zap2
Apr 19, 11:09 AM
Apple should do a nice desktop refresh...at least for the consumer/prosumer grade machine, I don't follow the CPU that a Mac Pro upgrade would depend on(although I'd imagine if the lower powered chips are out, higher powered chips would also be out, but one can never be 100% sure)
But iMac and Mac mini bumps would be quite do able!
But iMac and Mac mini bumps would be quite do able!
arkmannj
Apr 12, 09:50 PM
I wonder if they'll update the whole studio suite
(yes, including DVD Studio Pro I hope. Maybe they'll rename it Media studio and make it output DVD's, Blu Ray, maybe even interactive Quicktime files )
(yes, including DVD Studio Pro I hope. Maybe they'll rename it Media studio and make it output DVD's, Blu Ray, maybe even interactive Quicktime files )
Cheffy Dave
Jun 24, 01:46 AM
That's a very old render. I doubt MacAllen made it. Plus, why would you want a transparent display on a desktop? I can almost understand it on a window, but on a desktop it just looks like ****.
but it's all about what appears in that window,and sort of disappears when not in use, anyway it all just conjecture, not cast in stone, chill, it's just discussion ,yes???;)
but it's all about what appears in that window,and sort of disappears when not in use, anyway it all just conjecture, not cast in stone, chill, it's just discussion ,yes???;)
peestandingup
Jul 15, 12:33 AM
I usually think Apple makes great decisions, but my guess is that Blu-Ray was a bad one. I think it will ultimately fail with consumers.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
There is A LOT riding on this right now & given Sony's track record with this sorta stuff, im a little concerned. Their PSP (UMD) format is already on its way out & is being discontinued. Not to mention all the other failed Sony formats over the years.
Now, they announce the PS3 is gonna have that ridiculous price tag of $600, which could have been much cheaper if they didnt include Blu-Ray in every single machine. They should have made it an add-on & gave people a choice instead of shoving it in everyones face. Correct me if im wrong, but dont gamers just wanna play games? You're looking at upwards of $1,000 for the system, a couple games, add-ons, etc. If PS3 fails (which it very well might), then kiss Blu-Ray goodbye.
Sony is setting themselves up for a huge backlash & I could really care less about them. I just wish Apple wasnt supporting their format.
diamond.g
Mar 24, 03:47 PM
Anytime OS X detects quartz, OpenGL, etc. it kicks in. You get the idea. Generally when those are detected you tend to be doing something that will require heavy load(or heavier load).
Right.
Like running the new FF 4 (which appears to trigger the dGPU now for no apparent reason). Or when Safari needs to update its thumbnails and the dGPU kicks on.
:p
Hopefully Apple will improve the switchover to make it more frugal.
Right.
Like running the new FF 4 (which appears to trigger the dGPU now for no apparent reason). Or when Safari needs to update its thumbnails and the dGPU kicks on.
:p
Hopefully Apple will improve the switchover to make it more frugal.
Mulyahnto
Jul 19, 03:55 PM
I think iPod and Mac sales volume was towards the high end of the range of analysts' predictions. iPod and Mac sales volume is a more important indicator than revenue, I think.
ellsworth
Apr 26, 12:50 PM
Ridiculous.
BenRoethig
Nov 28, 07:59 AM
Congratulations, you just lost any arguments you wish to make. If Apple monitors are vastly overpriced for what you get, if you don't have any need for something that is superior to a regular consumer model, then why in the hell did you buy one?
Might have something to do with the fact that it matches the computer. However, the vast majority of Apple vs Dell display battles, even in the Mac community go to Dell. By the way, of the 23" displays tested last year, the one recommended by Macworld wasn't the Cinema Display, it only got 3.5 mice. The winner was actually an HP, which also by the way, was roughly the same price as the ACD at the time. It's 24" successor is about the same price as the dell. Same of their 20" Give all the "professional quality" justifications you want, the price of the components went down. Apple's making a ton off of giant margins because they know there are some who want that Apple logo so badly they'll pay twice as much to get it.
Might have something to do with the fact that it matches the computer. However, the vast majority of Apple vs Dell display battles, even in the Mac community go to Dell. By the way, of the 23" displays tested last year, the one recommended by Macworld wasn't the Cinema Display, it only got 3.5 mice. The winner was actually an HP, which also by the way, was roughly the same price as the ACD at the time. It's 24" successor is about the same price as the dell. Same of their 20" Give all the "professional quality" justifications you want, the price of the components went down. Apple's making a ton off of giant margins because they know there are some who want that Apple logo so badly they'll pay twice as much to get it.
baryon
Jun 23, 07:08 AM
Okay, but I cannot live without full featured Photoshop and Final Cut Pro. Also, I can't live without extensions like Perian, applications like Transmission, Cyberduck and VLC. I don't see how those would make it into iOS, through Apple's approval system. I need custom built applications and less "official" stuff as well. I'm fine with my iPod Touch not letting me run everything I run on my Mac, but I need my computer to be able to do EVERYTHING. I'm sure Apple loves iOS and wants to deploy it everywhere they can, but I'm also sure they don't want to stop with OS X. Now Steve has said recently that PCs are like trucks and that they'll still be around but only for people who really need them. If that's the case, PCs are no longer going to be consumer devices, so they won't have the good support they have now (new features regularly, updates, etc...) So we're going to be left behind if we want to keep using a computer for what a computer really is: everything.
