mrblack927
Apr 25, 12:09 PM
No it will go from 4S to 5 lol
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
Mr_Brightside_@
Apr 11, 07:38 AM
Excellent sig. ;)
Shoulda seen the last one
Shoulda seen the last one
mark151
Sep 12, 08:12 AM
Italian iTunes (Music) Store is down too, with the black screen.
and...i've found this http://www.apple.com/movies
and...i've found this http://www.apple.com/movies
ghostlyorb
May 2, 09:48 AM
If battery life increases... I'll be happy!
KeriJane
Apr 10, 08:21 AM
You do know that Windows had an App Store before OS X, but it got axed due to it being badly implemented which resulted in lack of custom? All they are doing there is returning and improving one of their own features, not copying Apple.
Hi roadbloc
Ummm....
In post 19 of this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12360982&postcount=19), I wasn't intending to imply that MS was copying the App store. I was merely trying to point out the hilarity of such a concept. In a misguided attempt at being nice, I even tried to allow that MS might be the victim of cruel IT departments and may not be wholly responsible for the extreme inadequacy of their Enterprise products.
Now that you mention it, I've reconsidered.
It's both "almost too hilarious a concept to think about" AND just another cheap ripoff of Apple yet again!
Just because they made an abortive attempt previously doesn't mean that they're not trying to jump on Apple's coat-tails once again.
Well, maybe not so much "jumping on Apple's coat-tails" but rather... MS is trying to blatantly copy Apple once again so as to beat them to death with their own invention or successful refinement of an existing idea.
I still feel that just thinking about the concept of an MS App Store could do away with most anti-depression drugs at the cost of exhaustion and fainting from excessive laughter.
See? Even I can admit SOME good may yet come of MS's chicanery! ;)
Have Fun,
Keri
Hi roadbloc
Ummm....
In post 19 of this thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12360982&postcount=19), I wasn't intending to imply that MS was copying the App store. I was merely trying to point out the hilarity of such a concept. In a misguided attempt at being nice, I even tried to allow that MS might be the victim of cruel IT departments and may not be wholly responsible for the extreme inadequacy of their Enterprise products.
Now that you mention it, I've reconsidered.
It's both "almost too hilarious a concept to think about" AND just another cheap ripoff of Apple yet again!
Just because they made an abortive attempt previously doesn't mean that they're not trying to jump on Apple's coat-tails once again.
Well, maybe not so much "jumping on Apple's coat-tails" but rather... MS is trying to blatantly copy Apple once again so as to beat them to death with their own invention or successful refinement of an existing idea.
I still feel that just thinking about the concept of an MS App Store could do away with most anti-depression drugs at the cost of exhaustion and fainting from excessive laughter.
See? Even I can admit SOME good may yet come of MS's chicanery! ;)
Have Fun,
Keri
escapehere
Oct 29, 06:16 AM
Are we talking about the FreeBSD license or the NetBSD license. The NetBSD license isn't free and that is what OSX is based off of and apple paid to use the license.
OSX is based off FreeBSD and mach. Apple may have taken some code from NetBSD over the years but FreeBSD is the predominate source for the BSD layer. It's pretty common knowledge, it even used to be mentioned on Apple's website, although I don't know if it still is.
The NetBSD licence is a BSD-style licence. That's a free licence. FreeBSD and NetBSD often use each other's code for various things. View the licences for yourself:
http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html
If Apple did use any NetBSD code, they may possibly have made a donation to the NetBSD foundation but they certainly didn't "pay" for a licence.
OSX is based off FreeBSD and mach. Apple may have taken some code from NetBSD over the years but FreeBSD is the predominate source for the BSD layer. It's pretty common knowledge, it even used to be mentioned on Apple's website, although I don't know if it still is.
The NetBSD licence is a BSD-style licence. That's a free licence. FreeBSD and NetBSD often use each other's code for various things. View the licences for yourself:
http://www.freebsd.org/copyright/freebsd-license.html
http://www.netbsd.org/Goals/redistribution.html
If Apple did use any NetBSD code, they may possibly have made a donation to the NetBSD foundation but they certainly didn't "pay" for a licence.
