cbnsoul
Mar 22, 02:01 PM
Come on Mac Mini update; well overdue for a refresh. That Core 2 Duo is keeping me from buying.
Me too. I have a 2 year old Mini and while the current models look cool, they aren't a whole lot faster. I would also LOVE an SSD option although at this point I would be more than satisfied with a 7200 RPM option! (Can't believe that you still can only get 5400 RPM drives unless you get the server.)
Me too. I have a 2 year old Mini and while the current models look cool, they aren't a whole lot faster. I would also LOVE an SSD option although at this point I would be more than satisfied with a 7200 RPM option! (Can't believe that you still can only get 5400 RPM drives unless you get the server.)
mikes63737
Sep 12, 05:13 PM
Can you say "One More Thing 2"? :D
I'm glad that Apple isn't forcing all you with 5G iPods to buy new ones for the new features.
I'm glad that Apple isn't forcing all you with 5G iPods to buy new ones for the new features.
scrapple
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
yawn..
they both made billions... who cares.
they both made billions... who cares.
MattyMac
Sep 9, 10:17 AM
I want to see some unpacking pics of that 24inch model compared with the 20in. Soon enough I suppose.
![Celestine Cruz Gonzaga. [20091115] The Buzz - Toni](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uBs3TuTx9SXJhC2t0T3-l_1vag_9SsZ1zR5OZUn58DMWPtYHHuEJ24kXXVEVNYv8JKRa34LzsSIkvBAFYoNcXECR5KwI8fdBpr=s0-d "[20091115] The Buzz - Toni")
OllyW
Mar 30, 11:57 AM
That is great coming from a company who has Windows trade marked.
So?
The other company has got Apple trade marked. They are both in common use but are protected when used in the computer industry.
http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/general.aspx
So?
The other company has got Apple trade marked. They are both in common use but are protected when used in the computer industry.
http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/general.aspx
cozmot
Mar 14, 11:12 PM
Bull�hit. It asked your permission, you just clicked through without reading.
Not so much Bull�hit I encountered this before and you have to opt out, not in. This is trickery. This is another method that McAfee gets their beastly code propagated, since their scare tactics don't always work.
There are so many updates that we have to run all the time, that you can't blame the hapless user for occasionally letting a sly scheme like this slip by them. I wouldn't buy a condom from McAfee, much less their anti-virus software that in my opinion, is worse that the problem they attempt to protect you from.
Not so much Bull�hit I encountered this before and you have to opt out, not in. This is trickery. This is another method that McAfee gets their beastly code propagated, since their scare tactics don't always work.
There are so many updates that we have to run all the time, that you can't blame the hapless user for occasionally letting a sly scheme like this slip by them. I wouldn't buy a condom from McAfee, much less their anti-virus software that in my opinion, is worse that the problem they attempt to protect you from.
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 03:30 PM
This will probably go over like a lead balloon, but there is something to be said for natural selection. NOW BEFORE YOU START SCREAMING, hear me out...
AIDS is an awful thing, especially to the proportions it has affected the people of Africa. But there is also a reason AIDS has taken over there the way it is, and it's only partially to do with poverty. AIDS has exploded in that population, because it is a population that is extremely traditional, rudimentary, and in many ways archaic. There are many wonderful things about the African people, but there were also many wonderful things about the Dinosaurs, the Dodo bird, and numerous others.
Please don't take this to mean I'm equating the people of Africa with wild animals. I'm not. But in many ways, the people of Africa are in the situation they are in because they have not evolved the same way as most of the world, and in that respect, they are paying a price. Yes, it is our responsibility as human beings to try and help people in need, and that is a wonderful thing. But at the end of the day, if we did nothing, there would still be a small percentage of African people who will survive this epidemic, and they will be more educated and elightened than the ones who do not.
Much in the way that forest fires, although terrible in some respects, are essential to the rejuvenation of the population and ecosystem in that area, so too are epidemics and catastrophes. And this not a bash-on-Africa comment... the Black Plague was the same idea. Too many people, living in too close quarters, with too little regard for health or wellbeing. Millions died, but many survived, and the ones that did were smarter and wiser for it.
