Erasmus
Aug 5, 08:39 PM
NO iPODS OR iPHONE I DON'T CARE FOR THEM ONE JOT
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
Ok, Stevie J, You can introduce the Mac Pro, the new XServe, and Leopard on Monday.
But please don't deny us our new conroe iMac with x1800XT! Release it on Tuesday!!! And Merom Macbooks and Macbook Pros. You will lose too many sales and potential switchers if you wait until the end of September!
Plus I'll cry.
We beggs of you Stevie J, we wants it, we needs it, it must come to me!
The iMac Ultra is mine. My own. My precious.
*LTD*
Apr 6, 07:51 AM
Impossible.
Apple's no longer supposed to care about their Pro software.
This will never happen.
Apple's no longer supposed to care about their Pro software.
This will never happen.
theBB
Aug 11, 07:28 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
Well, let's see, about 20 years ago, a lot of countries in Europe, Asia and elsewhere decided on a standard digital cell phone system and called it GSM. About 15 years ago GSM networks became quite widespread across these countries. In the meantime US kept on using analog cell phones. Motorola did not even believe that digital cell phone had much of a future, so it decided to stay away from this market, a decision which almost bankrupted the company.
US started rolling out digital service only about 10 years ago. As US government does not like to dictate private companies how to conduct their business, they sold the spectrum and put down some basic ground rules, but for the most part they let the service providers use any network they wished. For one reason or another, these providers decided go with about 4 different standards at first. Quite a few companies went with GSM, AT&T picked a similar, but incompatible TDMA (IS=136?) standard, Nextel went with a proprietary standard they called iDEN and Sprint and Verizon went with CDMA, a radically different standard (IS-95) designed by Qualcomm. At the time, other big companies were very skeptical, so Qualcomm had to not only develop the underlying communication standards, but manufacture cell phones and the electronics for the cell towers. However, once the system proved itself, everybody started moving in that direction. Even the upcoming 3G system for these GSM networks, called UMTS, use a variant of CDMA technology.
CDMA is a more complicated standard compared to GSM, but it allows the providers to cram more users into each cell, it is supposedly cheaper to maintain and more flexible in some respects. However, anybody in that boat has to pay hefty royalties to Qualcomm, dampening its popularity. While creating UMTS, GSM standards bodies did everything they could to avoid using Qualcomm patents to avoid these payments. However, I don't know how successful they got in these efforts.
Even though Europeans here on these forums like to gloat that US did not join the worldwide standard, that we did not play along, that ours is a hodge podge of incompatible systems; without the freedom to try out different standards, CDMA would not have the opportunity to prove its feasibility and performance. In the end, the rest of the world is also reaping the benefits through UMTS/WCDMA.
Of course, not using the same standards as everybody else has its own price. The components of CDMA cell phones cost more and the system itself is more complicated, so CDMA versions of cell phones hit the market six months to a year after their GSM counterparts, if at all. The infrastructure cost of a rare system is higher as well, so AT&T had to rip apart its network to replace it with GSM version about five years after rolling it out. Sprint is probably going to convert Nextel's system in the near future as well.
I hope this answers your question.
guzhogi
Nov 29, 01:16 PM
Just thought of something, maybe Apple could charge the record company for each song released by means of "Oh, you used a Mac to make this song. Give us this amount of money for each copy of the song you sell."
DotCom2
Apr 27, 09:25 AM
Problem is, if you turn "Location Services" off, then you can't use "Find My iPhone" which I think is quite a useful feature! :(
ChrisTX
Apr 11, 09:22 PM
Why wouldn't Apple also just release a VZ iPhone 5 in June/July time frame also. It shouldn't matter that VZ was late to the party and only just now got the iPhone. Apple has made their money off the VZ folks that have been waiting forever for the iPhone, and then June/July Apple can make their money off the rest. I recently just got my iPhone 4 replaced for free by Apple due to a faulty sleep/wake button, so I'm more concerned with iOS 5, but I still want to see new Apple hardware soon!
ro2nie
Aug 27, 08:43 PM
I think im gonna wait and buy in 2007 with leopard and iLife 07 :rolleyes:
mkruck
Apr 6, 03:06 PM
Yeesh dude, at least your wife cares enough to do nice things for you. :(
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
Yes, and my response that you quoted was said tongue in cheek. People really need to lighten up and stop taking themselves so seriously.
Sent from my Xoom using Tapatalk
ZLurker
Aug 12, 02:05 AM
Mac OS Kitten.
LOL!!
Good one!
LOL!!
Good one!
dukebound85
Dec 7, 05:07 PM
would those that have played this game reccomend getting it? or are there too many cons (standard cars, multiple versions of one car, bad AI in racing, bad physics in damage esp with standard, etc) that would lead to buyers remorse?
