MovieCutter
Sep 5, 04:33 PM
I'm going to venture a guess and say we'll see something named the iPod Showtime or Showtime as a product name.
dime21
Apr 20, 08:12 AM
So, you're against personal responsibility then?
most leftists usually are. government programs and pointless legislation have taken the place of personal responsibility, at least in their eyes. :rolleyes:
most leftists usually are. government programs and pointless legislation have taken the place of personal responsibility, at least in their eyes. :rolleyes:
zap2
May 3, 05:27 PM
Yeah... All 13 of you :rolleyes: JK.
Don't get me wrong, I'd probably be a little upset if I were you, but this shouldn't come as too much of a surprise; you are a VERY small percentage of the market.
The amount people who want to use the iMac as a display is a small group?
We're talking consoles, PCs, Macs, phones, tablets, media players, blue-ray players.
I think we'd see a large amount of people like this features, plus it would make the iMac a much more attractive purchase, as it would still be a fine display even after the hardware in it is too old. I know it would most likely make me go for the iMac over the Mac mini(although most likely I'm waiting for the mini before any purchases)
Don't get me wrong, I'd probably be a little upset if I were you, but this shouldn't come as too much of a surprise; you are a VERY small percentage of the market.
The amount people who want to use the iMac as a display is a small group?
We're talking consoles, PCs, Macs, phones, tablets, media players, blue-ray players.
I think we'd see a large amount of people like this features, plus it would make the iMac a much more attractive purchase, as it would still be a fine display even after the hardware in it is too old. I know it would most likely make me go for the iMac over the Mac mini(although most likely I'm waiting for the mini before any purchases)
QCassidy352
Jul 14, 03:18 PM
Actually October 19, 2005 for the 970MP.
the original quote was to "G5/PPC fanboys," not "970MP fanboys." But whatever. My point is that it's hardly surprising that a bleeding edge chip beats an old one. That's kinda the point of technological progress, no?
Now u see why Steve wet his pants when he saw these chips over a year ago. Then Decided to switch , He knew if he had not. Apple's platform would be dead in the water.
So then AMD and IBM are dead in the water? Somebody better call them and tell them.
Believe it or not, the fact that intel is releasing new chips does not mean that the other companies have given up or that intel has "won." IBM's desktop and server chips have been and will continue to be very competitive. Apple switched because PPC was not cutting it for laptops.
the original quote was to "G5/PPC fanboys," not "970MP fanboys." But whatever. My point is that it's hardly surprising that a bleeding edge chip beats an old one. That's kinda the point of technological progress, no?
Now u see why Steve wet his pants when he saw these chips over a year ago. Then Decided to switch , He knew if he had not. Apple's platform would be dead in the water.
So then AMD and IBM are dead in the water? Somebody better call them and tell them.
Believe it or not, the fact that intel is releasing new chips does not mean that the other companies have given up or that intel has "won." IBM's desktop and server chips have been and will continue to be very competitive. Apple switched because PPC was not cutting it for laptops.
zin
Apr 30, 01:36 PM
Apple always seem to use good CPUs. I just hope that their GPU choices don't stoop low this time.
fehhkk
Apr 16, 10:35 AM
Looks like 2012 is the year to get the Ivy Bridge Macbook Pro :D
GFLPraxis
Jul 20, 12:29 PM
Then all we're looking at is cranking up the current 180 watt power supply. I remember my iMac G5 2.0 GHz hitting 75-76º C at 100% load. The Rev. C iMac G5 was whisper quiet compared to my machine using the same 970FX chip. If Conroe doesn't break 45° C then it's not a thermal nightmare to put into the iMac. It's just a pain to power.
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 10:35 AM
The 2.40 and 2.66 (which would be great for the imacs) use 114 Watts at idle and 158-162 at load (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=7). Here's info on power draw for original G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=32486), early 2005 G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=302439), and late 2005 G5s (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=303540). I fail to see the problem. I'm not being flip - I really fail to see the problem. They fit G5s in to imacs, and those power draw numbers look worse than conroe's, unless I'm missing something.Thanks for the additional research. Still, you're taxing the current 180w power supply. I don't think the Power Mac G5 is a good example either. Are we expecting a redesign for Conroe? Not that I don't WANT Conroe in the iMac. It just seems a bit much.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/12/ibm_90nm_g5_chip/
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-powerenv/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/02/12/ibm_90nm_g5_chip/
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/library/pa-powerenv/
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:27 AM
The paragraph I quoted kind of explains it.
I agree though, I'd like to see more proof if it is true.
