twoodcc
Aug 11, 10:10 AM
bring it on!! my razr isn't that impressive. in fact, not any phone i've ever had was. maybe apple can change this
gsander
Jun 10, 10:05 AM
You've got questions. We've got transistors.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
Bill McEnaney
Apr 30, 08:24 PM
Doesn't mean its a good idea or helpful to the nation, but its not libel/slander if its true.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
Fair enough, but I think many are willing to make hasty public comments about others. On Chopped, a program on the Food Network, a judge accused a competitor of lying when the competitor said that before the show, he had already used an ingredient that he used incorrectly on the program. Maybe the contestant's other dish came out poorly when he first used that ingredient. I've written some programs in IBM 370 assembly language. So I've that language. But I've forgotten what I learned about it.
On other message board some posters accused others of homophobia, sounding as though they couldn't have cared less about whether or how much they harmed the reputations of the accused. On other boards, some posters accused me of homophobia, too. Unfortunately, I doubt that the accuser even wonder whether it would have been better to send me a private message instead.
I know that some people here believe that I'm too socially conservative. Although they may be right, I prefer too much caution to too little caution.
To their credit, everyone here has treated me politely, even when I've said things that offended them. Compared to posters I've met at some other boards, people here, including Lee Kohler, control themselves admirably. But if I, and I do mean I, calumniate someone politely publicly, privately, or both, polite wording doesn't make up for the harm I do to the calumniated person's reputation.
But its clear what you are implying
I didn't intend to imply anything.
mccldwll
Apr 27, 08:34 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
Well........in Full of's case, nut data certainly was accurate.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Sep 18, 11:33 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
Full of Win
Mar 25, 10:56 PM
Just one step closer to 10.7.3, the first release I would ever think to use.
bommai
Apr 7, 10:19 PM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
Deflorator
Mar 31, 03:32 PM
What the heck is this? The "Steve was right" month?
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
iMrNiceGuy0023
Jun 9, 01:21 AM
I think this will be great for AT&T and Apple....Radio Shack is the closest store out of AT&T and Apple Store
Radio Shack and Best Buy use the same AT&T POS system to upgrade and activate phones
I got my 3G and 3GS from Best Buy.....but i'll go to Radio Shack for my iPhone 4
Looks like AT&T and Apple are looking to do big numbers with this release
Radio Shack and Best Buy use the same AT&T POS system to upgrade and activate phones
I got my 3G and 3GS from Best Buy.....but i'll go to Radio Shack for my iPhone 4
Looks like AT&T and Apple are looking to do big numbers with this release
Stellarola
Apr 14, 01:54 AM
My fianc� and I have been holding out since our first gen iPhones. This is a true bummer. I feels it's true. :(
mmmcheese
Jul 14, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 01:47 AM
I tested Lion, and removed it after a month. Not buying it. I'll use Snow Leopard, it's the best OS so far. I'll see the one after Lion, maybe there will be something interesting.
Would you mind elaborating? Like, why you didn't like it? What about it made you compelled to remove and decide not to buy? And please don't say bugs. It was a beta.
Would you mind elaborating? Like, why you didn't like it? What about it made you compelled to remove and decide not to buy? And please don't say bugs. It was a beta.
syklee26
Mar 26, 01:27 AM
I have a feeling Apple won't charge $129 for Lion. It is not going to be easy to tell users that, after charging only $29 for SL, they are back to charging $129.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
I feel like Apple may charge around $49 for Lion.
This is unless Jobs is going to be at WWDC with some really awesome secret features in his sleeve, like he did with Leopard.
Mistrblank
Apr 8, 07:19 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
It keeps people coming back day after day.
It keeps people coming back day after day.
rockthecasbah
Jul 27, 01:35 PM
This means that Apple could easily upgrade the existing Intel-based Macs to the newer processor with no design changes.
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
Not many people seem to be making too much of a deal about this, but i don't like the sound of that. It's great for upgrading a Mini or iMac, but i really want fresh new designs for the Mac Pro and MacBook Pro. If that is the case, Apple may just wait longer for a design change just because they can! It's not like i'd turn one away, but the current designs are tiring... Oh well i'll still be excited if my "fears" are true, but i really want a fresh design.
