D34thPwny
Jan 2, 12:09 AM
In any case, it should be really cool and innovative!
You know, 'cause, they never do that...
You know, 'cause, they never do that...
h'biki
Apr 16, 02:30 AM
For example, Apple had to make Safari due to Microsoft pulling out of the mac - this is just one example where Apple is starting to make software because companies are leaving the platform.
.
One of the *few* examples of companies pulling out. Premiere was another high profile example. But over the last 3 years has seen companies companies porting their Windows/Linux/Unix software to OS X as well as a flood of original development -- which to me indicate that the platform is healthy.
(Examples include Maya, the return of MatLab to the platform, Absofts C++ Complier, Combustion, Shake [when it was with Nothing Real]... as well as original progs like iView, Proteus, SpamSieve etc]
.
One of the *few* examples of companies pulling out. Premiere was another high profile example. But over the last 3 years has seen companies companies porting their Windows/Linux/Unix software to OS X as well as a flood of original development -- which to me indicate that the platform is healthy.
(Examples include Maya, the return of MatLab to the platform, Absofts C++ Complier, Combustion, Shake [when it was with Nothing Real]... as well as original progs like iView, Proteus, SpamSieve etc]
MacPanda
Nov 29, 02:52 PM
i think you will be able to purchase stuff directly off itv and i am hoping you will be able to use some sort of wifi to sync it to the next generation ipod with wifi - i really want to be able to share songs between iPods and although the zune only lets you do it 3 times wifi needs to happen.
iTV has a small form factor and i hope they will keep it that way too - looks like a neat idea.
Peace - Anthony
iTV has a small form factor and i hope they will keep it that way too - looks like a neat idea.
Peace - Anthony
pika2000
Mar 22, 05:05 PM
For all those saying about SSD - don't forget that after approx. 2 years of regular use, the drive is pretty much useless. read/write speeds drop off considerably as they age. As unbelievable as it may seem, SSD still has a long way to go before it can replace the hard disk drive.
:rolleyes: SSD is far more reliable than a spinning platter on a highly portable handheld device. Read/write speed? This is for an MP3 player, not a gaming PC. And it's not like the performance of the hard-drive on the current classic is great either. There's always a lag here and there for the drive to spin up. Try browsing cover flow on the classic, it's painful.
:rolleyes: SSD is far more reliable than a spinning platter on a highly portable handheld device. Read/write speed? This is for an MP3 player, not a gaming PC. And it's not like the performance of the hard-drive on the current classic is great either. There's always a lag here and there for the drive to spin up. Try browsing cover flow on the classic, it's painful.
fhall1
Feb 27, 02:02 PM
27" iMac
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
Nice setup, but you have the room....don't spoil it by setting the printer on the subwoofer under the desk
17" MacBook Pro
iPad 16GB
iPhone 4 16GB
Logitech Z-2300
Time Capsule 1TB
Nice setup, but you have the room....don't spoil it by setting the printer on the subwoofer under the desk
trevorlsciact
May 2, 08:17 PM
All you have to do is drag .app in trash then instead of "empty trash", use secure empty trash so it can find the rest of the files:D
Unless I am very mistaken, that is not how that works.
Unless I am very mistaken, that is not how that works.
twoodcc
Nov 15, 09:46 AM
well i guess my mac pro will continue to serve me well. so i'm not too worried that new ones are coming out, glad actually. go apple:cool:
iSax1234
Mar 24, 12:23 PM
Other Animal species have bisexual relationships so it must be natural.
Other Animal species also are involved in cannibalism and random out breaks against their own kind, so in our species we shouldn't prohibit murder either, its natural.
Other Animal species also are involved in cannibalism and random out breaks against their own kind, so in our species we shouldn't prohibit murder either, its natural.
Rocketman
Oct 23, 10:46 PM
What TIME are the updates on Tuesdays usually made? EST? PST?
8-10am Pacific. If it hasn't happened by noon, forget it.
Steve is no longer married to Tuesday, however.
64 bit has to do with memory addressing, not GUI speed. Someone posted they felt it unlikely Santa Rosa (Intel 64 bit memory support chips) would be released early. But doesn't Intel have a 64 bit memory addressing system similar to the ?965? now?
If you don't need 3+ GB of portable memory NOW, you might as well wait till June 07 or buy whatever is available now and be really happy with it.