But without the data a paragraph means nothing. Show me a map with that data on it from when location services was off.
I agree though, I'd like to see more proof if it is true.
But without the data a paragraph means nothing. Show me a map with that data on it from when location services was off.
lmalave
Sep 26, 01:54 PM
Very hard to say, but 3G is not taking to the rest of the world very well, especially the US as they can't get 2/2.5G to work properly yet. This is about the only occasion when the UK really is doing well.
Wrong. Cingular is rolling out 3.5G (HSDPA), and although they only have one phone that currently supports it (the LG CU500, http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phones/cell-phones.jsp?RFlow=A&source=INC230056&zip=10010&q_deviceId=cdsku9870167&WT.svl=dtl), reviewers have been wowed by the download speeds and smooth streaming video performance (download speeds are 1.8 Mbps).
Maybe this was exactly one of the reasons that Apple chose Cingular: it was the only carrier that could support integration with the iTunes music store. Yes, you heard right: I predict that Cingular and Apple worked out some deal where Cingular will use the iTunes music store rather than trying to set up their own music store. You heard it here first. I predict that the mobile iTunes software on the iPhone will actually be store-enabled...
Wrong. Cingular is rolling out 3.5G (HSDPA), and although they only have one phone that currently supports it (the LG CU500, http://onlinestorez.cingular.com/cell-phone-service/cell-phones/cell-phones.jsp?RFlow=A&source=INC230056&zip=10010&q_deviceId=cdsku9870167&WT.svl=dtl), reviewers have been wowed by the download speeds and smooth streaming video performance (download speeds are 1.8 Mbps).
Maybe this was exactly one of the reasons that Apple chose Cingular: it was the only carrier that could support integration with the iTunes music store. Yes, you heard right: I predict that Cingular and Apple worked out some deal where Cingular will use the iTunes music store rather than trying to set up their own music store. You heard it here first. I predict that the mobile iTunes software on the iPhone will actually be store-enabled...
vvswarup
Apr 30, 09:49 PM
Microsoft doesn't really play in the consumer / gadget / toy market, which simply means that you don't get to see most of their products unless you work in a corporate data center. And unlike Apple, Microsoft -has- data center / server products that people WANT to use and that are years ahead of the pack (Sharepoint Portal Server, Exchange Server, SQL Server, Terminal Services, just to name a few) - and a LOT of their RD goes there.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
dukebound85
Apr 25, 02:04 AM
Uh no I didn't. I just interpreted the law. As someone implied earlier, this could all be a ruse. I might not have done anything I said in this thread. No one here can know 100% for sure, because you did not witness the event I claim occurred. That simple fact, in addition to any record searching anyone did without a warrant would be an invasion of privacy would get anything I say in this thread thrown out of court faster than you could blink.
-Don
OP, I do find it amusing you think you know the intricacies of the law just because your uncle is a judge
Until you have the education/training yourself, I would not be so confident in your opinions...especially as one who has not even finished hs
I also advise you to stop digging yourself in a hole. I feel you are rapidly losing any credibility/respect that many long time posters previously had of you due to this very, and I mean very childish and selfish mindset you are exhibiting in this thread
-Don
OP, I do find it amusing you think you know the intricacies of the law just because your uncle is a judge
Until you have the education/training yourself, I would not be so confident in your opinions...especially as one who has not even finished hs
I also advise you to stop digging yourself in a hole. I feel you are rapidly losing any credibility/respect that many long time posters previously had of you due to this very, and I mean very childish and selfish mindset you are exhibiting in this thread
reflex
Aug 29, 03:32 AM
They don't say Dell or HP. But who makes PC's?
Just about everyone and their dog? :)
Just about everyone and their dog? :)
jackaninny
Mar 29, 12:43 PM
yes profit is so, so important for us consumers.
:rolleyes:
Ask Nokia customers how important profit is.
:rolleyes:
Ask Nokia customers how important profit is.
IJ Reilly
Aug 23, 11:09 PM
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
Not in 20 years, they couldn't. And no matter how often it's said to the contrary, $100 million is still very serious money.
Reminds me of 1997, when Microsoft was forced to invest $150 million in Apple as part of a settlement of a patent lawsuit, a lot of people couldn't wrap their minds around the idea that Microsoft had actually lost. They did then. Apple did today.
whateverandever
Mar 23, 05:21 PM
People who speed and drive under the influence make me sick. Pull the apps. And when you catch the scum, throw them in jail and take away their licence. The don't deserve to walk among us.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
So... you're calling everyone who's ever gone over the speed limit scum that is worth of jail? Chances are good you'd fall into that category as well, even if you only accidentally went 1mph over the speed limit -- breaking the law is breaking the law.
