again, I agree that Apple needs to keep on top of these vulnerabilities. With a little luck, we'll see a new security update within the next week or two that will patch most, if not all, of these. My objection was not to wanting Apple to fix these vulnerabilities. My objection was to the tone that suggested that if we didn't mount a public outcry, Apple would ignore these altogether, and by January 1st there'd be as many viruses on OS X as on Windows. It's the alarmist nature of so many of the posts here that I found objectionable. Give Apple the credit it's due, and trust that they are working on patching all of these vulnerabilities right now. How hard it is to patch them will determine how long we'll have to wait for the security updates.
I'm still waiting to hear that someone--anyone--has actually been exploited by one of these "exploits."
Yes, actually they're vulnerabilities, not exploits. There's a big difference. Determining a way to utilize a vulnerability as an exploit is no small challenge. And I'm with you. While I'm eager to see Apple plug these holes, I'm not worrying about the boat sinking until I see some water start to come in... ;)
I do not agree that lower our demands for Apple with regards to security expectations. Now is Apple's chance to prevent getting an image that their competition has, with regards to holes in security. Apple themselves have advertised that Spyware, viruses, etc, are not part of the OS X experience (http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov). In my opinion, that may be received as a challenge, or incentive for someone to make that argument a fallacy.
Perhaps you missed me saying "Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence"? Again, I agree that Apple needs to keep on top of these vulnerabilities. With a little luck, we'll see a new security update within the next week or two that will patch most, if not all, of these. My objection was not to wanting Apple to fix these vulnerabilities. My objection was to the tone that suggested that if we didn't mount a public outcry, Apple would ignore these altogether, and by January 1st there'd be as many viruses on OS X as on Windows. It's the alarmist nature of so many of the posts here that I found objectionable. Give Apple the credit it's due, and trust that they are working on patching all of these vulnerabilities right now. How hard it is to patch them will determine how long we'll have to wait for the security updates.
I'm still waiting to hear that someone--anyone--has actually been exploited by one of these "exploits."
Yes, actually they're vulnerabilities, not exploits. There's a big difference. Determining a way to utilize a vulnerability as an exploit is no small challenge. And I'm with you. While I'm eager to see Apple plug these holes, I'm not worrying about the boat sinking until I see some water start to come in... ;)
JRoDDz
Apr 28, 11:59 PM
So can we all call the white iPhone.. the iPhone "Fatty"
Finiksa
Jul 24, 10:00 PM
This sounds like a brilliant concept. If it ever makes it into a shipping product I suspect Apple would utilise it to maintain the protective layer of plastic over the screen like current iPods instead of exposing the fragile LCD/OLED display. The users could scroll directly on the iPod housing instead of having to float their finger in the air above the display.
joeboy_45101
Oct 23, 11:04 AM
Oh well, all this says to me is that Vista is going to suck even more than I originally thought. :D
Wes Jordan
Jan 28, 10:19 PM
Because it was over-vauled :rolleyes:
hayesk
Jul 25, 10:41 AM
It seems like a major problem with this would be the fact that you get no tactile feedback. However, I have tapping enabled on my iBook and I don't find it odd or uncomfortable at all then I "click" on something. I'm sure it would take some getting used to, but I imagine that it could work.
The 3G iPod did not have physical feedback, and they worked.
But the problem here is everyone is assuming that none-touch means you don't even touch the iPod. Did it occur to anyone that it means you don't have to touch the screen? This allows Apple to put a more durable transparent cover over the entire face of the iPod.
Think about it - a nice smooth seamless iPod face. When you put your finger over the display, the controls appear. Your finger touches the cover, but not the screen underneath. This allows for easy cleaning, and protection of the actual screen.
The 3G iPod did not have physical feedback, and they worked.
But the problem here is everyone is assuming that none-touch means you don't even touch the iPod. Did it occur to anyone that it means you don't have to touch the screen? This allows Apple to put a more durable transparent cover over the entire face of the iPod.
Think about it - a nice smooth seamless iPod face. When you put your finger over the display, the controls appear. Your finger touches the cover, but not the screen underneath. This allows for easy cleaning, and protection of the actual screen.
noahtk
Apr 21, 11:06 PM
This is getting funny. :rolleyes:
leekohler
Apr 27, 01:43 PM
Nope. This was your first reply to me before I even mentioned "fact" :
Yes it was, as you were claiming to "know" that it was faked. Claiming that was offensive in the very least.
Yep, I truly hit a nerve. Your abrupt rant wasn't necessary, and why you only quoted me on it when others said the same thing is mystifying. Don't let your emotions get in the way of things.
Hi kettle.
Yes it was, as you were claiming to "know" that it was faked. Claiming that was offensive in the very least.
Yep, I truly hit a nerve. Your abrupt rant wasn't necessary, and why you only quoted me on it when others said the same thing is mystifying. Don't let your emotions get in the way of things.
Hi kettle.
belair
Oct 24, 07:45 AM
Would anyone happen to know if they changed the case design.
The apple store is still down�
The 17 inch looks almost affordable, almost.
The apple store is still down�
The 17 inch looks almost affordable, almost.
Rot'nApple
Apr 23, 10:22 PM
What product will the T-Mobile chic bash now??? :rolleyes:
You know how fickle women can be, so does it really matter?! :rolleyes:
Oops, just made somebody's hit list. :eek: Let me rephrase that... :cool:
As a woman, the T-Mobile "chic" has the right to change her mind! Thus probably will bash Android Fragmentation! :D
Yes, Dear...
/
/
/
You know how fickle women can be, so does it really matter?! :rolleyes:
Oops, just made somebody's hit list. :eek: Let me rephrase that... :cool:
As a woman, the T-Mobile "chic" has the right to change her mind! Thus probably will bash Android Fragmentation! :D
Yes, Dear...
/
/
/
DrinkingLizard
Jun 26, 11:42 PM
Apple definitely should give you a warning that you're about to purchase an app more costly than $75. Although this kid obviously only went to the app because of its cost.
I've heard this general idea mentioned by a few people but I'm more than a little curious as to why it's always $75 that's mentioned as the threshold.
Why is this? What is so special about $75?
I've heard this general idea mentioned by a few people but I'm more than a little curious as to why it's always $75 that's mentioned as the threshold.
Why is this? What is so special about $75?
macfly4
Apr 15, 08:54 AM
Forgot to mention mine is a 3gs also. This battery drain is worse than it was on the first 4.3 update. What is going on with this?
No comments:
Post a Comment