Lord Blackadder
Aug 10, 01:10 PM
There's nothing really sinister about it. It's just harder to measure and to this point, there's been no point in trying to measure it in comparison to cars.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
I understand that they have to be measured differently, but doesn't it make sense that they be compared apples-to-apples (if possible) to the vehicles they are intended to replace?
Most people do ignore it to a large extent, because they say "heck, if it costs me $1 to go 40 miles on electric vs. $2.85 to go 40 miles on gasoline, then that *must* be more efficient in some way". And they are probably right. Economics do tend to line up with efficiency (or government policy).
That is true, but as you pointed out later "green", "efficient", "alternative[to oil imports]" are not all the same thing. Perhaps they are more green but less efficient, or less efficient but more green. Just being more efficient in terms of bang for buck is not necessarily also good from an environmental or alternative energy standpoint. But you are right that the end cost per mile is going to weigh heavily when it comes to consumer acceptance of new types of autos.
I think it's great that European car manufacturers have invested heavily in finding ways to make more fuel efficient cars. And they have their governments to thank for that by making sure that diesel is given a tax advantage vs. gasoline. About 15 years ago, Europe recognized the potential for efficiency in diesels to ultimately outweigh the environmental downside. It was a short-term risk that paid off and now that they have shifted the balance, Europe is tightening their diesel emissions standards to match the US. Once that happens, I'm sure there will a huge market for TDIs in the US and we'll have a nice competitive landscape for driving-up fuel efficiency with diesels vs. gasoline hybrids vs. extended range electrics.
I would argue that Europe's switch to diesels did not involve quite the environmental tradeoff you imply - in the 70s we in the US were driving cars with huge gasoline engines, and to this day diesel regulation for trucks in this country is pretty minimal. Our emissions were probably world-leading then - partially due to the fact that we had the most cars on the roads by far. The problem lies (in my heavily biased opinion) in ignorance. People see smoke coming off diesel exhausts and assume they are dirtier than gasoline engines. But particulate pollution is not necessarily worse, just different. People are not educated about the differerence between gasoline engine pollution and diesel engine pollution. Not to mention the fact that diesel engines don't puff black smoke like they did in the 70s. I'm not arguing that diesels are necessarily cleaner, but they are arguably no worse than gasoline engines and are certainly more efficient.
Whether or not it's "greener" depends upon your definition of green. If you're worried about smog and air quality, then you might make different decisions than if you are worried about carbon dioxide and global warming. Those decisions may also be driven by where you live and where the electricity comes from.
A lot of people in the US (and I assume around the world) are also concerned about energy independence. For those people, using coal to power an electric car is more attractive than using foreign diesel. Any cleaner? Probably not, but probably not much dirtier and certainly cheaper. Our government realizes that we can always make power plants cleaner in the future through regulation, just as Europe realized they could make diesels cleaner in the future through regulation. Steven Chu is no dummy.
It's a fair point. Given the choice, I would prioritize moving to domestic fuel sources in the short term over a massive "go green" (over all alse) campaign.
Which is why we will need new metrics that actually make sense for comparing gasoline to pure electric, perhaps localized to account for the source of power in your area. For example, when I lived in Chicago, the electric was 90% nuclear. It's doesn't get any cleaner than that from an air quality / greenhouse gas standpoint. However, if you're on the east coast, it's probably closer to 60% coal.
I agree completely. The transition needs to be made as transparent as possible. People need to know the source, efficiency and cleanliness of their power source so that they can make informed choices.
I think you're smart enough to know that it's more efficient, but you're not willing to cede that for the sake of your argument, but I encourage you to embrace the idea that we should have extended range electrics *and* clean diesels *and* gasoline hybrids. There's more than one way to skin a cat.
I'm not trying to sound stubborn, I simply have not come accross the numbers anywhere. I don't get paid to do this research, ya know. I do it while hiding from the boss. ;)
I've seen that propaganda FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) before. It doesn't stand up to scrutiny. Let's consider that the power grid can handle every household running an air conditioner on a hot summer day. That's approximately 2000-3500 watts per household per hour during daytime peak load (on top of everything else on the grid.) Now let's consider that a Volt (or equivalent) has a 16kw battery that charges in 8 hours. That's 200 watts per hour, starting in the evening, or the equivalent of (4) 50 watt light bulbs. This is not exactly grid-overwhelming load.
