afrowq
Apr 11, 05:59 PM
Exactly. Apple has been neglecting its professional products since the iPhone and iOS release, and focusing on consumer level products. A lot of people on MacRumors are new to Mac/Apple. For those of us who have used Mac's for 10+ years, mostly for work, we have become weary of the direction the company is taking for US, not for the average Joe. FCP was a standard at the time, for less than its competitors it offered a great GUI at a reasonable price point. The hardware and software are business investments.
As for the sarcastic comment regarding someone not leaving Apple now before FCP is released, it's because leaving is a huge decision. We have lots of money, time and equipment invested in our work. It's not as simple as dropping everything you have used for many, many years and investing and training yourself for another platform.
Sorry, but I am tired of the new users brought in from iPhone's and iPods and MacBook's getting snarky with the professionals who carried Apple through tough times and rely on Apple's professional line for our work. First the dedicated ACD's are neglected and replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD panel from the 27" iMac, OS X Lion is morphing into an iOS GUI, the Xeon Server processors in the Mac Pro line that replaced the affordable PowerMac G4/5's are over priced and over powered for some of our needs, Xserve was dropped not due to less sales but less marketing and development due to Apple's focus on iDevices, less OS X development such as Resolution Independence, 64-bit implementation, TRIM support for third party Sandforce SSD's, and so on. Heck, even professional such as Annie Leibovitz has left Apple due its lack of professional level products over the past four years.
There's much more to Apple than iDevices, as great as they may be. iMac's, iPads, MacBooks - they don't replace the systems Apple has left that are necessary for our work.
*and before anyone states that Apple has made billions on iDevices and iOS, they certainly can take a small amount of that cash reserve and reinvest it into a much needed market, such as a mid-level tower that fits between the top level iMac and entry level Mac Pro for those of us who need 5+ tower's but now can't afford them since the Intel transition. Apple could easily restructure their professional focus with new project managers to give a much needed refresh of their high end niche, and they could easily make a profit from that market. They created/restructured a niche market with iDevices and made a killing, why not with their professional end products? There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
As for the sarcastic comment regarding someone not leaving Apple now before FCP is released, it's because leaving is a huge decision. We have lots of money, time and equipment invested in our work. It's not as simple as dropping everything you have used for many, many years and investing and training yourself for another platform.
Sorry, but I am tired of the new users brought in from iPhone's and iPods and MacBook's getting snarky with the professionals who carried Apple through tough times and rely on Apple's professional line for our work. First the dedicated ACD's are neglected and replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD panel from the 27" iMac, OS X Lion is morphing into an iOS GUI, the Xeon Server processors in the Mac Pro line that replaced the affordable PowerMac G4/5's are over priced and over powered for some of our needs, Xserve was dropped not due to less sales but less marketing and development due to Apple's focus on iDevices, less OS X development such as Resolution Independence, 64-bit implementation, TRIM support for third party Sandforce SSD's, and so on. Heck, even professional such as Annie Leibovitz has left Apple due its lack of professional level products over the past four years.
There's much more to Apple than iDevices, as great as they may be. iMac's, iPads, MacBooks - they don't replace the systems Apple has left that are necessary for our work.
*and before anyone states that Apple has made billions on iDevices and iOS, they certainly can take a small amount of that cash reserve and reinvest it into a much needed market, such as a mid-level tower that fits between the top level iMac and entry level Mac Pro for those of us who need 5+ tower's but now can't afford them since the Intel transition. Apple could easily restructure their professional focus with new project managers to give a much needed refresh of their high end niche, and they could easily make a profit from that market. They created/restructured a niche market with iDevices and made a killing, why not with their professional end products? There are thousands if not more of us who would gladly pony up and stick with Apple.
