RawBert
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Apple doesn't need competition the way the PC me-too companies do. Apple has had its eye on the tablet space for over half a decade with no competition to speak of, but they produced a world-class 1.0 version of the iPad anyway. They have a vision of the future and are forging ahead regardless of what the copycats are doing. They are not going to stagnate as long as Steve is around.
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
Time to drop the tired "I sure like having competition for Apple" cliche. Ths ain't Microsoft were talking about.
Amen. Preach on!
Bill McEnaney
Apr 27, 01:51 PM
It's neither moral nor virtuous to be against the rights of your fellow citizens. Just sayin'
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
What rights: civil ones, human ones, merely legal ones, or moral ones? As I've already said, moral liberty consists of the ability to adopt the means to do the good.[/quote]
One has to wonder why conservatives get so wrapped up in social issues when there are so many other things on the plate. Things like abortion and gays will never go away. It's just as stupid to obsess over them as it is to obsess over Obama's birth certificate. Let's fix the economy and put people back to work. Those are the real problems. Anything else is a distraction.
I'm not obsessing about anything. Maybe abortion and gay rights will never go away. But does that mean I should stop fighting, say, abortion? Think about it, liberals. Each time a doctor aborts a baby, the government forfeits the tax revenue it would have collected from the baby if he survived, grew up, and worked. The U.S. population is aging, and too few babies are being born to maintain the country's population. Whether liberals like it or not, the government me need to shrink when there are too few taxpayers to give it the revenue it demands.
Put nursing home patients on social programs when their families or their friends take care of them instead. As nursing home populations grow, so do tax rates. As tax rates go up, more people lose their low-paying jobs and discover that welfare gives them more money than they earned at their low-paying jobs. As more and more get welfare, taxes go up and up.
Sure, we need to repair the economy. That's partly why we need major tax-cuts and major spending-cuts. The $38 billion is insignificant, especially when government spending offsets it.
Tolerance isn't either approval or indifference. To tolerate something is to endure an evil to prevent a greater evil or to get a great good.
Kane.Elson
Jul 28, 03:57 AM
You might want to make that til Tuesday September 12 when the Paris Apple Expo opens with an Apple keynote.
Yeah, I meant around that time. I'm not going to order it on midnight august 31st :P
It's just painfull thinking about all the goodies coming out soon.
Yeah, I meant around that time. I'm not going to order it on midnight august 31st :P
It's just painfull thinking about all the goodies coming out soon.
~Shard~
Aug 25, 03:00 PM
Apple needs to address this situation appropriately. As their products gain higher profile, as their customer base increases and they gain market share, it's only logical to think that there will be a greater need for support. If nothing else, it's simple math - more Macs out there = more problems! Esepcially with how well the Intel Macs have been selling, I think Apple would be foolish to think that what was good enough a few years ago is still good enough today in terms of support.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
Apple must also realize the importance of first impressions. Now more than ever new switchers are coming on board to the Intel platform, and if they have problems right off the bat and poor customer service and support, that's going to leave a sour taste in their mouth, and perhaps they may just get fed up and switch back.
Apple is so good at so many things - let's hope they ensure this is the case for their Support services as well.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 6, 04:42 PM
Upper Middle Class FTW!
Poor college student for the win.
I have to be a part time street pharmacist to pay for my tech additions
Poor college student for the win.
I have to be a part time street pharmacist to pay for my tech additions
rovex
Mar 22, 02:46 PM
Dude go back to school. And pay particular attention to learn about diagonal lengths and surface areas of rectangles.
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
I wasn't thinking straight, big deal.
And Thankfully I'm more successful in life than you'll ever be. Thanks.
bedifferent
Apr 10, 10:42 PM
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
My friend, who is a documentary film maker, was hired by Apple as a designer working with FCP engineers. In the past, we had differing views on FCP; I believed Apple was dropping it as well as other pro-sumer based products while she thought they wouldn't.
After recently speaking, and w/o breaking her NDA, she said she's disappointed. The project managers and engineers squabble a lot, and the designers (all almost film-makers and editors) aren't getting much input. According to her, Apple needs to fire the management and instate those focused on bringing the product to a new pro-sumer level. There appears to be a lot of mixed reviews, and that (as like Aperture) FCP is an attempt to bridge consumer and prosumer engines creating a big mess.
We'll see.
The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
�and according to those close to FCP development, therein lies the issue...
bretm
Apr 25, 03:54 PM
Ladies Ladies... they are storing information that should be private(yes, indeed), but let's not blow this out of proportion.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
THEY ARE NOT FOLLOWING YOU!!!
The OS or iOS collects & stores this information like many platforms for specific reasons... Android, does indeed do the very same type of stored information of the 3 cell-tower's estimation of location.
The really REALLY bad news is that this information is stored in your iPhone & as well as the actual device(Mac or PC) you sync your iPhone too. The information get's logged correctly... but we are talking about Privacy.