Rocketman
8-10am Pacific. If it hasn't happened by noon, forget it.
Steve is no longer married to Tuesday, however.
64 bit has to do with memory addressing, not GUI speed. Someone posted they felt it unlikely Santa Rosa (Intel 64 bit memory support chips) would be released early. But doesn't Intel have a 64 bit memory addressing system similar to the ?965? now?
If you don't need 3+ GB of portable memory NOW, you might as well wait till June 07 or buy whatever is available now and be really happy with it.
Rocketman
seanr
Oct 14, 06:53 PM
You talk about the price but I look at it this way. shore it might not be that great for the price and the difference between the hign end mini and the low end imac is not worth the hign end mini price but the point of the mini is to get people off the windows crap.I was going to switch back when the first intel mini came out but wanted something bettter for the price I ended up getting another windows one but now that the low end mini has due core and more ram I'm looking at selling my pc and getting a mac.I have been a fan of apple and the mac for many years and can see that it is not there hardware that sells the systems but there OS. I feel vista is doomed to fail and apple will be there to pick up the pieces when leopard comes out. I think Macworld 07 will be the best yet and will put windows and the pc on the down fall for good.Apple will be king in 2007 and we need to stop complaining and know apple will keep on putting the goods out.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 10:17 PM
I thought I heard him say that it was 'shipping' in June, in addition to the App Store. Can anyone else verify this?
Final Cut is.
We were talking about Aperture, the photo program.
Final Cut is.
We were talking about Aperture, the photo program.
ahuman7341
Jul 19, 04:29 PM
Most critical applications to be out in september? wouldnt adobe fall into this category???
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
Unspeaked
Sep 1, 01:58 PM
Definitely not. There's too much branding in the iMac name. For consumers, it means ease and simplicity with power and looks.
Agreed.
It'd be almost as bad as calling their music player a Pod.
The iMac name is gold.
Agreed.
It'd be almost as bad as calling their music player a Pod.
The iMac name is gold.
Evangelion
Jul 14, 07:26 AM
It'll take a while before B-spec becomes too slow for web surfing ;)
But there are lots of people who use the wireless for more than just web-surfing. Hell, WLAN is used at my workplace quite extensively in place of wired ethernet. That was the whole point of my comment. I (among others) use network-connectivity (wired or otherwise) for other things besides web-surfing
As to just web-surfing.... In the time of few years my internet-connection has moved from 512KB to 8MB. I could go to 12 or 24MB right now. The speed-increase has been FAST.
But there are lots of people who use the wireless for more than just web-surfing. Hell, WLAN is used at my workplace quite extensively in place of wired ethernet. That was the whole point of my comment. I (among others) use network-connectivity (wired or otherwise) for other things besides web-surfing
As to just web-surfing.... In the time of few years my internet-connection has moved from 512KB to 8MB. I could go to 12 or 24MB right now. The speed-increase has been FAST.
twoodcc
Sep 6, 09:57 AM
The Superdrive option in the base model has gone.
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
Earth to Apple: a Combo drive in 2002 was state of the art. A Combo drive in 2004 was a reasonably priced alternative to a DVD burner. A Combo drive in 2005 was an acceptable means of marketing differentiation. A Combo drive in 2006 (particularly with no option to buy a DVD burner) is an embarrassment...
i agree. i would never buy a computer that didn't have a dvd burner....and i'd never advise someone else to either
vvv
Nov 29, 09:46 AM
So. Microsoft’s mouse market share is so large that everyone is Logitech is peeing their pants? How about Microsoft’s total dominance of the Apple ][+ CPM card market?
Give me a break. Show me one area where Microsoft’s hardware has lead to a market share the size of iPod’s hold on MP3 players? I can’t think of a single one, can you?
They have been in the console biz for 1.2 generations, and their second generation console, a "moderate success", is looking like it will "win" this generation of console wars, I know I'm not alone in thinking that.
But I can think of a lot of software plays: Windows, Office, Visual Studio, Project/Visio. I can think of some moderate successes: Windows CE in embedded space, Xbox 360. As well as a lot of failures: Tablet PC, Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, UPMC, Windows Media Center, Plays For Sure, Xbox.
Their software sales are driven by getting in on the ground floor, windows for example, Office, and then trying to destroy all other comers (through various, often unscrupulous means), where as in the hardware market they play catch up, xbox, etc. I think we can all agree it's much easier to get in on the ground floor, than when everyone else is on floor 13.