I'm no math whiz (or electrician), but wouldn't 200 watts/hr * 8 hours = 1.6kw, rather than 16kw? I thought you'd need 2kw/hr * 8hrs to charge a 16kw battery.
It's not that I don't think people have looked into this stuff, it's just that I myself have no information on just how much energy the Volt uses and how much the grid can provide. In the short term, plugin hybrids are few in number and I don't see it being an issue. But it's something we need to work out in the medium/long term.
Or, some would argue that the biggest thing that Americans have trouble with are a few people telling them what the majority should or shouldn't do - which is, as it seems, the definition of "Communism", but I wouldn't go so far as to say that. :)
Communism means nothing in this country, because we've been so brainwashed by Cold War/right-wing rhetoric that, like "freedom", the term has been stolen for propaganda purposes until the original meanings have become lost in a massive sea of BS. I was using it for it's hyperbole value. :D
Most people do indeed realize that they can get better mileage with a smaller car and could "get by" with a much smaller vehicle. They choose not to and that is their prerogative. If the majority wants to vote for representatives who will make laws that increase fuel mileage standards, which in turn require automakers to sell more small cars - or find ways to make them more efficient - that is also their prerogative. (And, in case you haven't noticed, in the last major US election, voters did indeed vote for a party that is increasing CAFE standards.)
Well, that's the nature of democracy. But it's not so much a question of the fact that people realize a smaller car is more efficient, but a question of whether people really care about efficiency. I have recently lived in Nevada and Alaska, two states whose residents are addicted to burning fuel. Seemingly everyone has a pickup, RV and four-wheelers. Burning fuel is not just part of the daily transportation routine - it's a lifestyle.
CAFE standardsAnd if it's important to you, you should do your part and ride a bike to work or buy a TDI, or lobby your congressman for reduced emissions requirements, or stand up on a soap box and preach about the advantages of advanced clean diesel technology. All good stuff.
I walk to work. I used to commute 34 miles a day (total), and while I never minded it, I felt pretty liberated being able to ditch the car for my daily commute. Four years of walking and I don't want to go back. I love cars and motorsport, and I don't consider myself an environmentalist, but I got to the point where I realized that I was driving a lot more than necessary. That realization came when I moved out of a suburb (where you have to drive to get anywhere) and into first a small town and then a biggish city. In both cases it became possible to walk almost everywhere I needed to go. A tank of fuel lasted over a month (or longer) rather than a week from my highway-commuting days. And I lost weight as I hauled by fat backside around on foot. ;)
I won't be in the market for another car for a few years, and my current car (a Subaru) is not very fuel efficient - but then again it has literally not been driven more than half a dozen times in the last six months. When the time comes to replace it I'll be looking for something affordable (ruling out the Volt) but efficiency will be high on the priority list, followed by green-ness.
I wonder if all of you people who are proposing a diesel/diesel hybrid are Europeans, because in America, diesel is looked at as smelly and messy - it's what the trucks with black smoke use.
<snip>
As far as the Chevy Volt goes, I just don't like the name... but the price is right assuming they can get it into the high $20,000's rather quickly.
I'm an American, and yes I've seen the trucks with black smoke. We just need to discard that preconception. This isn't 1973 anymore. We also need to tighten up emissions regualtion on trucks.
The Volt is a practical car by all acoioutns, but it costs way too much. The battery is the primary contributing factor, I've heard that it costs somewhere between $8-15k by itself. Hopefully after GM has been producing such batteries for a few years the cost will drop substantially.
mrblack927
Apr 25, 12:09 PM
No it will go from 4S to 5 lol
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
puckhead193
Jan 8, 12:35 AM
huh? apple is doing what?
apple is updating their site live as it happens, correct? Do you think apple will release a limited edition ipod or imac or something else in a color like in black or red or something else?
apple is updating their site live as it happens, correct? Do you think apple will release a limited edition ipod or imac or something else in a color like in black or red or something else?