Am i the only one that seems to think that WWDC is getting clogged up with TOO many things? I mean sure the more Apple products released/updated the better, but this keynote seems to be taking a lot of emphasis off of Leopard previews (according to the rumors) to focus more on new products. iPods galore, Mac Pros, MBPs, Mac Mini (maybe), whatever at this point, i mean where are we really fitting in Leopard other than a quick flash!?!
Amnak
Apr 7, 10:55 PM
Normally I'd call bs, but I got mine at Best Buy and my friend a former employ asked if they had any more, the said technically no but for him they'd "find" one. Thank god I got it from there for reward pointssss!
QCassidy352
Aug 26, 07:20 PM
The only change is likely to be the cpu. The rest of the MBP will probably be kept the same and if you look at the yonah vs merom benchmarks at places like AnandTech, it probably isn't worth sending it back.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
I'm sure the GPU will also be bumped, at the very least. The MBP will probably also see some things that the MB has like a user-removable hard drive and magnetic latch. The CPU and GPU alone make it worth getting the new one, IMO.
Also, I'll say it one last time (yea right) - the imac should not and will not get a mobile processor. It only got Yonah because there was no alternative. It had a real desktop processor when one was available on the PPC side (G5), and it will have a real desktop processor now that one is available on the intel side (Conroe). Leave merom for what it was meant for - laptops.
amin
Aug 19, 09:42 AM
You make good points. I guess we'll learn more as more information becomes available.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Yes under some specific results the quad was a bit faster than the dual. Though with the combo of Rosetta+Photoshop its unclear what is causing the difference. However, if you compare the vast majority of the benchmarks, there's negligible difference.
Concerning Photoshop specifically, as can be experienced on a quad G5, the performance increase is 15-20%. A future jump to 8-core would theoretically be in the 8% increase mark. Photoshop (CS2) simply cannot scale adequately beyond 2 cores, maybe that'll change in Spring 2007. Fingers crossed it does.
I beg to differ. If an app or game is memory intensive, faster memory access does matter. Barefeats (http://barefeats.com/quad09.html) has some benchmarks on dual channel vs quad channel on the Mac Pro. I'd personally like to see that benchmark with an added Conroe system. If dual to quad channel gave 16-25% improvement, imagine what 75% increase in actual bandwidth will do. Besides, I was merely addressing your statements that Woodcrest is faster because of its higher speed FSB and higher memory bus bandwidth.
Anandtech, at the moment, is the only place with a quad xeon vs dual xeon benchmark. And yes, dual Woodcrest is fast enough, but is it cost effective compared to a single Woodcrest/Conroe? It seems that for the most part, Mac Pro users are paying for an extra chip but only really utilizing it when running several CPU intensive apps at the same time.
You're absolutely right about that, its only measuring the improvement over increased FSB. If you take into account FB-DIMM's appalling efficiency, there should be no increase at all (if not decrease) for memory intensive apps.
One question I'd like to put out there, if Apple has had a quad core mac shipping for the past 8 months, why would it wait til intel quads to optimize the code for FCP? Surely they must have known for some time before that that they would release a quad core G5 so either optimizing FCP for quads is a real bastard or they've been sitting on it for no reason.
Vulpinemac
Apr 6, 03:22 PM
No matter what Apple does lately or how much they sell or how good the forecasts are for sales Apple Stock continues it quick downward slide. What the HELL!! I just do not understand it ... Specially while Google stock continues to climb at an incredible pace week, after week, after week.. :confused::confused::mad:
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
I have to wonder where you get your information. Apple's stock is near the top of a two-year climb of almost $250, showing only a $15 drop in the last three days while Google is almost $100 below its peak only 2 months ago and barely above its high of only a year ago. In fact, even if you only count this week, Google is $20 below its high just three days ago. Yes, Google may have a higher peak overall in the last two years, but Google has also proven to be more volatile, swinging higher--and lower than Apple over the same time period.
Banjhiyi
Mar 26, 04:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
This might explain the shambles that is 10.6.7.
Last release before Lion - semi-brick your machine to force an upgrade.
iOS 4.3, last release before iPhone 5 - murder your battery to force an upgrade.
You've guessed it, I'm not very happy with Apple at the moment. So which is it; underhand tactics, sloppy Q&A or declining standards?
wpotere
Apr 27, 12:59 PM
Would you call someone a moderate when he would leave a baby alone in a room to die after the baby had survived an abortion? Most people here already know that I'm against the stimulus and against "gay" rights. As for the stimulus packages, Ford just reported a profit, and that company refused the stimulus money. If a company is going to fail let it do that. Let it take responsibility for its own blunders. Don't let a codependent government rescue it.