Nailed it
Leoff
Sep 19, 06:12 AM
What's funny is that even if new MacBooks and MacBook Pros were released tomorrow with the newer Merom chip, 90% of you folks in here wouldn't notice a difference in your daily computing. You would not say "OMG, this 64 bit processing and extra .16Ghz speed is AWESOME!!! I can't BELIEVE I lived without this for so long!!!" You wouldn't even notice unless someone told you.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 06:14 PM
I completely agree, but let's be honest, Apple and Microsoft fans are no different.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
milo
Jul 14, 02:58 PM
Can anyone tell me the purpose of dual drive slots nowadays? I can see the use for them (and had computers with) when they were limited to one function, i.e. DVD-ROM for one and a CD-RW for the other but now that everything can happen in one drive with speed not being an issue, is it really nececcary to have two?
Same purpose. DVD-ROM in one, bluray or HD-DVD in the other. Plus two are nice for duping.
Too expensive on the low-end, if true. I suspect we'll see a lot of reviews and benchmarks giving a bad cost to value ratio for the Macs.
You obviously haven't shopped around. Price out machines with these CPU's at Dell, you're looking at $2400/2600/3700. I think these prices are too *low* based on chip prices and current PC prices. I think that whole grid is bogus.
As for the 3G chip, it could be a BTO option. I assume other video cards would be BTO options as well.
Same purpose. DVD-ROM in one, bluray or HD-DVD in the other. Plus two are nice for duping.
Too expensive on the low-end, if true. I suspect we'll see a lot of reviews and benchmarks giving a bad cost to value ratio for the Macs.
You obviously haven't shopped around. Price out machines with these CPU's at Dell, you're looking at $2400/2600/3700. I think these prices are too *low* based on chip prices and current PC prices. I think that whole grid is bogus.
As for the 3G chip, it could be a BTO option. I assume other video cards would be BTO options as well.
epitaphic
Sep 13, 11:02 AM
Read more here...
http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
Logically, the next question is if ZFS' 128 bits is enough. According to Bonwick, it has to be. "Populating 128-bit file systems would exceed the quantum limits of earth-based storage. You couldn't fill a 128-bit storage pool without boiling the oceans."
wow. boiling the oceans. there's a thought that never crossed my mind ;)
http://www.sun.com/2004-0914/feature/index.html
Logically, the next question is if ZFS' 128 bits is enough. According to Bonwick, it has to be. "Populating 128-bit file systems would exceed the quantum limits of earth-based storage. You couldn't fill a 128-bit storage pool without boiling the oceans."
wow. boiling the oceans. there's a thought that never crossed my mind ;)
ChazUK
Apr 6, 01:34 PM
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
Apple are kicking arse without the competition. Do they need it at this point?
Apple are kicking arse without the competition. Do they need it at this point?
GQB
Mar 31, 05:10 PM
Good. I hope they take one of the last strengths of the iPad ecosystem away from it.
If you're going to spew nonsense, at least make it relevant to the thread.
If you're going to spew nonsense, at least make it relevant to the thread.
Eduard
Apr 9, 04:22 PM
I would rather keep my 330m than an integrated Intel GPU :(
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
stapler
Sep 13, 07:57 PM
I doubt anybody runs more than eight really hardcore apps at once.
budafied
Apr 6, 10:49 AM
This may make my 13" MBP summer purchase change a bit...
It'd be a hard choice between a current i5 13" MBP and an i5 13" MBA, especially with that higher res screen and the SSD. The only problem is that it will be my only machine, so I'm not sure I can do just an Air for an extended period of time. The netbook-only setup I have now is pretty lame.
It'd be a hard choice between a current i5 13" MBP and an i5 13" MBA, especially with that higher res screen and the SSD. The only problem is that it will be my only machine, so I'm not sure I can do just an Air for an extended period of time. The netbook-only setup I have now is pretty lame.
rwilliams
Mar 22, 12:58 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
And this post sums up why so many are failing to knock Apple off of their perch. Companies keep thinking that bigger and better specs is going to deliver customers to them, and it's just not happening. Apple has never had the greatest specs in their products - it's the user experience and the polish of the Mac/iOS ecosystem that's keeping them coming back year after year.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
And this post sums up why so many are failing to knock Apple off of their perch. Companies keep thinking that bigger and better specs is going to deliver customers to them, and it's just not happening. Apple has never had the greatest specs in their products - it's the user experience and the polish of the Mac/iOS ecosystem that's keeping them coming back year after year.
depperl
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
if leopard is not enough here's some more new features: Leopard-Server (http://www.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/)
i think leopard-server is going to have some cool things for the enterprise-market :rolleyes:
i think leopard-server is going to have some cool things for the enterprise-market :rolleyes:
DVK916
Jul 27, 11:02 AM
Only the Mac Mini and the iMac's processor can be replaced. the MacBook and MacBook Pro have the processor soldered into the motherboard.