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
Keep in mind, I have played quite abit of Forza, but now have a PS3 and want agood racing sim but just keep hearing bad things about this game (largely being an incomplete game)
SevenInchScrew
Aug 19, 09:21 AM
I'm 100% sure the GT site says all the cars were remodeled for the ps3, as in not the ps2 cars.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard� cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Do we know if all cars have fully modelled interiors or if thats just for the luxury cars?
No, the only cars that have an interior view are the Premium� models. From NSB's link above...
Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.
http://us.gran-turismo.com/us/news/d5247.html
recreated
As in not copypasta'd over from gt4.
All that I get from that quote is that they are using older models, but that they will, obviously, be rendered in the new GT5 engine. So, the marketing team can say all they want, but actual screen shots of Standard� cars do not show much improvement, if any at all, resolution increase notwithstanding.
Do we know if all cars have fully modelled interiors or if thats just for the luxury cars?
No, the only cars that have an interior view are the Premium� models. From NSB's link above...
Standard cars do not support vehicle interior camera views.
mwswami
Jul 23, 07:12 PM
That's what Kentsfield is for. It is a single quad core chip, which is expected to fit into the cheaper motherboards for Conroe instead of the much more expensive motherboards for Woodcrest.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.
Two recent quotes: On their earnings release, Apple said that they are on track to finish the Intel transition by the end of the year. And Intel said that Kentsfield will be available in the last quarter of this year. A single chip Woodcrest is nonsense (much more expensive than Conroe at same performance). Complete line with dual chip times dual core Woodcrest is too expensive for the cheapest mode. By waiting for Kentsfield, Apple can avoid designing two motherboards and still have quad cores.
So you don't expect the Mac Pro at WWDC?? Or only a dual core version using Conroe?
I agree single Woodcrest doesn't make sense. So we have two options for Quad core - Dual Woodcrest and single Kentsfield. Of course 2xWodcrest is going to be more expensive but I wonder by how much more. I am guessing $400. But, if you do that, you have the same motherboard across the Mac Pro (and possibly shared with XServe as well) and for that $400 you also get FB-DIMM and higher RAM ceiling. Also, the same platform can be used with Clovertown to scale to 8 core workstation early Q1'07. If Kentsfield is used then 4 core is the end of the line.
So I don't expect Mac Pro to exclusively use Conroe/Kentsfield. Either two different boards - Conroe/Kentsfield on the low end and Woodcrest/Clovertown on the high end. Or Woodcrest/Clovertown across the board. Given the reasons above, I expect it will be the latter.
Conroe deserves to be in the Apple lineup. I expect it will be in the upgraded (perhaps a larger i.e. 23") iMac. Apple may also release another desktop to fill the gap between the Mini and the Pro. That option has been discussed here as well.
dscuber9000
Mar 19, 09:31 PM
Military operations in Iraq have ended, and Obama campaigned on agreeing the Afghanistan War... so I don't know what you're talking about, honestly.
And I think it is pretty rich for a conservative to bring up his failing to close Guantanamo Bay when it is the conservatives who are trying so hard to keep it open. :rolleyes:
And yes, I completely disagree with what we're doing in Libya. But I don't think putting someone in office who would cut pretty much everything the government does is the right answer. :rolleyes:
And I think it is pretty rich for a conservative to bring up his failing to close Guantanamo Bay when it is the conservatives who are trying so hard to keep it open. :rolleyes:
And yes, I completely disagree with what we're doing in Libya. But I don't think putting someone in office who would cut pretty much everything the government does is the right answer. :rolleyes:
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 09:40 AM
It's nice that this month's "Apple-gate" story will start to die. I can't wait to see what the media generates next month in the "Apple-gate" saga.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
Antennagate
Locationgate
C'mon, Apple competitors, think up your next outrage.
dhunt
Jul 29, 04:41 PM
I know for a fact that the design college I go to just placed an order for MANY MANY MBP 17". Apple knows that students and schools need computers before school starts, and getting rid of some "old" products before you release your new ones, is a pretty good idea if you ask me.
Thunderhawks
Apr 6, 04:35 PM
Don't understand that there needs to be a pissing contest about Xoom OR ipad.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
Why are the Xoom guys even here on a Mac site, to tell us THEIR device is better?
Let's even assume they are right.
Go buy your Xoom and be happy if it does what you want No harm, no foul.
The Apple users buy Apple until something better comes along also as long as it does what they want.
They love the possible integration with their other devices and when that comes to Xoom or something else is better they will switch.
Technology pace is amazingly fast and nobody knows what is next.
BRLawyer
Jul 15, 01:28 PM
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
This sounds to me like a redux of the Performa/Quadra/LC disaster of the late 90s...I am glad Apple has learned from its mistakes, so it does NOT stretch its production line to a plethora of unnecessary models anymore...