I don't think MS is as worried about their mice as they are multimedia products, the xbox and the new zune brand are much more important than that, making the MS brand "nicer" more friendly etc. As more and more people want a computer in their living room, MS wants to be there to give it to them. Their mice are fairly well respected the last time I checked anyways.
See, unlike your narrow minded Microsoft fanboy-ism, I realize that the iPod dominance rests under three legs: iTunes, iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. Over the last five(!) years, Microsoft has used canon fodder to attack the latter two while it provided the first and the DRM for the second. Now the Zune is a direct attack, because two people at the top of Microsoft are jealous that after all these years QuickTime is still alive and well. They remember when they told Avi and Jobs to "knife the baby" and it’s really a thorn when they, the most profitable tech company in history, can’t back up that threat with action.
Fanboyism, well when the debate is lost, the loser resorts to slander, I believe socrates said that. Anyways, I'm not a ms fanboy, but I realise that they have tons of money to burn, and that is not going to change any time soon. They own a good portion of apple if I'm not wrong.... They have no reason to not want apple to succeed, nor do I, competition breeds excellence, as I said, if apple is affraid of competition, then it's time for some.
But until Microsoft wipes out Samsung and Creative, I think the burden of proof is on you. I pretty much destroyed your “Xbox is the shiznit” crap: it is, in no way, trending to dominate the market, and it won't even stop bleeding money until 2Q 2007. They’re just hoping Sony stumbles (which they are, but it looks like Nintendo is the primary recipient of Sony’s largess).
How did you destroy the xbox crap? They entered the market, and now with a second generation product are looking like they will have the most market share of all of the next gen consoles, going against a 3rd and 6-7th generation products. It sold more ps3's or wii's on their opening weekend. I own a wii btw, and probably will own a ps3 in a bit. Xbox 360 has sold about 8 million, so far, I believe. It's pretty much agreed upon that they will own the N.A. console market, it's the other markets which are in contention.
As for hoping Sony stumbles... Uh, the reason that sony looks like they are stumbling is because the ps3's online capability is being compared to XBL, that their console is being compared to the xbox, the fact that the ps3 can't output 1080i, wtf is that, and hey that may not be firmware fixable, they retracted that statement, etc etc etc. Go read any review of the PS3, they will mention things that are in direct comparison to the xbox. MS got it right this time, sony didn't. The only thing that is saving sony is their playstation brand name. Again, I'll own a ps3, but not for a while. I was REALLY excited about the ps3, and was a huge ps2 fan, but sony is pissing me off, and many, many other gamers as well. 600 dollars, comon, we all know that is crap, they loaded it with blueray and want us to pay for the pleasure of them shoving their format down our throats, perhaps we would like to play games, not watch your movies sony.
Do you think it is a coincidence that the partner that Microsoft tapped to launch the Zune (Toshiba) was the only major player with less that 2% of the market? And while we are on the topic. Why the hell is Microsoft introducing a hard drive player when the units that Apple is selling and having trouble stocking are flash-based?
Why did ms do that stuff, why are you asking me, I don't know. But maybe just maybe they don't care what apple is doing? Seems plausible to me, they got in on the console market by doing it completely different. Which I know, the 360 is a moderate success, sure, in japan sure.
[I made a tiny error. Xbox sold 1.6 million units its launch quarter. They sold .9 million units last quarter. I got those two quarters confused.]
ps3 has 250K units world wide so far, and most of those are on ebay. lol
Give me a break. Show me one area where Microsoft’s hardware has lead to a market share the size of iPod’s hold on MP3 players? I can’t think of a single one, can you?
They have been in the console biz for 1.2 generations, and their second generation console, a "moderate success", is looking like it will "win" this generation of console wars, I know I'm not alone in thinking that.
But I can think of a lot of software plays: Windows, Office, Visual Studio, Project/Visio. I can think of some moderate successes: Windows CE in embedded space, Xbox 360. As well as a lot of failures: Tablet PC, Pocket PC, Windows Mobile, UPMC, Windows Media Center, Plays For Sure, Xbox.
Their software sales are driven by getting in on the ground floor, windows for example, Office, and then trying to destroy all other comers (through various, often unscrupulous means), where as in the hardware market they play catch up, xbox, etc. I think we can all agree it's much easier to get in on the ground floor, than when everyone else is on floor 13.