No, this isn't true. All of them have a socket cpu that can be replaced.
No, this isn't true. All of them have a socket cpu that can be replaced.
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Ok then show me where it says that turning location services off will not stop the tracking. I've scanned the articles and did not find anything that said that. If it does still track when you turn it off, I'd like to know.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 7, 11:11 PM
I hate going into best buy. It is staffed by a bunch of people in their teens and tweens. That's fine except they tend to think giving a guess as an answer is acceptable when "I don't know" would be a better answer. I never trust them for advice and search for my answers elsewhere. I remember when I bought my first Directv with DVR unit. I asked about the USB port and whether or not you could connect an external drive. The kid looked at it, saw the usb port, and decided that must be what its for and said yes. I had encountered this before and knew not to trust him. Sure enough that port was for programming the unit only. I didn't care in that case as I didn't really need that feature and knew not to trust him anyway. But I have had other instances. Once I asked about an AV receiver and was mad when I got home to find the feature asked about was not existent.
CompUSA used to have better trained employees but then they laid them off because the company thought they were paid too much. It turned into Best Buy. I sent a letter to CompUSA telling them that laying people off would not fix the problems but only make it worse and that I hoped they went out of business for their decision to turn their backs on good employees. I didn't have to weight long for my wish to come true.
Anyway Best Buy is all there is really except for Fry's but that is not conveniently located. I can see the next electronics chain to launch easily topping Best Buy. If they hire people who actually care to learn about the product that is.
CompUSA used to have better trained employees but then they laid them off because the company thought they were paid too much. It turned into Best Buy. I sent a letter to CompUSA telling them that laying people off would not fix the problems but only make it worse and that I hoped they went out of business for their decision to turn their backs on good employees. I didn't have to weight long for my wish to come true.
Anyway Best Buy is all there is really except for Fry's but that is not conveniently located. I can see the next electronics chain to launch easily topping Best Buy. If they hire people who actually care to learn about the product that is.
gnasher729
Mar 26, 10:19 AM
There is no way this is a GM. The "reporter" is obviously confused. If it was a GM version that means they would be sending it off for duplication soon. Since WWDC is months away this makes no sense.
To be fair, they are saying "nearing a Golden Master candidate". Which is quite meaningless, because Lion is "nearing a Golden Master candidate" from the time when the first line of code for Lion was written.
Apple has a list of features that need adding to produce Lion, and a list of known problems that need to be fixed. The developers' job is to add the features and to fix the known problems; someone else's job is to find yet unknown problems before customers find them. You get a "Golden Master candidate" when all features are implemented (or management decided that something wouldn't be a feature), and all problems known at that moment in time are fixed. If new problems are found in the "Golden Master candidate" then the developers fix them and create a new "Golden Master candidate". If no new problems are found then the "Golden Master" candidate turns into a "Golden Master", and that will be the released version of MacOS X 10.7.0.
To be fair, they are saying "nearing a Golden Master candidate". Which is quite meaningless, because Lion is "nearing a Golden Master candidate" from the time when the first line of code for Lion was written.
Apple has a list of features that need adding to produce Lion, and a list of known problems that need to be fixed. The developers' job is to add the features and to fix the known problems; someone else's job is to find yet unknown problems before customers find them. You get a "Golden Master candidate" when all features are implemented (or management decided that something wouldn't be a feature), and all problems known at that moment in time are fixed. If new problems are found in the "Golden Master candidate" then the developers fix them and create a new "Golden Master candidate". If no new problems are found then the "Golden Master" candidate turns into a "Golden Master", and that will be the released version of MacOS X 10.7.0.
