ValSalva
Apr 6, 11:10 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
VanNess
Aug 5, 10:40 PM
Does anyone think the recent "problems" at Apple are going to have any effect on what happens Monday.
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
This is steering off-topic, but Rob Enderle is a part-time anti-Apple/pro-Microsoft zealot and a full-time ignoramus who's past record of "analysis" boasts getting it wrong - really wrong - about 99.9% of the time regarding what he has to say about Apple.
So it's no surprise at all that he is virtually a lone voice on this issue pertaining to Jobs, virtually everyone else doesn't see him being implicated in a wrongful way about this.
In any event, it's pure speculation. It's not going to effect the WWDC and the WWDC isn't going to affect SEC matters pertaining to Apple.
Story: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/05/BUGAHKBK3H1.DTL
If there are products that are they "maybe" list, this might put them on the "go" list. Big news pushes stock prices up and pushes the "problem" stories on page 2.
This is steering off-topic, but Rob Enderle is a part-time anti-Apple/pro-Microsoft zealot and a full-time ignoramus who's past record of "analysis" boasts getting it wrong - really wrong - about 99.9% of the time regarding what he has to say about Apple.
So it's no surprise at all that he is virtually a lone voice on this issue pertaining to Jobs, virtually everyone else doesn't see him being implicated in a wrongful way about this.
In any event, it's pure speculation. It's not going to effect the WWDC and the WWDC isn't going to affect SEC matters pertaining to Apple.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:23 PM
Mike,
I know you're concerned about name-maybe Apple could license the use to you.
Leopard-Public beta like Vista. No-as it can be easily uploaded to torrent sites-like with the Tiger leaks. Apple should keep the preview ADC members only.
I know you're concerned about name-maybe Apple could license the use to you.
Leopard-Public beta like Vista. No-as it can be easily uploaded to torrent sites-like with the Tiger leaks. Apple should keep the preview ADC members only.
buckers
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
You sure as hell can.
This.
You sure as hell can.
This.
Cowinacape
Jul 14, 04:46 PM
I don't know if I am real big on the rumored 512 meg of ram (geesh) for the bottom end tower, c'mon Steve would throwing a gig in there really break the bank?? I do like the idea of dual optical drives though ( I do copy my cd's for use in my garage/workshop, so I don't wreck the originals).
An extra one or two pci slots would of been nice, (sucks, that some video cards wind up taking two slots, due to their cooling setup)
An extra one or two pci slots would of been nice, (sucks, that some video cards wind up taking two slots, due to their cooling setup)
Dan==
Jul 27, 05:02 PM
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
I could take a stab to make a Mini double-wide :-). (Perhaps not til the weekend tho to make it pretty.)
It would work well in home entertainment setups, but not so much on the desktop, I think. I'd expect a deeper, rather than wider, chassis would be preferred.
Fabulous Las Vegas Nevada
Las Vegas Sign by the Mandalay
welcome to fabulous las vegas
welcome to fabulous las vegas
welcome to fabulous las vegas
Welcome to fabulous Las Vegas
The Iconic Las Vegas Sign Gets
welcome to fabulous las vegas
Welcome to Fabulous Las Vegas
welcome to fabulous las vegas
stock vector : Las Vegas sign,
LAS VEGAS WELCOME SIGN AT
Las+vegas+sign+night
![]()
I could take a stab to make a Mini double-wide :-). (Perhaps not til the weekend tho to make it pretty.)
It would work well in home entertainment setups, but not so much on the desktop, I think. I'd expect a deeper, rather than wider, chassis would be preferred.
Sirmausalot
Apr 10, 11:42 AM
I think the studio concept, as we know, it will be gone. It will all be one truly integrated application. Most importantly, full audio editing will be integrated obviating the need for OMFs and conforms for the person who does all of their own work.
This will include a powerful titling tool, Motion graphics, compression, sound. There shouldn't be a need to launch an external application. Integrated Internet delivery will be comprehensive to social media, iDevices, and anything in the cloud.
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
This will include a powerful titling tool, Motion graphics, compression, sound. There shouldn't be a need to launch an external application. Integrated Internet delivery will be comprehensive to social media, iDevices, and anything in the cloud.
DVD Studio Pro will get a full overhaul and fully support The Bag of Hurt Blu-ray -- on an external burner for the new iMacs which will also be announced. Again, physical media gets an external treatment and the application will be the sperate step child of the newly integrated Final Studio.
sgibson
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
You keep using that word� (http://cl.ly/0X032o272d2a3G1T1K3D)
FF_productions
Jul 14, 04:14 PM
2003: "In 12 months, we'll be at 3GHz".
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
Mid 2006: "I want to talk about 2.66GHz" although 4 cores running at 2.66GHz (Yum! :D ).
