BlizzardBomb
Jul 23, 05:59 AM
I posted this question in another thread but no one has answered it, so... I was wondering what thoughts you had on this:
Will this upgrade to Core 2 Duo be considered a RevB strictly speaking, for the iMacs? I mean, since it's a new generation of Intel chip as opposed to a speed bump of an existing chip, is it likely to cause any unknown bugs or dramas that the Core Duos didn't?
I'm in the market for a new iMac when they put the new chips in, but I want to be confident that this time they'll have ironed out all the bugs from the initial release of Intel iMacs, plus not be likely to have new bugs caused by the new architecture of the Core 2 Duos.
Thoughts?
Chuck.
If iMacs get Merom its highly likely there'll be 0 new problems. If they get Conroe there is a very very small possibility of heat issues.
Will this upgrade to Core 2 Duo be considered a RevB strictly speaking, for the iMacs? I mean, since it's a new generation of Intel chip as opposed to a speed bump of an existing chip, is it likely to cause any unknown bugs or dramas that the Core Duos didn't?
I'm in the market for a new iMac when they put the new chips in, but I want to be confident that this time they'll have ironed out all the bugs from the initial release of Intel iMacs, plus not be likely to have new bugs caused by the new architecture of the Core 2 Duos.
Thoughts?
Chuck.
If iMacs get Merom its highly likely there'll be 0 new problems. If they get Conroe there is a very very small possibility of heat issues.
ehoui
May 6, 11:35 AM
Tell you what ..... you go and find 20 kids in grade 3 or 4. Teach 10 of them how to multiply 3 13/16" by 3, and then teach the other 10 how to multiply 96.8 by 3. Then see how many from each group decide to take up social work, or teaching history, becoming a ski instructor as a profession :D.
No, that's not how it works -- YOU are supposed to do that to support your argument, not me :-). Anyway, I understand what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree because I think there are more important factors (for which there are studies). Cheers!
No, that's not how it works -- YOU are supposed to do that to support your argument, not me :-). Anyway, I understand what you are saying, but I respectfully disagree because I think there are more important factors (for which there are studies). Cheers!
Popeye206
Apr 7, 10:23 AM
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point, my point was 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock for a prolonged period of time'. This is very different from Apple being found guilty etc etc.
Stella, Nothing wrong or illegal about a company securing parts. RIM, HP, and others have the resources to do the same, but they did not and Apple did. Just because one company is smarter than the others does not make it illegal.
It does show though... I'd invest in Touch Panel makers. They are going to be expanding like crazy! Great investment opportunity!
Stella, Nothing wrong or illegal about a company securing parts. RIM, HP, and others have the resources to do the same, but they did not and Apple did. Just because one company is smarter than the others does not make it illegal.
It does show though... I'd invest in Touch Panel makers. They are going to be expanding like crazy! Great investment opportunity!
supmango
Nov 2, 12:54 PM
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
Agreed, nothing like this is ever "free".
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
Agreed, nothing like this is ever "free".
lilo777
Apr 18, 04:02 PM
As it's already been said, Apple is protecting their IP and patents. If they don't show the effort, they run the risk of losing them. It's not a "Apple is evil" issue, it's how IP and patents work.
There are several ways to lose a patent. One way is not to defend it. Another ways is trying to defend bogus patents and have the court invalidate it.
There are several ways to lose a patent. One way is not to defend it. Another ways is trying to defend bogus patents and have the court invalidate it.
ZorPrime
Nov 26, 12:34 AM
i hope apple comes out with a shoe phone, something the pink panther or inspector gadget would use.
Very retro.. ;)
Very retro.. ;)
gnasher729
Aug 4, 03:00 AM
MBP Merom anyone? Appleinsider has always been reliable...so this may happen. This WWDC is gonna be great!
This is not a question of Appleinsider being reliable, more a matter of rumor sites making a guess that is absolutely obvious. There is no way that Apple could _not_ use Merom in the future, since Intel will sell it at exactly the same price that it charges for Yonah today.
This is not a question of Appleinsider being reliable, more a matter of rumor sites making a guess that is absolutely obvious. There is no way that Apple could _not_ use Merom in the future, since Intel will sell it at exactly the same price that it charges for Yonah today.
manu chao
Jul 30, 12:27 PM
They [flip phones] have more moving parts that can break ...