THE iPHONE IS JUST NOT AS SECURE AS IT SHOULD BE!!!
The file should be stored(for technical specific reasons), but not with this lack of diligence on user privacy...
APPLE, you need a way to log this info in a much more secure atmosphere if the iOS does truly need this information for specific reasons.
I don't get this either. If someone can get the file off your computer, then they can get any file off your computer. Email, web browsing history, address book, whatever. My phone is password protected and so is my computer.
BrettJDeriso
Apr 7, 11:23 PM
I dropped by BB this morning to score an iPod Nano. After standing around the diplay for ten minutes with no assistance, I headed over to the cell phone section to find the nearest Blue shirt. Of course, she couldn't leave her section, so she agreed to page someone. The page went out over the P.A., and in the time it took me to walk back to the ipod case, two "window shoppers" had showed up and were conversing amongst themselves about the merchandise.
Naturally, the when the clerk arrived, not knowing which customer needed assistance, she addressed them first. When they politely declined her help, she hovered there and stared over there shoulder as they continued their conversation.
At that point, I politely interjected, "Excuse me, miss, I paged you." She gave me a sideways glance -the barest minimum of an acknowlegement- and snapped, "I'll be with you in a moment."
It was at that point I drove to the Apple Store a block over and completed the transaction where the sales staff practically threw themselves at me.
The moral of this story: Eff Best Buy. They don't deserve to carry Apple products. This headline literally made the whole episode worthwhile.
Naturally, the when the clerk arrived, not knowing which customer needed assistance, she addressed them first. When they politely declined her help, she hovered there and stared over there shoulder as they continued their conversation.
At that point, I politely interjected, "Excuse me, miss, I paged you." She gave me a sideways glance -the barest minimum of an acknowlegement- and snapped, "I'll be with you in a moment."
It was at that point I drove to the Apple Store a block over and completed the transaction where the sales staff practically threw themselves at me.
The moral of this story: Eff Best Buy. They don't deserve to carry Apple products. This headline literally made the whole episode worthwhile.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 6, 11:12 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?
I can they have before. Drop in OS kits.
I can they have before. Drop in OS kits.
crackbookpro
Apr 11, 02:34 PM
It's all waiting on LTE from AT&T...; Apple could/would/will have served more justice by releasing an iPhone 5 with no LTE this June, and waiting for the June of 2012 to release an "iPhone 6" with LTE.
There is a possibility that LTE from Verizon is well-suited for an iPhone LTE release in early Feb next year. Verizon may have changed the starting point of Apple's releases for the iPhone(like the Verizon iPhone 4 in Feb '11). I do know that AT&T; is behind in its LTE infrastructure... It's all waiting on LTE from AT&T...;
The next iPhone may indeed have LTE from both AT&T; & Verizon, and presumably be here in the 1st quarter of 2012.
Hope this isn't the case...
There is a possibility that LTE from Verizon is well-suited for an iPhone LTE release in early Feb next year. Verizon may have changed the starting point of Apple's releases for the iPhone(like the Verizon iPhone 4 in Feb '11). I do know that AT&T; is behind in its LTE infrastructure... It's all waiting on LTE from AT&T...;
The next iPhone may indeed have LTE from both AT&T; & Verizon, and presumably be here in the 1st quarter of 2012.
Hope this isn't the case...
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.
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 02:10 AM
I don't see Apple moving to any version of ReiserFS or ext#, so I think we are stuck with HFS+ and extensions/improvements of it, until the ZFS situation gets clearer.
Apple abandoned ZFS due to licensing and they're working on their own new file system.
Apple abandoned ZFS due to licensing and they're working on their own new file system.
sth
Apr 12, 02:24 PM
Any news about what time the presentation will be?
yoak
Apr 6, 07:31 AM
Yup I guess as we deliver full "uncompressed" HD via HDCAM SR mainly our needs a rather different. To me Blu-ray is the worst of all formats fairly big cumbersome files that are still to compressed to be useful to any one professionally, and not small enough to simply chuck around on thumb drives.....
We don�t even have to go to HDCAM SR for delivery anymore. On our latest project we just brought a hard drive with the masters (in ProRes) and did a transfer right at the broadcast facility. That was nice.
I do see your point on the blu-ray file size though.
But when the promo department at the same broadcaster wanted to look at the programs to plan the promotion of the series it would be nice to drop them a blu-ray, knowing they would be able to watch it on any player.
EDIT: I do have to say it�s not often I miss the need for blu-ray, but it certainly do happen
We don�t even have to go to HDCAM SR for delivery anymore. On our latest project we just brought a hard drive with the masters (in ProRes) and did a transfer right at the broadcast facility. That was nice.
I do see your point on the blu-ray file size though.
But when the promo department at the same broadcaster wanted to look at the programs to plan the promotion of the series it would be nice to drop them a blu-ray, knowing they would be able to watch it on any player.