Steve Jobs really must have been embarassed after claiming we'd have 3 ghz when we still can't even pass 2.7 ghz without a huge unstable liquid cooling system. Maybe Intel will bring us 3 ghz next month, a quad 3 ghz Xeon, does that even exist?
My problem with having 4 cores at 2.6 ghz is what will the other Mac Pro's offer? One more month...
bigwig
Nov 28, 07:37 PM
1) Who says the people who actually make the music would get any of this money in the first place?
My bet is that artist's contracts only pay out on music sales, not hardware royalties. Thus the cdrom tax and ipod royalties are profits they don't have to share with artists despite their pious rhetoric about how they need these revenues because piracy hurts recording artists.
My bet is that artist's contracts only pay out on music sales, not hardware royalties. Thus the cdrom tax and ipod royalties are profits they don't have to share with artists despite their pious rhetoric about how they need these revenues because piracy hurts recording artists.
Awakener
Apr 13, 11:40 AM
You're going to be paying for a data plan anyway, so why not make some of that money back in a subsidy?
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T; or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
Yeah, I really don't get why you wouldn't buy with a subsidy. You're basically going to pay either AT&T; or Verizon either way, so what's the difference whether you have a contract or not? EXCEPT, now there is talk iPhone 5 will be carrier independent! http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/02/11/why-a-tiny-iphone-could-be-a-big-deal/
HTC is outselling iPhone 4 atleast in some markets.
http://m.bgr.com/2011/03/31/htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-at-verizon-wireless-stores-analyst-claims/
It today the news looks more likely iPhone 5 may be delayed:
http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20110413PD212.html
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 03:11 PM
3am.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Thanks.
And that's not good.
Denarius
Mar 23, 11:40 AM
Enough time to move diplomatically as well?
There was tonnes of external political pressure exerted on Gadafi in the run up and he didn't shift an inch and proceeded to pick off unarmed protesters to an extent not seen in the other recent North African revolutions.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option.
In the scenario that existed last week, it wasn't only 'what other options there', but 'what other options are there that will prevent Gadafi killing off the revolutionaries before the week is out. Other options of the latter type were non-existent.
Gadafi needs to end it by standing down and the Libyan Government declaring free elections subject to UN oversight.
There was tonnes of external political pressure exerted on Gadafi in the run up and he didn't shift an inch and proceeded to pick off unarmed protesters to an extent not seen in the other recent North African revolutions.
I suppose the point at which "all other options have failed" is a debatable one, since everyone has different opinions on what constitutes a valid option.
In the scenario that existed last week, it wasn't only 'what other options there', but 'what other options are there that will prevent Gadafi killing off the revolutionaries before the week is out. Other options of the latter type were non-existent.
Gadafi needs to end it by standing down and the Libyan Government declaring free elections subject to UN oversight.
Sydde
Apr 27, 02:43 PM
... are there any graphic designers here who can help?
What you really need is a gang of mods to show you how to use "[ t i m g ]" :mad:
What you really need is a gang of mods to show you how to use "[ t i m g ]" :mad:
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
AppliedVisual
Oct 14, 04:02 PM
Intel is supposed to start shipping Clovertown CPUs into the retail channel by mid-november. We should see systems based on them by then too -- HP is claiming to have their first Clovertown workstations available on the 15th, so only a month away. I bet we'll see the 8-core Mac Pro systems by the end of November.
yg17
Apr 28, 02:08 PM
I figured he was born in the United States, as Hawaii is a state and was when he was born there. Now this McCain guy, he was not born in the United States, he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, which was a US territory or protectorate, so it still counts. Maybe if he had won the presidency, someone would have made a big deal about it too. I doubt it.
The fact that no one made a big deal about McCain proves that birtherism is rooted in racism.
Here you have a guy who was born outside the US, with questionable eligibility to be president and no one cared. Do I think McCain was eligible? Yes, I think he should be, as should anyone else who is born outside of the US to American parents - should someone be disqualified because their American parents who live in Buffalo were eating dinner at a restaurant across Niagara Falls in Canada when the mother went into labor? No. Of course not. McCain is eligible, but, the constitution is very vague on who is a natural born citizen. McCain's eligibility should have been taken to SCOTUS so the natural born citizen cause in the Constitution can be interpreted and cleared up once and for all. But no one made a big deal about it. Then you have Obama, who was born in Hawaii, who released a birth certificate, who had birth announcements in the Honolulu newspaper, and for whom there wasn't a single shred of evidence to suggest he was born anywhere else besides Hawaii, and people are making false accusations that he was born in Kenya or somehow not eligible to be president. Is it just a coincidence that he was the first black candidate? I think not. Birtherism = racism. It's as simple as that.
The fact that no one made a big deal about McCain proves that birtherism is rooted in racism.