True, but as long as my RAZR keeps working, my personal perception of how high that risk is, tells me that this is not an important factor.
and take longer to answer, especially if your hands are full or you're driving
your car.
It still takes longer to get my cellphone out of my pocket than to flip it open. I can flip it open with one hand and without having to look at it (somehow important when driving).
True, but as long as my RAZR keeps working, my personal perception of how high that risk is, tells me that this is not an important factor.
and take longer to answer, especially if your hands are full or you're driving
your car.
It still takes longer to get my cellphone out of my pocket than to flip it open. I can flip it open with one hand and without having to look at it (somehow important when driving).
wclyffe
Nov 8, 09:43 AM
I'm really sorry but I couldn't resist correcting. :D After I was halfway through the video I thought "why the heck don't I understand this if it's supposed to be German?" It was Danish. :D
Ooops...sorry. I turned the volume down almost immediately and didn't listen carefully enough! Thanks!
Ooops...sorry. I turned the volume down almost immediately and didn't listen carefully enough! Thanks!
ihaveNFC
May 7, 11:25 PM
How is it a novelty?
Turned out not to have any particular value "for me" as I continued to use it.
Turned out not to have any particular value "for me" as I continued to use it.
balamw
Apr 11, 07:53 AM
I can't go so far as to say the answer is 288 as I don't think it is correct to take / at face value. I don't think that is what the author intended.
PEBCAK. (see earlier in the thread).
The answer of what was typed is 288. If the entity between the keyboard and chair meant something else, they should have typed something else.
The problem isn't with the expression it's with the wetware.
B
PEBCAK. (see earlier in the thread).
The answer of what was typed is 288. If the entity between the keyboard and chair meant something else, they should have typed something else.
The problem isn't with the expression it's with the wetware.
B
twoodcc
Aug 4, 03:54 PM
Not to be rude, but are you really dumb enough to ask this? Ok, I'll try to make this as simple as possible: if I used a fully 64-bit OS & fully 64-bit software, that is software optimized for 64-bit processors, on a fully 64-bit processor, what would the advantage of using that set-up over using a 32-bit OS & 32-bit software on a 32-bit processor?
yeah i'd say that's rude. maybe i misunderstood you, but you never said this. (or if you did, i missed it).
i do not know the technical stuff, but i do know that if you had all 64-bit stuff, then it'd be a lot better than all 32-bit stuff. (i know i should use better termanology, but oh well)
yeah i'd say that's rude. maybe i misunderstood you, but you never said this. (or if you did, i missed it).
i do not know the technical stuff, but i do know that if you had all 64-bit stuff, then it'd be a lot better than all 32-bit stuff. (i know i should use better termanology, but oh well)
rdowns
Apr 14, 01:11 PM
America is getting bent over and the dummies in the Tea Party are championing for their own destruction. Here is a link to the story about the Real Housewives of Wall Street.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411
I strongly recommend people do whatever they can to watch the Documentary Inside Job.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/
It's red face enraging to see how much money was pocketed by rich *******s in this country while working americans were losing their homes.
Read that a bit earlier. Taibbi is just about the only journalist reporting on this. How sad.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411
I strongly recommend people do whatever they can to watch the Documentary Inside Job.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/
It's red face enraging to see how much money was pocketed by rich *******s in this country while working americans were losing their homes.
Read that a bit earlier. Taibbi is just about the only journalist reporting on this. How sad.
GCRoberts
Apr 7, 01:25 PM
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I think there is more going on here with many of us Apple supporters. We have already watched Apple lose out to Microsoft in the 80's when Apple clearly had the better products. Thirty years later we still suffer through a Microsoft dominated world while Apple STILL has better products. Yes, we can buy Macs for home, but we go to the office and have to sit in front of MicroCrap software. You have to suspect that there will be a huge winner in this new market as well and we desperately want it to be Apple this time around! Will this mean that Apple will become the company that makes crappy products while the little guys create genius.....possibly.....but with decades of a pretty damn good track record.....our money is on Apple to continue to innovate no matter how much market share they own.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I think there is more going on here with many of us Apple supporters. We have already watched Apple lose out to Microsoft in the 80's when Apple clearly had the better products. Thirty years later we still suffer through a Microsoft dominated world while Apple STILL has better products. Yes, we can buy Macs for home, but we go to the office and have to sit in front of MicroCrap software. You have to suspect that there will be a huge winner in this new market as well and we desperately want it to be Apple this time around! Will this mean that Apple will become the company that makes crappy products while the little guys create genius.....possibly.....but with decades of a pretty damn good track record.....our money is on Apple to continue to innovate no matter how much market share they own.