I don't think MS is as worried about their mice as they are multimedia products, the xbox and the new zune brand are much more important than that, making the MS brand "nicer" more friendly etc. As more and more people want a computer in their living room, MS wants to be there to give it to them. Their mice are fairly well respected the last time I checked anyways.
See, unlike your narrow minded Microsoft fanboy-ism, I realize that the iPod dominance rests under three legs: iTunes, iTunes Music Store, and the iPod. Over the last five(!) years, Microsoft has used canon fodder to attack the latter two while it provided the first and the DRM for the second. Now the Zune is a direct attack, because two people at the top of Microsoft are jealous that after all these years QuickTime is still alive and well. They remember when they told Avi and Jobs to "knife the baby" and it’s really a thorn when they, the most profitable tech company in history, can’t back up that threat with action.
Fanboyism, well when the debate is lost, the loser resorts to slander, I believe socrates said that. Anyways, I'm not a ms fanboy, but I realise that they have tons of money to burn, and that is not going to change any time soon. They own a good portion of apple if I'm not wrong.... They have no reason to not want apple to succeed, nor do I, competition breeds excellence, as I said, if apple is affraid of competition, then it's time for some.
But until Microsoft wipes out Samsung and Creative, I think the burden of proof is on you. I pretty much destroyed your “Xbox is the shiznit” crap: it is, in no way, trending to dominate the market, and it won't even stop bleeding money until 2Q 2007. They’re just hoping Sony stumbles (which they are, but it looks like Nintendo is the primary recipient of Sony’s largess).
How did you destroy the xbox crap? They entered the market, and now with a second generation product are looking like they will have the most market share of all of the next gen consoles, going against a 3rd and 6-7th generation products. It sold more ps3's or wii's on their opening weekend. I own a wii btw, and probably will own a ps3 in a bit. Xbox 360 has sold about 8 million, so far, I believe. It's pretty much agreed upon that they will own the N.A. console market, it's the other markets which are in contention.
As for hoping Sony stumbles... Uh, the reason that sony looks like they are stumbling is because the ps3's online capability is being compared to XBL, that their console is being compared to the xbox, the fact that the ps3 can't output 1080i, wtf is that, and hey that may not be firmware fixable, they retracted that statement, etc etc etc. Go read any review of the PS3, they will mention things that are in direct comparison to the xbox. MS got it right this time, sony didn't. The only thing that is saving sony is their playstation brand name. Again, I'll own a ps3, but not for a while. I was REALLY excited about the ps3, and was a huge ps2 fan, but sony is pissing me off, and many, many other gamers as well. 600 dollars, comon, we all know that is crap, they loaded it with blueray and want us to pay for the pleasure of them shoving their format down our throats, perhaps we would like to play games, not watch your movies sony.
Do you think it is a coincidence that the partner that Microsoft tapped to launch the Zune (Toshiba) was the only major player with less that 2% of the market? And while we are on the topic. Why the hell is Microsoft introducing a hard drive player when the units that Apple is selling and having trouble stocking are flash-based?
Why did ms do that stuff, why are you asking me, I don't know. But maybe just maybe they don't care what apple is doing? Seems plausible to me, they got in on the console market by doing it completely different. Which I know, the 360 is a moderate success, sure, in japan sure.
[I made a tiny error. Xbox sold 1.6 million units its launch quarter. They sold .9 million units last quarter. I got those two quarters confused.]
ps3 has 250K units world wide so far, and most of those are on ebay. lol
Multimedia
Nov 17, 07:33 PM
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.I agree. Apple's view of the market is very strange. They seem to think their customers either only want an all-in-one two core solution or an extremely expensive top of the line 4 or 8 core solution. Hopefully Kentsfield will find a home in a new Mac line in 2007.
Object-X
Nov 28, 03:25 AM
Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327
In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.
I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?
There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.
Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.
Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:53 PM
The problem is there are some people that cannot see the evidence in front of them.
You can have an intelligent debate with someone about some contentious issue such as abortion, animal experiments, death penalty etc because there are intelligent arguments to argue both sides. People obviously have different opinions, but I can recognise the merits of the arguments made by those who disagree with me.
This, however, it not one of those topics. Things like homosexuality as a choice, creationism, astrology are not unknowns. There is evidence- scientists don't seriously research astrology because the evidence is in! Some people will still believe in these things through faith or whatever else. [Not that I understand it- if God himself came down now and told me he was real and I should be anti-gay rights I'd just tell him to shove it!]