Here you have a guy who was born outside the US, with questionable eligibility to be president and no one cared. Do I think McCain was eligible? Yes, I think he should be, as should anyone else who is born outside of the US to American parents - should someone be disqualified because their American parents who live in Buffalo were eating dinner at a restaurant across Niagara Falls in Canada when the mother went into labor? No. Of course not. McCain is eligible, but, the constitution is very vague on who is a natural born citizen. McCain's eligibility should have been taken to SCOTUS so the natural born citizen cause in the Constitution can be interpreted and cleared up once and for all. But no one made a big deal about it. Then you have Obama, who was born in Hawaii, who released a birth certificate, who had birth announcements in the Honolulu newspaper, and for whom there wasn't a single shred of evidence to suggest he was born anywhere else besides Hawaii, and people are making false accusations that he was born in Kenya or somehow not eligible to be president. Is it just a coincidence that he was the first black candidate? I think not. Birtherism = racism. It's as simple as that.
admanimal
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
Meanwhile, Apple is drowning in orders and battling light leaks (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/22/buyers.complain.of.multiple.faulty.replacements/) in displays. If the quality cannot be improved expeditiously, would-be customers may investigate the competition. :(
Yeah, with problems like that they are destined to fail. :rolleyes:
Yeah, with problems like that they are destined to fail. :rolleyes:
AlligatorBloodz
Apr 8, 02:16 AM
Just to let y'all know, unless someone else knows otherwise, Best Buy makes zero off Apple product sales (that haven't been marked up).
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
This is not entirely true. The apple tv2 best buy sells for $99 and best buys cost is around $90. Also, best buy honors student discounts on apple products. Apple does not reimburse bby for that. You really think bby is going to pay customers to buy apple products?
Anyway, I hate bby. I used to work there. Few of the employees give a **** about the customer.
I read this thread and I noted that someone pointed out that BB apparently marks up some items -Airports, Time Machines, etc. I found this odd since Apple controls all the pricing, but eh, not going to question that since those are the facts I'm assuming (can't be bothered to go on a comparing spree).
Anyway, the iPad 2s aren't marked up, thus they make zero.
Each department should be meeting their budget daily. How do they do that? By selling products they make notional margin and that allows that department to meet their budget. On a slow, sh-tty day, a department may only be 70% to budget; on a fast, awesome day, a department may be 110% to budget.
But when you make zero off iPad sales, keeping them away from customers does not help notional margin. Doesn't bring them any closer to hitting budget. The only way they'd make money on that iPad sale would be selling accessories or the Black Tie protection. But that's entirely something else.
Best Buy makes zero notional margin on iPad sales, so they're not withholding stock to meet daily budgets.
I can't explain why they're doing this, but given my knowledge, I can invalidate the claim that managers are hoarding iPads so that they can meet budget every day.
Cheers! :D
This is not entirely true. The apple tv2 best buy sells for $99 and best buys cost is around $90. Also, best buy honors student discounts on apple products. Apple does not reimburse bby for that. You really think bby is going to pay customers to buy apple products?
Anyway, I hate bby. I used to work there. Few of the employees give a **** about the customer.
NickPill
Aug 7, 10:55 PM
Hi, this is just a question to the developers. Did you already get 10.5? I have the ADC Select membership but can�t find 10.5 in the download section. Please send me an email where I can find it. Thank you!
troop231
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
All formidable looking tablets, it is indeed the year of the tablet.
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
elmimmo
Aug 17, 04:09 AM
It's frustrating to see all the work that anandtech (http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2816&p;=10) went through to make the benchmarks, for such a ****** comparison they decided to do in the first place.
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that? If the new Intels you are comparing against are all Quad based, the only reasonable G5 to compare against is the fastest one out there, the Quad G5 @2,5, because it is the fastest, and because it is even at core count. And they do not even mention it exists. And since you take the trouble to do so, compare fastest G5 against fastes Intel, gosh.
They could as well have compared any Mac Pro against an iMac DV�
They are comparing a 2 generations old G5 (Dual 2,5) versus a new Intel (Quad 2,6) which is not even the fastest out there. What kind of comparison is that? If the new Intels you are comparing against are all Quad based, the only reasonable G5 to compare against is the fastest one out there, the Quad G5 @2,5, because it is the fastest, and because it is even at core count. And they do not even mention it exists. And since you take the trouble to do so, compare fastest G5 against fastes Intel, gosh.
They could as well have compared any Mac Pro against an iMac DV�
Super Dave
Aug 6, 01:43 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Admittedly trademark law isn't my specialty, but I suspect Apple has a trademark on the word "Mac," and adding a generic word like "Pro" to it does not seem like something you could claim any originality with. Especially since it's based on their trademarked word in the first place. Is there something I'm missing?
Oh, and a computer and computer store aren't exactly the same thing. How are you going to claim consumer confusion?
David :cool:
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:39 PM
It is more like 81% of the world market.
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
MS Windows has about 95% of the world market...doesn't mean the technology is better.:)