lilo777
Mar 29, 11:11 AM
That will be their pitch. Value added cloud service. There really is no difference now for Android users between buying a mp3 or movie from iTunes or Amazon.
front page of the New York
New York Times Front Page
front page of the New York
The New York Times#39; Rose
hobbbz
Apr 21, 02:50 PM
Here's a quick scale / mockup
digitalbiker
Aug 11, 03:22 PM
I find it incredibly hard to believe that Apple intends to maintain the closeness in specs that are currently present between the MacBook Pro and MacBook. It makes more sense for Apple to move the MBP to the Core2 Duo and leave the MacBook to the Yonah. This leaves two more speed bumps for the MacBook. First 10 2.16, then to 2.33, all the while leaving the MBP time to advance with the Merom so it can gain momentum against the MacBook.
I also think Apple will leave the MB with Yonah. They will want product differentiation and price differentiation.
So I think they will drop the price to <$1000.00 for MB and re-design MBP to provide enhancements similar to MB but with faster Merom CPU's and higher price than MB.
I also think Apple will leave the MB with Yonah. They will want product differentiation and price differentiation.
So I think they will drop the price to <$1000.00 for MB and re-design MBP to provide enhancements similar to MB but with faster Merom CPU's and higher price than MB.
mkrishnan
Nov 22, 11:20 AM
Good post. I'm still waiting for a phone that will easily (and thoroughly) sync with my Address Book and iCal, and I'm on the mac platform. So even some of the features you describe would be of immediate value to a lot of mac users.
My experience with Symbian (Series 60) is that it does a very thorough sync'ing using iSync.... and of course there are many, many phones that do at least a loosely passable job... even my cute but dumb RAZR. Are you serious or joking?
My experience with Symbian (Series 60) is that it does a very thorough sync'ing using iSync.... and of course there are many, many phones that do at least a loosely passable job... even my cute but dumb RAZR. Are you serious or joking?
Sky Blue
Aug 4, 01:25 PM
So I am planning on buying a MBP a soon or soon after they upgrade to Merom (depending on my $$ situation). BUt, I might be convinced to wait until Leopard is installed on the machines to buy.
Question:
How much will it cost to upgrade? I know that the current version of OSX is $100+ in the Apple store. Is that an upgrade, or for people still running 9? Will the upgrade be that much?
Thanks
$129 for everybody if it's like previous releases. There is usually no upgrade.
Question:
How much will it cost to upgrade? I know that the current version of OSX is $100+ in the Apple store. Is that an upgrade, or for people still running 9? Will the upgrade be that much?
Thanks
$129 for everybody if it's like previous releases. There is usually no upgrade.
bedifferent
Apr 24, 10:24 AM
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
blow45
Mar 29, 02:58 PM
It is unclear why only Apple's iPod line is cited in the report, as virtually identical lithium-polymer batteries are used in the iPhone and iPad. Similar technology is also used in Apple's notebook batteries, although those units may not utilize the pliable polymer manufactured by Kureha in their construction.
Well pick up the phone and ask them, or investigate this somehow. It's unclear in as much as you haven't done your job of researching this...
Well pick up the phone and ask them, or investigate this somehow. It's unclear in as much as you haven't done your job of researching this...
Multimedia
Aug 7, 07:22 PM
In the past, Apple has always issued a "White Paper" on new leading products. I can't see the link for that yet. Anyone find it? :confused:
Stevesbodyguard
May 4, 03:03 PM
I googled it...sounds like a dying fad...
Agreed...I give it another 2 months till nobody even remembers this whole "App Store" thing.
Agreed...I give it another 2 months till nobody even remembers this whole "App Store" thing.
citizenzen
Apr 16, 01:23 PM
It's spending on investment rather than spending on consumption.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