What we can say is that homosexuals do seem to be getting more and more rights, which is great. I was so happy to see civil partnerships introduced here a few years ago, and I hope it will be 're-branded' as marriage eventually. We don't need everyone to agree to make progress, and there will always be people behind the times, but with any luck anti-homosxual views will become more and more unacceptable in civilised society.
This is good! Especially the last line, and if I may piggy back on that stating slavery & women not being equal to men is now unacceptable as it should be.
I actually agree. But would you still think this if they didn't allow "Gay B-Gone." Or would you cry that gays always get their way?
Honestly I wouldn't cry about any issue with apps. I pay attention to what's coming to iOS and what is approved and disapproved but I look at it as Apple has it's own reasons. As long as no App they approve is forced on me I'm happy.
I may not know the pythagorean theorem either, but if I'm going to participate in a debate over the pythagorean theorem, I'm going to make damn sure I know it.
Again, I agree I came without my research on the founding fathers & the pledge of allegiance.
You can have an intelligent debate with someone about some contentious issue such as abortion, animal experiments, death penalty etc because there are intelligent arguments to argue both sides. People obviously have different opinions, but I can recognise the merits of the arguments made by those who disagree with me.
This, however, it not one of those topics. Things like homosexuality as a choice, creationism, astrology are not unknowns. There is evidence- scientists don't seriously research astrology because the evidence is in! Some people will still believe in these things through faith or whatever else. [Not that I understand it- if God himself came down now and told me he was real and I should be anti-gay rights I'd just tell him to shove it!]
What we can say is that homosexuals do seem to be getting more and more rights, which is great. I was so happy to see civil partnerships introduced here a few years ago, and I hope it will be 're-branded' as marriage eventually. We don't need everyone to agree to make progress, and there will always be people behind the times, but with any luck anti-homosxual views will become more and more unacceptable in civilised society.
This is good! Especially the last line, and if I may piggy back on that stating slavery & women not being equal to men is now unacceptable as it should be.
I actually agree. But would you still think this if they didn't allow "Gay B-Gone." Or would you cry that gays always get their way?
Honestly I wouldn't cry about any issue with apps. I pay attention to what's coming to iOS and what is approved and disapproved but I look at it as Apple has it's own reasons. As long as no App they approve is forced on me I'm happy.
I may not know the pythagorean theorem either, but if I'm going to participate in a debate over the pythagorean theorem, I'm going to make damn sure I know it.
Again, I agree I came without my research on the founding fathers & the pledge of allegiance.
Herdfan
Apr 19, 04:08 PM
i wish they could wait and roll out the new imacs w/ Lion in June. im trying to hold out...its hard...lol
Actually glad they aren't. Then I can get the new iMac and upgrade to Lion when I'm/it's ready.
Actually glad they aren't. Then I can get the new iMac and upgrade to Lion when I'm/it's ready.
Leet Apple
Feb 27, 05:51 PM
Changed it up a bit.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5054/5483768370_423466b4b2_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5260/5483175217_83c32f59b9_b.jpg
You Should Clean your iPhone Screen ;)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5054/5483768370_423466b4b2_b.jpg
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5260/5483175217_83c32f59b9_b.jpg
You Should Clean your iPhone Screen ;)
m4rc
Mar 24, 03:02 AM
But Apple's market is shrinking.....
What you are possibly forgetting is that although, yes, Apple's market share may be shrinking, the market it self - the number of units actualy shifted - is growing at massive rates. I don't really have to explain percentages now do I, it is obvious that 1.7% or whatever it is of 10,000,000 (a figure pulled from the air, I have NO idea how many units are shifted :)) is a much higher number than say 5% of 1,000,000. Apple is shifting more units - may not be computers, iPods are obviously helping Apple to succeed, and do remember that some of these iPod users are going to like the thing so much that they start taking a healthy interest in the rest of Apple's product range.
Apple may be many things, but the way they have turned there fortunes around, going from the brink to billions in the bank and zero debt, shows the one thing they are not is stupid. They realise what the market is doing, and are releasing the products that make the most profit. It is all about profit, as in pretty much any bussiness. I started my business doing I.T Support, Servicing, Installations etc. I found a market niche where I could make some serious profit, and have completely remodelled the company to that, even though what we as a company always wanted to do was I.T Services. You have to go where the money is. And I obviouslly don't know the numbers, but I would bet that the profit does not come with shifting units that make you a few dollars just to increase your market share a little.