The people of Africa are not necessarily as helpless as the may seem from the outside. They just have a different culture and mindset than Western people do. Right or wrong is not for us to decide, but adapting to nature is part of life on Earth... and sometimes that means that large numbers of people or animals die, needlessly or otherwise. Just my two cents.
I admire your commitment to the evolutionary approach. I would just like to point out that evolution has also created the compassion (or at least social conscience) that inspires this sort of effort. Perhaps this compassion is a trait that increases the survivability of our species in a way too. (I'm not suggesting that all traits increase survivability, but evolution has been going for some time now, and compassion has been a human trait for some time as well, so perhaps the two are friends for some reason).
AIDS is an awful thing, especially to the proportions it has affected the people of Africa. But there is also a reason AIDS has taken over there the way it is, and it's only partially to do with poverty. AIDS has exploded in that population, because it is a population that is extremely traditional, rudimentary, and in many ways archaic. There are many wonderful things about the African people, but there were also many wonderful things about the Dinosaurs, the Dodo bird, and numerous others.
Please don't take this to mean I'm equating the people of Africa with wild animals. I'm not. But in many ways, the people of Africa are in the situation they are in because they have not evolved the same way as most of the world, and in that respect, they are paying a price. Yes, it is our responsibility as human beings to try and help people in need, and that is a wonderful thing. But at the end of the day, if we did nothing, there would still be a small percentage of African people who will survive this epidemic, and they will be more educated and elightened than the ones who do not.
Much in the way that forest fires, although terrible in some respects, are essential to the rejuvenation of the population and ecosystem in that area, so too are epidemics and catastrophes. And this not a bash-on-Africa comment... the Black Plague was the same idea. Too many people, living in too close quarters, with too little regard for health or wellbeing. Millions died, but many survived, and the ones that did were smarter and wiser for it.
The people of Africa are not necessarily as helpless as the may seem from the outside. They just have a different culture and mindset than Western people do. Right or wrong is not for us to decide, but adapting to nature is part of life on Earth... and sometimes that means that large numbers of people or animals die, needlessly or otherwise. Just my two cents.
I admire your commitment to the evolutionary approach. I would just like to point out that evolution has also created the compassion (or at least social conscience) that inspires this sort of effort. Perhaps this compassion is a trait that increases the survivability of our species in a way too. (I'm not suggesting that all traits increase survivability, but evolution has been going for some time now, and compassion has been a human trait for some time as well, so perhaps the two are friends for some reason).
wnurse
Aug 24, 08:48 AM
I think you are seriously underestimating how expensive these type of patent battles can be. Check out the following story:
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3402321
So SCO obviously expected its legal costs to spiral beyond $31 million to make a special deal with its law firm to cap costs. The fact they are willing to give as much as 33% of any potential winnings with the legal firm indicates that the final tally could easily approach $100 million if not for the cap.
It is quite clear that Apple would have made life very, very expensive and excruciating for Creative's legal team. $100 million in legal costs is not unrealistic considering that you not only had the original suit, but countersuits by Apple involving 4 bonafide patents.
What would creative legal cost have been. I seriously doubt apple legal cost would have approached 100 million but for the sake of argument, lets say it did, would creative cost also have approached 100 million. Could creative have paid that much?. If apple legal cost could escalate to that amount, creative would have dropped the case long before the cost approached that amount. Creative does not have 100 mil to blow on lawyers. Either way you look at it, apple legal cost would not have approached 100 mil. The point of the settlement was not to avoid legal cost (as many of you fondly point out, apple has 10 billion in cash, why should legal cost even worry them?). No, the problem was that creative might have won. Then apple would have had a problem.
http://www.internetnews.com/bus-news/article.php/3402321
So SCO obviously expected its legal costs to spiral beyond $31 million to make a special deal with its law firm to cap costs. The fact they are willing to give as much as 33% of any potential winnings with the legal firm indicates that the final tally could easily approach $100 million if not for the cap.
It is quite clear that Apple would have made life very, very expensive and excruciating for Creative's legal team. $100 million in legal costs is not unrealistic considering that you not only had the original suit, but countersuits by Apple involving 4 bonafide patents.