You do realize that Bush started that right? As for Ford, their European division saved their butts and the jobs lost would have made the recession a lot worse. Yeah, good idea, let it all fail. Maybe we should let the government fail as well eh? They seem to be having monetary issues now.
You do realize that Bush started that right? As for Ford, their European division saved their butts and the jobs lost would have made the recession a lot worse. Yeah, good idea, let it all fail. Maybe we should let the government fail as well eh? They seem to be having monetary issues now.
CaoCao
Mar 4, 01:46 PM
This is true because you say it's true?
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Nope, you just want to make sure that we can't have access to the same protections for our families that you do. How silly of me to want that.
Not at all. Gay people raise kids just as well as straight people- that's been proven. And we do have families. There is no risk of destroying society. The question is valid. Answer it.
A bit of delay in my response because I had to look it up, but thanks for letting us have this right for 7 years now..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg/400px-Map_of_US_sodomy_laws.svg.png
Red = Sodomy Laws struck down by the US Supreme Court in 2003
And yet I doubt Macaroony sees opposite-sex attractions as immoral or placing oneself in grave danger. I know what your religious beliefs tell you, and it is your right to follow those as explicitly as you are legally able. But why does that have to impact the rest of the world when you know many of them share different beliefs and have different experiences?
Personally, I think people who believe in gods are weak-minded fools. But I would never support a law that mandated atheism or banned religious gatherings. Because these religious things, while they are not in line with my worldview, do not impact my way of life directly, and allow people to live how they think they need to, not how I think they need to.
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and venture a guess that you don't have a non-biased fact source for a retarded statement like that. :rolleyes:
CaoCao, could you please elaborate as to how gays could cause the collapse of society? I keep hearing that but I don't understand the sentiment behind it. And please, do not skirt around the answer, I always try to be as clear as day with mine.
The only explanation I can come up with as to why you would see being gay and giving gays the same civil rights as the collapse of society is that it differs so much from your worldview, it causes your world to collapse to the point where you feel nothing but uncomfortable to live in such a society. In other words; if gays are treated equal under every law under the sun, your society would collapse.
I often hear that same-sex marriage devalues marriage and threatens those that are already married. I wonder why and how. I doubt that your straight neighbor's happy marriage affects you at all unless you're so jealous, you want their marriage to be annulled - a happy same-sex couple must be killing you inside. I have said it here and in another thread before, marriage is nothing but a contract between two members of two families and the state to secure their fortune and legacy. Every attorney will tell you the same.
I have to say, it's very exhausting coming up with a defense convincing enough for those that don't seem to follow the world by logic. I'm glad I'm not a lawyer because if law is like that all the time, I'd rather give up on it and live in exile.
Logic is my source. Society needs people, no people means no society. If there were no more babies society would eventually collapse.
Source?
:rolleyes:
Ktulu
Aug 25, 08:23 PM
Apple always made the Pismo. I don't know the exact years but it was a black G3 PowerBook.
That's right. thank you I completely forgot about that.:D
That's right. thank you I completely forgot about that.:D
nagromme
Aug 7, 04:16 PM
Will Time Machine mean that you can't permanently delete any file? What about something confidential which you want to "e-shred"?
Never fear: it says you can exclude any data from Time Machine that you wish.
(Plus, if you change your mind about a file, you have OS X's Secure Empty Trash--which might also purge your backup, if it's connected. But whatever the implementation, I'm sure Apple has thought about this--we just don't have 100% off the details yet.)
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Only if you are FORCED to use Spaces. But like Expos�, Dashboard, and even the right mouse button, it will be optional. Apple is sensitive about beginner simplicity.
Never fear: it says you can exclude any data from Time Machine that you wish.
(Plus, if you change your mind about a file, you have OS X's Secure Empty Trash--which might also purge your backup, if it's connected. But whatever the implementation, I'm sure Apple has thought about this--we just don't have 100% off the details yet.)
My main concern overall about Leopard is that feature creep is going to cut into ease of use.
Only if you are FORCED to use Spaces. But like Expos�, Dashboard, and even the right mouse button, it will be optional. Apple is sensitive about beginner simplicity.
No comments:
Post a Comment