roadbloc
Apr 26, 04:01 PM
"Amazon" is a generic term and should not be used for a store name.
So is "Apple".
Why can't anyone come up with original company names? Like Microsoft. :rolleyes:
So is "Apple".
Why can't anyone come up with original company names? Like Microsoft. :rolleyes:
islanders
Dec 27, 11:35 PM
TiVo doesn't download your shows over the internet, it records them off the cable TV or satellite receiver. The only reason it requires an internet connection is to get programming schedules and verify you're paying your monthly fee.
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
Do you have a source for that statement?
Apple thinks you are.
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Thanks for responding to some of my points, but I�m really curious where this is going.
I think I'm just going to wait and see.
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
Do you have a source for that statement?
Apple thinks you are.
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Thanks for responding to some of my points, but I�m really curious where this is going.
I think I'm just going to wait and see.
BenRoethig
Aug 29, 11:45 AM
I would like to see a "media center" with a basic built-in TV-tuner so I could use it as a TIVO. It cant be that hard to add a TV-tuner...
I'm thinking something similar. 3.5x8.5x8.5. Basically a larger MacMini with a 3.5" hard drive, dedicated graphics, and video chipset similar to the Miglia TV Max.
I'm thinking something similar. 3.5x8.5x8.5. Basically a larger MacMini with a 3.5" hard drive, dedicated graphics, and video chipset similar to the Miglia TV Max.
strabes
May 2, 04:37 PM
I like it, but right now there's 3 ways to install apps: App Store, download from internet and drag to applications folder, installer wizard (like MS Office). Also, the difference between the applications folder and LaunchPad will be confusing for most users. This whole thing needs to be unified. Either get rid of the Applications folder or get rid of LaunchPad.
-aggie-
Sep 14, 09:21 AM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
This is exactly what I thought when I read the OP. They stated they couldn't recommend the iPhone 4, even if it had bumpers, and now without bumpers they can't recommend it, because it won't have bumpers.
noahtk
Apr 19, 12:50 PM
Spoken like a true American.
Spoken like the government...
Spoken like the government...
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
BRLawyer
Apr 19, 02:05 PM
[SIZE=1]
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
Back on topic....... Supposedly, Ivy Bridge (next year?) will support USB 3. I wonder if it will be possible to have some sort of a Thunderbolt to USB 3 interface. I would hate to buy a new iMac now and not be able to take advantage of the USB 3 speed when it becomes more widely used in the next few years. Or is that not something to worry about?
Why would you want to use a SLOWER interface in the first place? As far as ports are concerned, TB should be able to work with everything (USB, FW etc.) anyway, provided the right adapters are used...
mcarnes
Jul 18, 01:44 AM
If I'm going to spend all that time downloading a movie, I should at least be able to keep it. Bah.
brepublican
Aug 16, 08:36 AM
So what else is new? We all know its coming...
toddybody
Apr 19, 11:29 AM
Current imac with the 5750 is technically a 5850m. A 6850m is a slight downgrade from the 5850m. The 6950m is only a slight upgrade from the current imac.
Let's hope for a 6970m. Temps and power requirements are similar between the two but the performance gain is decent. It's the best we can hope for. And given the higher resolution of the 27" I would say it needs it.
I think it's safe to say they will get sandy bridge and thunderbolt but what I would also like to see is better speakers.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
Let's hope for a 6970m. Temps and power requirements are similar between the two but the performance gain is decent. It's the best we can hope for. And given the higher resolution of the 27" I would say it needs it.
I think it's safe to say they will get sandy bridge and thunderbolt but what I would also like to see is better speakers.
You misunderstood me friend...I meant an HD 6950 2GB (Desktop Card)
Yes, its a pipe dream...but cant a man dream:rolleyes:
TheMacGuy
Aug 7, 12:30 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
Yeah.... MacBook Pro too,...
"... its the most wonderful time of the year..."
WARNING! off topic - I just hear some wonderful (ole) mac music... look here! - http://davidpogue.com/pogue_unplugged/songspoofs.html
Yeah.... MacBook Pro too,...
"... its the most wonderful time of the year..."
WARNING! off topic - I just hear some wonderful (ole) mac music... look here! - http://davidpogue.com/pogue_unplugged/songspoofs.html
fblack
Oct 23, 10:30 AM
If this is true then...hallelujah! :)
cube
Mar 24, 04:00 PM
Intel has had years developing graphics as well. That statement by itself really doesn't say anything.
Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge? Your whole argument is based on how Llano is supposedly going to be faster than Sandy Bridge. You have yet to state any OpenCL applications that you are using or plan on using in the future yet suddenly you need it NOW because you saw some AMD propaganda video on their YouTube channel. The fact of the matter is, Llano has a VERY slim chance of coming to Macs so it's high time you get over that video and just enjoy Sandy Bridge if you are only buying computers from Apple. If you really needed that extra power then you wouldn't be buying a machine with only an IGP to begin with.
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
Functionality wins over a supposed performance edge? Your whole argument is based on how Llano is supposedly going to be faster than Sandy Bridge. You have yet to state any OpenCL applications that you are using or plan on using in the future yet suddenly you need it NOW because you saw some AMD propaganda video on their YouTube channel. The fact of the matter is, Llano has a VERY slim chance of coming to Macs so it's high time you get over that video and just enjoy Sandy Bridge if you are only buying computers from Apple. If you really needed that extra power then you wouldn't be buying a machine with only an IGP to begin with.
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
twoodcc
Feb 3, 06:24 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 8 million points!
zwida
Sep 6, 08:01 PM
I hope that one day the wealthiest working person could only make 2x to 3x of the poorest working person. God, would that change the world for ever. If the butcher makes 7 bucks and hour a doctor should make 12bucks a waitress 6bucks the president 15 bucks, no more no less... sick and tired of all this GREED!!!!
Huh?
What's greed have to do with it?
Huh?
What's greed have to do with it?
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!
xPismo
Oct 24, 01:00 AM
FW800 and/or eSATA, HD screen, C2D (nice shortening btw) and $200.00 less price point. Please Apple. Make it so.
blondepianist
Mar 22, 08:01 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Because USB is much slower than a hard drive. It's why the iPod originally shipped with FireWire.
Because USB is much slower than a hard drive. It's why the iPod originally shipped with FireWire.
ppdix
Jan 31, 07:52 PM
:apple: user since 1987... Can't tell? :rolleyes:
andiwm2003
Nov 15, 10:44 AM
is there a chance that they replace the two dual core xenon with only one quad core xenon in the mac pro and drop the price? speedwise it should be about the same and it should definately be cheaper to make.
appleguy123
Mar 20, 03:49 PM
I agree.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Stella
Aug 16, 09:33 AM
If the report is from Digitimes then it can't be true.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
They are consistently full of *****.
I'm surpised this isn't on page 2.
fertilized-egg
Apr 2, 11:08 PM
I signed up to post to MacRumors just now so I could post and let you know your analogy is perfect. Excellent post.
I think so too. The toaster vs oven analogy works better than Jobs' truck vs car analogy. somebody send Jobs an email so he can steal it :D
I think so too. The toaster vs oven analogy works better than Jobs' truck vs car analogy. somebody send Jobs an email so he can steal it :D
No comments:
Post a Comment