What would creative legal cost have been. I seriously doubt apple legal cost would have approached 100 million but for the sake of argument, lets say it did, would creative cost also have approached 100 million. Could creative have paid that much?. If apple legal cost could escalate to that amount, creative would have dropped the case long before the cost approached that amount. Creative does not have 100 mil to blow on lawyers. Either way you look at it, apple legal cost would not have approached 100 mil. The point of the settlement was not to avoid legal cost (as many of you fondly point out, apple has 10 billion in cash, why should legal cost even worry them?). No, the problem was that creative might have won. Then apple would have had a problem.
KPATVPOD
Apr 20, 09:50 AM
Is the Program to read it Mac only or is there a PC version??
http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/#4
http://petewarden.github.com/iPhoneTracker/#4
wizard
Sep 9, 12:03 PM
I'm a little skeptical about Napa64 as well. I did read the previous links and articles on it. Why make Merom backwards compatible with Yonah?
What is to be skeptical about? Seriously Intel continuously improves its hardware, they have to or end up getting trounced on by the competition. In fact recent history with respect to AMD demonstrates what happens when they don't take a serious look at their hardware.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.
Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet. That is the iMac just released is more or less a first generation implementation of Merom. I'm left with the impression that Apple just slapped the new processor in the old socket and gave us all a surprise this week. But that is what backward computability is all about. Mind you I know nothing about the current logic boards but I'm sure that information will float across the web soon.
Dave
What is to be skeptical about? Seriously Intel continuously improves its hardware, they have to or end up getting trounced on by the competition. In fact recent history with respect to AMD demonstrates what happens when they don't take a serious look at their hardware.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.
Nice information there. I wanted a little heads up on Kentsfield. Still, isn't it dual Conroe's with separate cache and then over the front side bus?
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet. That is the iMac just released is more or less a first generation implementation of Merom. I'm left with the impression that Apple just slapped the new processor in the old socket and gave us all a surprise this week. But that is what backward computability is all about. Mind you I know nothing about the current logic boards but I'm sure that information will float across the web soon.
Dave
iGary
Sep 10, 04:27 PM
I hate to say it, but my guess is this is an iPod event, not a MB MBP event. ;)
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 11:02 PM
That would leave an awful lot of parents dead.
Not you, the poster you were quoting was being sarcastic. I was drawing your attention to his sarcasism.
Oh, sorry :) I had thought he was being rude towards me.
Not you, the poster you were quoting was being sarcastic. I was drawing your attention to his sarcasism.
Oh, sorry :) I had thought he was being rude towards me.
beangibbs
Mar 23, 04:33 PM
Funny, I just read in USA Today I beleve it was, that law enforcement officers actually prefer people use the apps...saying that even if the app alerts the driver and they change their driving habits for a short time, say, slowing them down from speeding for a few miles...it's a good thing, and they encourage it.
Besides...who the h*ll is the government to tell Apple what they can and cannot do with their business? Regulations are one thing...such as safety regs and such...those are needed, but Christ...this is over the line.
Besides...who the h*ll is the government to tell Apple what they can and cannot do with their business? Regulations are one thing...such as safety regs and such...those are needed, but Christ...this is over the line.
Bomino
Apr 25, 01:51 AM
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
nothing wrong? and what if she didnt swerve, hit you in the back, and the collision causes the death of, lets say, 1 or 2 people. but you, mr. safe driver felt obligated to teach her a lesson.
-Don
nothing wrong? and what if she didnt swerve, hit you in the back, and the collision causes the death of, lets say, 1 or 2 people. but you, mr. safe driver felt obligated to teach her a lesson.
Silentwave
Jul 15, 04:28 PM
I know that it is a desktop chip but I would expect that a site like anandtech or tomshardware would check againt the core duo just to see how much the difference is between the two "core" CPU.
Why?
Mobile vs. desktop
32 bit vs. 64 bit
Pentium M architecture vs. Intel Core microarchitecture (yes, Yonah uses the latest version of the pentium M architecture, far more efficient than netburst)
and I doubt very much they have comparable Mobos/ machines to test them on.
Why?