A cheapo MacPro model is more than enough to fill any gaps between the iMac and the Pro line...nothing else.
hulugu
Mar 22, 12:05 AM
It's hard to argue against sysiphus's summary. The depressing corollary to that is, I don't see any realistically electable candidates on the horizon who can improve on Obama. Presidents have become more alike over time. Perhaps that is because the US is so out of step with the rest of the world that all presidents find themselves involved in similar international adventures.
It will be interesting to see how Obama handles the next phase of the the situation, as he has promised to "tone down" US military involvement in Libya. Unlike Iraq, there is an opposition movement in-country and there is no invasion. So while I'm disappointed that we are involved in yet another conflict in the middle east, this one stands a better chance of aiding a legitimate opposition movement in removing a dictator rather than creating another tragic, expensive mess.
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground�I be amazed if there weren't forward-air controllers and Green Berets in Libya�the US's role will remain very limited. Like the Gulf War, we will let our Arab League allies be the first ones across the border, and give the security operations to the French and British.
It will be interesting to see how Obama handles the next phase of the the situation, as he has promised to "tone down" US military involvement in Libya. Unlike Iraq, there is an opposition movement in-country and there is no invasion. So while I'm disappointed that we are involved in yet another conflict in the middle east, this one stands a better chance of aiding a legitimate opposition movement in removing a dictator rather than creating another tragic, expensive mess.
I agree. The Democrats will, of course, push Obama for a second-term and thus our opposition candidates are all GOP, none of whom are serious contenders for improving our present situation.
If I read the Obama administration correctly, the US involvement will be very limited and while "advisors" are certainly on the ground�I be amazed if there weren't forward-air controllers and Green Berets in Libya�the US's role will remain very limited. Like the Gulf War, we will let our Arab League allies be the first ones across the border, and give the security operations to the French and British.
asphalt-proof
Aug 11, 02:38 PM
If Apple pick a carrier, I hope is not Cingular. But from past situations, that's very likely.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
I agree that a carrier free ohone is the way to go but a carrier-subsudized phone is cheaper for the consumer (or at least appears that way in the beginning). I think there maybe networ issues as well. Doesn't Verizon or Nextel operate on a different freq than Cingular/AtT? Not sure.
The ideal is a carrier free phone. That way the iphone can reach many more people and make it possible to upgrade phones without asking people to terminate their contracts.
I agree that a carrier free ohone is the way to go but a carrier-subsudized phone is cheaper for the consumer (or at least appears that way in the beginning). I think there maybe networ issues as well. Doesn't Verizon or Nextel operate on a different freq than Cingular/AtT? Not sure.
LarryB08
Apr 8, 08:09 AM
what you(Best Buy) did was take $100 from the customer and lock them in from buying anywere else!
Yeah, Best Buy took that $100 alright...they held a gun to each customer's head and told them flat out - "we have no more in stock so you better pay us $100 or else"
If you believe this was actually some sort of BB ruse, and still paid your money, then you deserve what you get. Start taking responsibility for your own actions for a change.
Yeah, Best Buy took that $100 alright...they held a gun to each customer's head and told them flat out - "we have no more in stock so you better pay us $100 or else"
If you believe this was actually some sort of BB ruse, and still paid your money, then you deserve what you get. Start taking responsibility for your own actions for a change.
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 11:46 AM
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
mdlooker
Apr 8, 05:56 AM
Well I wonder what lesson will be taught here? I don't think Apple will trust them ever again with blockbuster items. I wonder if companies hold grudges?
ryanx27
Aug 27, 11:05 AM
I happen to have a Yonah Macbook, and im a little concerned.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
well im hoping to sell this one next year, and thatll get me most of the way to my santa rosa beast, cuz i KNOW santa rosa is that good.
This is the classic existential dilemma of the Mac user :D
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
well im hoping to sell this one next year, and thatll get me most of the way to my santa rosa beast, cuz i KNOW santa rosa is that good.
This is the classic existential dilemma of the Mac user :D
kingconsulting
Nov 28, 07:39 PM
Actually, they do. They also got paid on every blank tape sold when cassettes were big. I think it is crazy for everyone to think that the music industry is greedy when it getting squeezed out of all of their revenue streams. So, Apple makes hundreds of millions off of their back on the itunes site, and a billion off of iPod sales, and they cannot share in the wealth?
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
What your saying is totally obsurd. Who's fault is it the record companies are getting "squeezed"? Apple makes computers that can play the music also. Maybe they record companies should get a cut of that also?
The record companies are the ones who want something for nothing!
It doesn't cost the consumer any more, why wouldn't you want the people who actually make the music you are listening to get compensated?
This debate is stale. People want something for nothing.
What your saying is totally obsurd. Who's fault is it the record companies are getting "squeezed"? Apple makes computers that can play the music also. Maybe they record companies should get a cut of that also?
The record companies are the ones who want something for nothing!
No comments:
Post a Comment