Some_Big_Spoon
Aug 27, 01:19 AM
BTO's
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
The update time for Apple's store is 9am EST? I was under the impression that it was 9am PST. I'm behind the times! (pun intended, I suppose)
Is the 7-10 days for BTO iMacs? Or stock ones?
elgruga
Nov 29, 02:27 AM
If Universal get cash as 'compensation' for stolen music, then presumably once you have paid the 'compensation' money, you can steal as much music as you like. Cool.
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....
Apple doesnt really sell music - it sells iPods and offers the music at cost (or close to it) to support the iPod. Its a smart move , and its a pity that almost ALL of the iTunes cash goes direct to the record companies.
I used to work in the music biz, and a bigger bunch of thieving clowns you have yet to meet.
Most artists get 6-8% of the CD sales. Yes folks thats a big fifty cents or so on an average CD sale.
But because they give you an advance against royalties, which you spend on recording and PR etc. etc, only the very successful (a huge 0.5% of bands) ever make any money. Its a losing gamble and it turns music into a commodity - which it shouldnt be.
This battle will run for a while yet, but there is hope that the DEMISE of record companies is on the horizon.
With computer recording etc., its not necessary to get a record deal - good music does exist outside of the music industry machine.
Maybe Micro$oft will implode too - the zune fiasco suggests that they are up their own arses as far as common sense goes.....
4JNA
Jul 20, 12:06 PM
'speakable items on' 'selecting hal9000 voice'
what are you doing dave?
you know i can't let you apply the filter to those pictures in that manner.
dave, i'm scared...
'speakable items off'
now we just need the big red glowing light on the front instead of the white one...:eek:
what are you doing dave?
you know i can't let you apply the filter to those pictures in that manner.
dave, i'm scared...
'speakable items off'
now we just need the big red glowing light on the front instead of the white one...:eek:
plinden
Sep 12, 11:00 AM
The folks over at Anandtech have dropped engineering samples of the quad core cloverton into a Mac Pro - http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2832&p=6
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
and it worked ... all eight cores were recognised.
The rest of the article was interesting too.
AppleJustWorks
Aug 26, 09:56 AM
California, it's replies like this that pisses switchers off, even seasones mac users get upset with these replies. What the hell is Rev A?. What idiot argument is this?. That's it ok for apple to make a ****ed-up product cause it's the first version?. What?.. apple just started making computers that they don't know how to make quality products until they already made the first version?. Apple should be horrified at your suggestion. Imagine if no one bought Rev A (whatever the **** that means) machines from Apple. APPLE WOULD GO BROKE!!. There's always Rev A machines when it comes to computers dude. The next mac pro upgrade will use a new processor, faster, new video, more ram, newer harddrive and becomes rev A cause THEY ARE THE FIRST APPLE PRODUCTS TO USE THE NEW UPGRADED PROCESSOR, NEW HARDDIVE, ETC. Really, stop with this nonsense. You are like the 10th idiotic apple fan I have read using this dumb argument.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Right on. I made the same argument to someone on a different forum, and it's just amazing how fanboy mac users concoct these elaborate theories of why apple screwing up is acceptable.
The point is, by simple logic, yes, the following revisions of a product tend to be more reliable because they've had time to address issues, but no, that doesn't mean (anyone) shouldn't buy a machine purely because of it's revision number. If that was the case, then Apple would be out of business. Period.
Benjy91
Mar 26, 10:28 AM
People seem to have "Simple & Easier" and "Dumbed-Down" confused with each other.
layte
Mar 31, 04:23 PM
Well at least you are an honest troll. Can't say that about everyone who starts attacking groups of people over their OS choice. *shrug*
:confused:
Where have I posted anything that could be construed as trolling? Or are we doing the 'I don't agree with you therefore it is trolling' thing?
:confused:
Where have I posted anything that could be construed as trolling? Or are we doing the 'I don't agree with you therefore it is trolling' thing?
No comments:
Post a Comment