I like the references people have made to other iconic brands - BMW, Ferrari, Tiffany's, there are many. These companies could all increase their market share massively by selling cheaper stripped down products, and to some extent BMW is doing just this, but to go for a car that aims at the bottom end of the market, that would hurt BMW too much. More likely, they would aquire a low end car manufacturer and improve the organisation, a little like VAG and Seat and Skoda - may not have all of those brands in the states though.
I would like to see Apple increasing it's market share too, but not at any cost. It would be very easy to just chuck out a budget box and lose money on it, what would thay gain? Lower profits possibley, and an increased market share, but to what end? Some companies have a lovely large market share, and are teetering on the edge as they are just not profitable. Apple know's it's business, and it will do whatever it has to do to succeed and profit. I do agree however, that they have current issues over product quality and service support, but again, these will be sorted over time.
Marc
What you are possibly forgetting is that although, yes, Apple's market share may be shrinking, the market it self - the number of units actualy shifted - is growing at massive rates. I don't really have to explain percentages now do I, it is obvious that 1.7% or whatever it is of 10,000,000 (a figure pulled from the air, I have NO idea how many units are shifted :)) is a much higher number than say 5% of 1,000,000. Apple is shifting more units - may not be computers, iPods are obviously helping Apple to succeed, and do remember that some of these iPod users are going to like the thing so much that they start taking a healthy interest in the rest of Apple's product range.
Apple may be many things, but the way they have turned there fortunes around, going from the brink to billions in the bank and zero debt, shows the one thing they are not is stupid. They realise what the market is doing, and are releasing the products that make the most profit. It is all about profit, as in pretty much any bussiness. I started my business doing I.T Support, Servicing, Installations etc. I found a market niche where I could make some serious profit, and have completely remodelled the company to that, even though what we as a company always wanted to do was I.T Services. You have to go where the money is. And I obviouslly don't know the numbers, but I would bet that the profit does not come with shifting units that make you a few dollars just to increase your market share a little.
I like the references people have made to other iconic brands - BMW, Ferrari, Tiffany's, there are many. These companies could all increase their market share massively by selling cheaper stripped down products, and to some extent BMW is doing just this, but to go for a car that aims at the bottom end of the market, that would hurt BMW too much. More likely, they would aquire a low end car manufacturer and improve the organisation, a little like VAG and Seat and Skoda - may not have all of those brands in the states though.
I would like to see Apple increasing it's market share too, but not at any cost. It would be very easy to just chuck out a budget box and lose money on it, what would thay gain? Lower profits possibley, and an increased market share, but to what end? Some companies have a lovely large market share, and are teetering on the edge as they are just not profitable. Apple know's it's business, and it will do whatever it has to do to succeed and profit. I do agree however, that they have current issues over product quality and service support, but again, these will be sorted over time.
Marc
twoodcc
Apr 17, 12:32 AM
We need a 6 digit thread :p
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
hey go ahead and start one if you want. i know what you mean though. i never thought i'd get to 1 million points when i first started. now i'm almost at 7 million!
I have in 2 weeks folded what took me nearly a year to do on my iBook G4. I should be at 100k soon which is very exciting for me. Who else is trying to achieve a 6 digit score :cool:
hey go ahead and start one if you want. i know what you mean though. i never thought i'd get to 1 million points when i first started. now i'm almost at 7 million!
daveporter
Nov 18, 08:27 PM
Multiple cores are useful for more then improving the processing of multiple threaded applicaitons individually.
Multiple cores are very useful when you run more then one application at a time as long as the operating system is able to allocate core use to more than one application at a time (as OSX does quite nicely). Therefore, with multiple cores, you will get better performance for each application when more then one applicaiton is run at the same time.
When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.
Therefore, multiple cores are still useful even if many of the applications you use are not highly multithreaded.
Dave
Multiple cores are very useful when you run more then one application at a time as long as the operating system is able to allocate core use to more than one application at a time (as OSX does quite nicely). Therefore, with multiple cores, you will get better performance for each application when more then one applicaiton is run at the same time.
When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.
Therefore, multiple cores are still useful even if many of the applications you use are not highly multithreaded.
Dave