Mobile vs. desktop
32 bit vs. 64 bit
Pentium M architecture vs. Intel Core microarchitecture (yes, Yonah uses the latest version of the pentium M architecture, far more efficient than netburst)
and I doubt very much they have comparable Mobos/ machines to test them on.
mjillard
Jan 11, 12:14 AM
I don't think anything is invulnerable. However, I do not see the point in using antivirus for my iDevices. Instead, it just seems more sensible to be careful what I do on these devices rather than to have something that will probably just cause more problems, as bloated antivirus programs tend to do. I have the free trial of Sophos on my iMac, and even though it hasn't slowed it down any yet, it also has yet to uncover a single threat.
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:36 PM
Yes, you know what an "app store" means if you know what an "app" means.
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
So, here is an interesting argument, as app is short for Applications, and Applications are a strict subset of programs, doesn't the App Store technically sell Programs, not Apps? Thus, the term is no generic at all. "Program Store" would the generic term. It's the same as a club called "Liqueur Store" (which is TMed.)
Does an "app" mean an Apple program?
It's doesn't matter what MS calls it. There's a class of programs everywhere called "applications". There's no other name for it.
Applications are a strict subset of programs.
So, here is an interesting argument, as app is short for Applications, and Applications are a strict subset of programs, doesn't the App Store technically sell Programs, not Apps? Thus, the term is no generic at all. "Program Store" would the generic term. It's the same as a club called "Liqueur Store" (which is TMed.)
vand0576
Sep 5, 11:32 AM
No one else has yet mentioned that the Airport Extreme is currently reflecting a 1-3 week shipping period (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/1.RSLID?mco=B842E400&nplm=M8799LL%2FA), while the Airport Express (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wo/1.RSLID?mco=7D88DA55&nplm=M9470LL%2FA) still says it will ship within 24 hours on the Apple Store Online. It would seem that it is the Extreme and not the Express to be getting the update.
Optimus Frag
Apr 23, 12:54 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
Aren't intel in the process on implementing Open CL?
alent1234
Apr 29, 03:22 PM
that was in 2005 when it first came out. by now they are on a revision that costs a lot less to make and they have sold a lot of games and XBL subs to make up for it. back when the 360 first came out it had an attach rate of 8 games, higher than Sony. figure at $10 licensing per game that's $80 per console on average plus XBL. so i don't know if the isuppli numbers are accurate.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
andys53
Apr 20, 12:15 PM
It's an option in iTunes, right on the main sync page when you choose your device. Nothing obscure.
Glad you noticed my advice way back on page 4 post no. 89. I know submitted it for a reason.
Glad you noticed my advice way back on page 4 post no. 89. I know submitted it for a reason.
Koodauw
Sep 18, 12:43 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
apfhex
Nov 13, 03:22 PM
In a sense, yes. The rules for iPhone development are different than for Mac OS X.
Except in this case, they still didn't break the rules. Nothing in the SDK prohibits what they did. (Gruber's reply (http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation) to Jeff LaMarche sums it up very nicely — I know it's already been linked to be I think it needs repeating)
YES, Apple can reject an app for any reason they see fit. But this is getting ridiculous. I haven't cared about any of the apps made by developers that have so far jumped ship, but one of these days it is going to be one of the ones I care about, and I'm not looking forward to it.
Except in this case, they still didn't break the rules. Nothing in the SDK prohibits what they did. (Gruber's reply (http://daringfireball.net/2009/11/airfoil_touch_situation) to Jeff LaMarche sums it up very nicely — I know it's already been linked to be I think it needs repeating)
YES, Apple can reject an app for any reason they see fit. But this is getting ridiculous. I haven't cared about any of the apps made by developers that have so far jumped ship, but one of these days it is going to be one of the ones I care about, and I'm not looking forward to it.
LarryC
Apr 23, 01:55 PM
I am curious about something. Intel is apparently having difficulty dealing with ATI, which is owned by AMD. Is this a problem for Apple that is limited to notebooks only? It seems like the new MBP doesn't have this same problem, except in the 13" model. Is this problem going to affect Apple's desktop machines? Or is it only limited to the very small laptops and perhaps the Mac Mini? I am just curious because it doesn't appear that the MBP 15 & 17" are effected. I do hope that this makes sense. I have been waiting to see the next versions of the Mac Book and the iMac. I would like to have a portable and I don't care or need a laptop that is a quarter of an inch in thickness or if it weighs a pound more than a Mac Book Air.
No comments:
Post a Comment