EDIT: I do have to say it�s not often I miss the need for blu-ray, but it certainly do happen
Multimedia
Jul 21, 04:58 PM
One way to get eight cores is to get 4 Mac Minis (just wait for the lowest model to become dual core), stack them up, and put them on a KVM. You get 8 cores, and 4 optical drives for *cheap*. Just a thought.;)Problem with that arrangement is that you are limited to the use of two cores for any one appication and there are already several I use that can use up to almost 3 at once. It would also get very confusing which mini you are on at a given moment.
Yeah I could also get a second G5 Quad. But that would be cheating. :D
Yeah I could also get a second G5 Quad. But that would be cheating. :D
SAD*FACED*CLOWN
Jun 9, 09:46 AM
With so many options for retail purchase, there's no need to camp out, even wait in a long line to get one.
janstett
Sep 15, 07:57 AM
I remember reading a BBC news article the other month about mRAM (or magnetic RAM) which has the same write speeds as RAM, but without its volatility. It doesn't loose it's data when the power is off. Ideal for fast HDDs they say.
Yeah, I think they're calling them "Hybrid drives" where they will have some fast static RAM built into a hard drive and store the most frequently accessed part of the drive in cache on the static RAM.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
You used to be able to do that with ramdisks, but getting the files onto the ramdisk took more time than just booting from the disk. Sometimes you can force the OS to keep itself in RAM when it's loaded from disk (so the OS won't start swapping itself out when it needs memory), there's a setting for this in Tweak XP.
Yeah, I think they're calling them "Hybrid drives" where they will have some fast static RAM built into a hard drive and store the most frequently accessed part of the drive in cache on the static RAM.
On an unrelated note, wouldnt it been cool to effectivly install a whole OS on RAM. That would be noticably quicker....
You used to be able to do that with ramdisks, but getting the files onto the ramdisk took more time than just booting from the disk. Sometimes you can force the OS to keep itself in RAM when it's loaded from disk (so the OS won't start swapping itself out when it needs memory), there's a setting for this in Tweak XP.
blackburn
Mar 26, 05:45 AM
I still don't get it, why do we apple users have to pay for os updates? The hardware is already expensive as hell.
polyesterlester
Aug 7, 03:55 PM
From the Xcode 3.0 (http://www.apple.com/macosx/leopard/xcode.html) page:
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
"Project Snapshots
"Record the state of your project anytime, and restore it instantly. Experiment with new features without spending time or brain cells committing them to a source control system. Like saving a game in Civilization 4, Xcode 3.0 lets you go back in time without repercussions. If only reality worked this way at the Pentagon..."
I love you, Apple.
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 09:36 AM
You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
SevenInchScrew
Nov 24, 01:20 PM
...I can't say how this compares to GT4 but so far it's been amazing
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
You have 800 cars exactly as they were in GT4, so you'll get a good idea. :p
My buddy picked this up today, so I'll be checking it out on Friday when we hang out. I'm not buying it without trying first. It will be interesting to see how well it plays. After waiting 6 years for another full Gran Turismo, I have big expectations. But hey, even if it doesn't play as well as I'm hoping, the photo mode looks excellent. I can spend a LOT of time in there.
MacinDoc
Sep 19, 01:58 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November.
Oh, really? What are they going to predict next, that the sun will rise tomorrow? Of course Merom-based products will replace their Yonah counterparts, which are slower, have inferior power management, and in some cases, cost more! I don't know if I could have predicted that. :rolleyes:
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated[/url] at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Gee, AppleInsider really went out on a limb on that one. ;)
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
Check out the surveys of tens of thousands of computer users at Consumer Reports. Apple's laptop reliability is within 1% of the best in the industry, and in the desktop department, Apple is by far the most reliable; some PCs are nearly twice as likely to need repairs as Macs. Rumor sites are hardly the best place to look for computer reliability data...
AppleInsider expects that Apple will update its complete laptop line (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2060) (13" MacBook and 15/17" MacBook Pros) to Core 2 Duo "Merom" before the holiday shopping season starts in late November.
Oh, really? What are they going to predict next, that the sun will rise tomorrow? Of course Merom-based products will replace their Yonah counterparts, which are slower, have inferior power management, and in some cases, cost more! I don't know if I could have predicted that. :rolleyes:
MacShrine and MacOSXRumors expect the MacBook Pro to be updated[/url] at Apple's September 25th event preceding Photokina. AppleInsider is unsure whether the updated MacBook will be unveiled at that event or be held off to ensure adequate supply of Intel's Core 2 Duo Merom chip.
Gee, AppleInsider really went out on a limb on that one. ;)
Apple's reliability? Care to elaborate more specifically? Good high quality well designed never dying logic boards that run at 40-ish degrees Celsius for one? :p
Check out the surveys of tens of thousands of computer users at Consumer Reports. Apple's laptop reliability is within 1% of the best in the industry, and in the desktop department, Apple is by far the most reliable; some PCs are nearly twice as likely to need repairs as Macs. Rumor sites are hardly the best place to look for computer reliability data...
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:19 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