Vidder
Dec 6, 06:03 PM
It does take too little killstreaks to gain really. But at least the killstreaks top out at 11 on this one, which I think makes it better.
The attack dogs really do my head in though!
the kill streak rewards are so low because its practically impossible to get more then 11 kills in one game with the ****** spawns. (unless you get lucky) 25 was feasible in Modern Warfare because it was a much better game and strategic players who knew how to play could get 25 kills cause they were fighting dip *****. in Black Ops everyone (dip ***** and good players alike) seems to be forced into the same run and gun strategy.
The attack dogs really do my head in though!
the kill streak rewards are so low because its practically impossible to get more then 11 kills in one game with the ****** spawns. (unless you get lucky) 25 was feasible in Modern Warfare because it was a much better game and strategic players who knew how to play could get 25 kills cause they were fighting dip *****. in Black Ops everyone (dip ***** and good players alike) seems to be forced into the same run and gun strategy.
Donz0r
Jan 5, 02:56 PM
Thank You!!! I always want to do this! Also, this year I have an appointment right in the middle of the keynote! You guys rock! IMO, this is The Best way to discover the new products, the way it was meant to be.
maclaptop
Apr 15, 10:25 PM
It's not only new territory, it's outside their core competency. Like Cisco selling cameras or Google selling phones.
Its this closed minded view that separates risk taking leaders from regular employees.
To prove this, all one has to do is look at Apple's success in portions of the tech sector that they previously had not occupied.
Never say never :)
Its this closed minded view that separates risk taking leaders from regular employees.
To prove this, all one has to do is look at Apple's success in portions of the tech sector that they previously had not occupied.
Never say never :)
skunk
Apr 21, 11:45 AM
If the score is X, you can change the score to X-1 and X+1. If you change it to X-1 then press up, it'll display as X+1 which removes your down vote and adds your upvote.In other words, there is no allowance for apathy. I can't be arsed with a system that doesn't allow for apathy. **** that.
Also, please explain why clicking on the "up" arrow sometimes adds 1 and sometimes 2. Does it depend on how enthusiastically you press the button?
Also, please explain why clicking on the "up" arrow sometimes adds 1 and sometimes 2. Does it depend on how enthusiastically you press the button?
Popeye206
Jan 15, 04:09 PM
... The iPhone is a great piece of kit, but this software update is a great disappointment. Generally I know where I am, so the psuedo GPS thing is something I can't see myself using (and to be honest if I didn't know where I was, then I'm pretty damn sure that there wouldn't be any O2 coverage anyway!).
Not to be a pain, but the phuedo GPS is like the coolest thing for people like me that travel... now I'll be able to find myself with one click. I love that feature!
What I thought was missing was Multiple Delete for email and copy and paste. I really wished they we're in this update... the rest I'm very happy about! Besides... this is the only phone I've ever had that has any upgrades! That alone is cool! My iPhone just keeps getting better! :-)
Not to be a pain, but the phuedo GPS is like the coolest thing for people like me that travel... now I'll be able to find myself with one click. I love that feature!
What I thought was missing was Multiple Delete for email and copy and paste. I really wished they we're in this update... the rest I'm very happy about! Besides... this is the only phone I've ever had that has any upgrades! That alone is cool! My iPhone just keeps getting better! :-)
adouglas2001
Jan 15, 02:55 PM
Just sold my Apple shares.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
Genius move, that.
Have you never heard of "sell on the news?" Everyone's already done it.
Apple is down $13.50 as I write this.
It will come back up, provided the economy as a whole doesn't implode.
I got an Apple gift card for the holidays, and was waiting to see what Apple was going to announce. My decision? I'm ordering a refurb MBP to replace my G4 Powerbook this week.
"Old old old?" Not compared to my early-2003 computer. It's dramatically faster, dramatically more efficient, and dramatically more capacious than the machine I've got. Based on the Penryn tests I've seen so far, an MBP update will result in only a marginal improvement. I don't NEED a few extra percent of battery life or performance here and there.