I love the idea of iOS but that's because it makes sense that an iPhone or iPad cannot run a conventional OS. A real desktop computer with a touch screen would have many problems such as precision. Also I can't see iOS adopting custom built drivers and applications for custom hardware and stuff like that. Yes iOS rocks for most people who only use a computer for Facebook, MSN and browsing the web. But I feel like that's totally not me, and I don't want to get left out of all the innovation. We're seeing Apple focus more and more on iOS and leaving OS X behind a bit could be one of their next moves. I don't want OS X to end up like Final Cut Pro: rarely updated and with an interface that comes from the past millennium.
There's no indication that this would be the case, but I'm sure it would work for Apple and most people.
I love the idea of iOS but that's because it makes sense that an iPhone or iPad cannot run a conventional OS. A real desktop computer with a touch screen would have many problems such as precision. Also I can't see iOS adopting custom built drivers and applications for custom hardware and stuff like that. Yes iOS rocks for most people who only use a computer for Facebook, MSN and browsing the web. But I feel like that's totally not me, and I don't want to get left out of all the innovation. We're seeing Apple focus more and more on iOS and leaving OS X behind a bit could be one of their next moves. I don't want OS X to end up like Final Cut Pro: rarely updated and with an interface that comes from the past millennium.
There's no indication that this would be the case, but I'm sure it would work for Apple and most people.
ssk2
Apr 3, 01:14 PM
Because I'm interested in the pathology of people like you, and I'm trying to understand how you can compare an existing product with a product that is nothing but talk, to the disadvantage of the product you can actually buy, and decide in favor of the product that doesn't exist. Just psychological curiosity.
Are you kidding me?!
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
Are you kidding me?!
The 'pathology of people like me'? Who do you think you are? Facts are that I've neither held, or used either device, so I'll wait until I have until I make my decision. What's so controversial about that? How am I talking about the iPad in any kind of disadvantageous way? I'm just saying I want to try both and have not made up my mind yet. Rational.
The Playbook does exist too, no matter how much you say it doesn't. What on earth are you basing you assumption on? Where did I ever promote the Playbook over the iPad? Please retract your comments.
vnle
Feb 19, 10:08 PM
Not much I can do with my dorm.
Do you go to UMD by any chance? :confused: Because that looks almost exactly like my dorm down to the tiny desk they give you.
Do you go to UMD by any chance? :confused: Because that looks almost exactly like my dorm down to the tiny desk they give you.
longofest
Jul 19, 05:46 PM
not as long as Vista customers will have to wait :D
It never gets old... ;)
It never gets old... ;)
jharv
Nov 26, 03:04 PM
http://www.aussie-nintendo.com/up/news/DonkeyKongCountryReturnsBox.jpg
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
clj7
Jan 7, 04:20 AM
My Dad also drives a a VW Golf, which has a GTI engine. Can't even imagine how much petrol it must be going through.
mefck
Apr 26, 02:17 PM
An FYI to the author of the article. You do not file a "counterclaim" seeking dismissal. Counterclaims are claims or causes of action against the original filer of the lawsuit. One files a motion seeking dismissal or files an answer that indicates they will eventually seek dismissal.
charlituna
Apr 2, 09:42 PM
I only talked to the guy for about one minute and was told that Apple was looking into this so I am guessing that more than 10 people have an issue.
They look into everything for all new products, standard practice. That's why they encourage folks to return 'bad' units those first few weeks. They call it Early Field Failure Analysis
They look into everything for all new products, standard practice. That's why they encourage folks to return 'bad' units those first few weeks. They call it Early Field Failure Analysis
mc68k
Nov 18, 06:38 PM
^yeah almost seems unfair to ppl that want to compete but dont have access to high end hardware. i guess if you look at it from an aggregate standpoint then low point crunchers make a bit of a diff.
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
the amount of power sucked from the wall per unit would be WAY less i would imagine. from an environmental standpoint it wouldnt make sense
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
sycho
Jan 31, 07:18 PM
It's keeping the OEM 17s, I look the OEM+ look. It's simple and good looking.
daneoni
Aug 7, 03:27 AM
Anyone got any ideas of when the keynote starts in the good ol UK?, i'm guessing 6pm ish?
louis Fashion
Apr 21, 08:40 PM
You and Full of Win must be related. Or married. Or both.
No they both married their sisters.
No they both married their sisters.
miketcool
Jan 1, 06:31 PM
Thank you Human Resources for moving my next payday to Jan. 9th.
>signed<
Soon To Be Broke-Again
>signed<
Soon To Be Broke-Again
toddybody
Apr 19, 11:56 AM
Just because 256 is 'perfect' for you does not mean it is perfect for everyone else. I need 500GB SSD. External drive solutions are just way to slow compared to internal SSD. The SSD upgrade on my Laptop was the best upgrade ever, now I want an 27'' iMac with 500GB SSD and lots of memory.
500GB of SSM ? Holey Moley Daddy Warbucks.
PS: you should check out the new PCI SSD (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227581), when they start making external PCI enclosures for "ThunderCat"...youll be golden buddy:)
500GB of SSM ? Holey Moley Daddy Warbucks.
PS: you should check out the new PCI SSD (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820227581), when they start making external PCI enclosures for "ThunderCat"...youll be golden buddy:)
mc68k
Dec 29, 05:48 PM
I spent christmas day, snowbound, rerouting the wiring (and cleaning the "computer room" so everything at least looks much better. I actually got 4 4u cases so I have room to grow, they were $28 each plus $17? each for shipping. 4u is about the same size as a normal tower case so everything fits in nicely. I will post some pics soon.looking forward to the pics, sounds like an operation!
No comments:
Post a Comment