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 07:19 PM
Who?
Try visiting www.pixar.com ;)
Try visiting www.pixar.com ;)
Much Ado
Sep 8, 01:40 PM
I remember that SNL skit too. That was great.
Introducing, and i'm thrilled about this- the new iPod invisa.
:)
Introducing, and i'm thrilled about this- the new iPod invisa.
:)
sfh
Mar 23, 05:06 PM
There are plenty of websites that do the same thing so therefore they need to petition the websites to censor their sites if they are going to ask apple to censor their app store.
BRLawyer
Apr 30, 06:19 PM
I understand where you are coming from. With your feet planted in set in concrete, unable to fathom future developments based on the experimental or high-end tech of the day, the Blu-Ray seems endlessly of value. Much like the tape reels of the 60s.
The BluRay is going away for one very specific reason: mechanical. By 2016 the flash memory chips for 50gb will probably be so everyday and cheap that bulky, mechanical BluRay will seem awkward. By 2019 I'd bet you can store several times more than a BluRay on medium-priced thumb-drive.
Proof? Look back 6 years when a 1gb thumb-drive was a huge chunk of cash. Look back 10 years when a 512MB thumb-drive was almost prohibitive to buy. The future is non-mechanical.
Absolutely right, as I have demonstrated this over and over again in previous posts. BR (and not BD as Sony wants you to have it) is dead in the water.
Not only for "mechanical" reasons, but first and foremost for the simple fact that it brings little added value over DVD (contrary to what happened between VHS and DVD back in the day). DVD in both industrialized and developing markets is still KING; just look at the shelves of electronics stores.
Apple is more than wise to keep its distance from the BR crap.
The BluRay is going away for one very specific reason: mechanical. By 2016 the flash memory chips for 50gb will probably be so everyday and cheap that bulky, mechanical BluRay will seem awkward. By 2019 I'd bet you can store several times more than a BluRay on medium-priced thumb-drive.
Proof? Look back 6 years when a 1gb thumb-drive was a huge chunk of cash. Look back 10 years when a 512MB thumb-drive was almost prohibitive to buy. The future is non-mechanical.
Absolutely right, as I have demonstrated this over and over again in previous posts. BR (and not BD as Sony wants you to have it) is dead in the water.
Not only for "mechanical" reasons, but first and foremost for the simple fact that it brings little added value over DVD (contrary to what happened between VHS and DVD back in the day). DVD in both industrialized and developing markets is still KING; just look at the shelves of electronics stores.
Apple is more than wise to keep its distance from the BR crap.
tylersdad
Apr 4, 12:04 PM
OMG.. I'm with Felt. "Security Guards" shouldn't carry guns, and if they do there should be training and good sense that goes into using it. Shooting the suspects in the head is criminal.
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
Anybody responsible for guarding should have a gun. If the person isn't qualified to carry a gun, they he/she isn't qualified to guard anything and shouldn't be a guard.
When you're exchanging gunfire with a criminal, the main goal is not to wound; it is to remove the threat to your life completely. Let's say the guard shoots the guy in the arm, the guy's going to be so pumped up on adrenaline that he's not going to even know he's shot, giving him plenty of opportunity to take another shot.
Ask yourself this: If it were your life he was guarding, what would you want the guard to do?
langis.elbasunu
Mar 23, 06:25 PM
in the us you are a criminal by default
SuperCachetes
Apr 10, 11:03 AM
Government-mandated vacation??? Why, those socialists! The damn government can keep its filthy hands outta my- hey, wait a minute... Did you say 5 weeks? :p
marksman
Mar 23, 05:19 PM
I am going to say that I am in favor of not having Apps whose only purpose is to assist people in breaking laws and also increase the possibility that someone innocent will get injured or killed because of the use of such an Application.
In other words if there is no legitimate use for an App other than to break the law and put people's lives in dangers, I think it is reasonable to ask Apple to review their policy on such things.
Anyone who drives drunk these days has major problems. Anyone who uses a phone/tablet app to assist them in driving drunk is a complete arse and I can only hope bad things happen to them.
In other words if there is no legitimate use for an App other than to break the law and put people's lives in dangers, I think it is reasonable to ask Apple to review their policy on such things.
Anyone who drives drunk these days has major problems. Anyone who uses a phone/tablet app to assist them in driving drunk is a complete arse and I can only hope bad things happen to them.
No comments:
Post a Comment