It is always wiser in the long run IMHO to be a late adopter and buy near the end of a product lifecycle than near the beginning. Early adopters are, and have always been, late beta testers.
I dunno...seems that everyone could use just a little less caffeine and stop obsessing over instant gratification and wish fulfillment. Take a deep breath. Leopard WILL be updated. Blu-Ray WILL happen. The MBP WILL get a refresh. And so on. But not today. Big deal. Wait a few months.
Could be that age and decades of experience have given me an appreciation for the long view. I just don't get all torqued up over every tiny move that Apple makes (or fails to make). They still make great products.
Dont Hurt Me
Nov 16, 09:44 AM
Perhaps but they are not competing right now on either products or road maps.
You don't change vendor like the wind blows. Apple has a history of using many makers of parts. Face it dual core athlons are more chip then most folks need. Ati would only have to say hey look at this combo for X dollars. Ati & Apple go way back.
You don't change vendor like the wind blows. Apple has a history of using many makers of parts. Face it dual core athlons are more chip then most folks need. Ati would only have to say hey look at this combo for X dollars. Ati & Apple go way back.
citizenzen
May 5, 06:29 PM
Do you really want a "gun war"? Really?
Dude. I haven't once suggested banning guns.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I think any talk of a blanket ban is pure folly and ignores the reality of the situation.
Since there has been no talk of a "blanket ban" you have little to fear.
Part of the reason the debate is "broken" is we seem to have a difficult time hearing what is being said.
Dude. I haven't once suggested banning guns.
These days I'd be satisfied with a hint of awareness.
I think any talk of a blanket ban is pure folly and ignores the reality of the situation.
Since there has been no talk of a "blanket ban" you have little to fear.
Part of the reason the debate is "broken" is we seem to have a difficult time hearing what is being said.
Whistleway
Oct 11, 07:54 PM
I am pretty sure Apple has to refresh its iPod line for holiday sales or it is bye-bye stock prices and holiday sales.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
The question is what will or can they do by november 14th. And it is very unlikely that it will be large video iPod. Heck, Zune has the same resolution as the iPod and i am not sure what the big deal is. It is not like adding 1" or 2" will make it all the better.
iMikeT
Oct 2, 07:31 PM
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
linux2mac
Mar 30, 09:12 AM
This is why I switched to Mac. I don't miss these Windows headaches or spending money on anti-virus software every year. :D
Spotify ads hit by malware attack
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12891182
Spotify ads hit by malware attack
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12891182
Clive At Five
Oct 3, 03:42 PM
Merrom MBP ;p
Man... the Merom MBP has become the new PowerBook G5
-Clive
Man... the Merom MBP has become the new PowerBook G5
-Clive
Dagless
Apr 22, 10:02 AM
No sir I don't like it. By all means have a +rep button, but don't add a -rep one. With this kind of site if you express the slightest justified dissatisfaction with Apple you'll be downranked to oblivion.
I believe the Steam forum has the best method. Positive only. Keep reputation details private, but have the accumulated total under usernames.
I believe the Steam forum has the best method. Positive only. Keep reputation details private, but have the accumulated total under usernames.
samiwas
Mar 5, 10:38 AM
Now: corporate contributions are legal money laundering operations. If you follow the money, I pay for goods which go into company funds which are used to contribute to buy Republican candidates who are dedicated to passing corporate-friendly laws that make my air dirtier and my food unhealthier, and that lower my standard of living until they finally ship my job to another country. Nice racket they have going. Has anybody ever noticed that the well never dries of money to buy off our government? I just love watching them cry about regulation; very classy.
Almost took the words right out of my mouth. Anyone who doesn't realize the hypocrisy in the original statement has their head in the sand.
Almost took the words right out of my mouth. Anyone who doesn't realize the hypocrisy in the original statement has their head in the sand.
zwida
Oct 2, 07:34 PM
Well, that has to be the funniest thing I ever heard.
Heh. I literally laughed out loud when I saw that line.
Heh. I literally laughed out loud when I saw that line.
No comments:
Post a Comment