sord
Aug 6, 11:55 PM
Ok - I've been into Macs for a couple years now, so I don't have the history with the company of many of you do.
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
That said, it seems to me that with these ads or banners for Leopard, that it is closer to being released than we all might think. Has Apple promoted a product this way -- bashing M$ -- with out releasing the product soon after?
To me it just seems like real strong words to use if Leopard wont be out for a while, esp. if it will only be released around the time Vista will be next year.
Anyone know what I mean, or feel the same way?
Last WWDC Stevie said that Leopard would be announced at this WWDC - or at least demonstrated. My guess - late this year or early next it will be in stores.
Oh - and Powerbook G5s (dual core) tomorrow!!
TheEddiePShow
Apr 12, 11:12 PM
Honestly I'm excited for this release. I'm a film major and use nothing but Final Cut and sometimes Imovie. People need to stop complaining about IMovie being DUMBED DOWN. It came free on my computer and honestly shouldn't be difficult to use if you're not working on difficult projects. IMovie is perfect for those who make videos and put some extras in it, but that's it. If anything the product that is DUMBED DOWN includes better looking fonts and font effects than final cut has. I find myself exporting videos from Final Cut and then finishing them in IMovie because there's better looking things I can add to my video. Anyway, can't wait for this to be released.
kristoffer4
May 4, 10:21 AM
But this will become confusing to some. Some will ask why can I delete some apps this way and others I have to move manually to the trash?
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
My girlfriend complained the other day that installing new programs is a bit of a pain. I showed her the app store and her response was but what if the programs I want is not in the app store? In this case VLC.
Yamcha
May 2, 05:21 PM
Whatever happened to Command-Delete?
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
Image (http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png)
Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg)
lol true, infact the new buttons look similar to the ones found on Windows 7.. Anyway one thing that is annoying about Launchpad is that you cannot remove applications from the grid, sometimes you end up with uninstallers, and it just becomes a huge mess, would be nice if we could remove applications from Launchpad, not necessarily uninstalling them but just removing them from the grid..
....this is starting to look like Aero in Windows Vista.
See any similarities?
Image (http://thecustomizewindows.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/How-to-remove-the-confirmation-prompt-to-delete-any-file-in-Windows-7-2.png)
Image (http://cdn.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/02/171331-lion_delete_evernote.jpg)
lol true, infact the new buttons look similar to the ones found on Windows 7.. Anyway one thing that is annoying about Launchpad is that you cannot remove applications from the grid, sometimes you end up with uninstallers, and it just becomes a huge mess, would be nice if we could remove applications from Launchpad, not necessarily uninstalling them but just removing them from the grid..
Schnebar
Jan 13, 01:24 AM
this is crap,
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Hmm maybe they could get around this by shipping bluetooth headphones with it.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Hmm maybe they could get around this by shipping bluetooth headphones with it.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
roach
Nov 30, 03:06 AM
Well, then you don't understand Apple's magic. That's precisely where
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
How do you record channel 105 from 5:30PM to 6:30PM on Friday? Damn...that would take forever with 4 buttons.
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
How do you record channel 105 from 5:30PM to 6:30PM on Friday? Damn...that would take forever with 4 buttons.
toddybody
Apr 19, 12:23 PM
Check the 'refurbished' section on store.apple.com - There you usually buy many of the previous generation model, thats where the 'stock' often ends up. You also might get good deals on previous generation on macmall.com or similar sides (but as this article points out, many 3rd party resellers are running low in stock - so there might not be many discounted 'old' models). I often buy machines in the refurbished section from apples site - nothing wrong with those and full warranty (but a couple of hunded dollars cheaper - also for current generation models)
Right on. MicroCenter also has some good deals on previous models. My dad bought a Dual Core i3 27inch iMac for 1399.99 brand new there...:)
Right on. MicroCenter also has some good deals on previous models. My dad bought a Dual Core i3 27inch iMac for 1399.99 brand new there...:)
lifeinhd
Feb 26, 11:52 AM
left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen.
I don't think that's a first-gen, mate. The first gens were acrylic:
http://webrevolutionary.com/price/img-large/apple-acrylic-20-cinema-display-lcd-monitor-flat-panel_250749624559.jpg
<Cool story>
Pic of my airplane setup (I was watching one of the Back to the Future movies):
LOVE those movies. I had the complete set on VHS, plus a fourth "behind-the-scenes" tape, but I lost the first one :(
Btw, it was a class trip at my Jewish school (hence the going out to dinner on Pico Blvd). The kosher food in LA is AMAZING!!
As good as NY?
http://www.porteschaikin.com/personal/macsetup.jpg
I have the same, uh, fan :p
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen.
I don't think that's a first-gen, mate. The first gens were acrylic:
http://webrevolutionary.com/price/img-large/apple-acrylic-20-cinema-display-lcd-monitor-flat-panel_250749624559.jpg
<Cool story>
Pic of my airplane setup (I was watching one of the Back to the Future movies):
LOVE those movies. I had the complete set on VHS, plus a fourth "behind-the-scenes" tape, but I lost the first one :(
Btw, it was a class trip at my Jewish school (hence the going out to dinner on Pico Blvd). The kosher food in LA is AMAZING!!
As good as NY?
http://www.porteschaikin.com/personal/macsetup.jpg
I have the same, uh, fan :p
Eric5h5
Mar 25, 05:21 PM
30fps is far from "silky smooth", but that's still pretty cool.
--Eric
--Eric
guez
Sep 7, 02:52 PM
I have been a Mac user since 1986. I'm not a superuser or a gamer, but the one thing I have learned is to avoid models with too much built-in obsolescence (e.g. my old firewire-less, low-resolution clamshell iBook and the late-model CD-burner-less white iBook G3 that replaced it, not to mention the Powerbook 150 [agh!], Mac Classic [aaagggh!], etc.). Except for the lack of built-in DVD capability, the lampshade 700 MHZ G4 iMac has been a great investment.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
So here is my question. Are the $599 mini and $999 iMac going to become obsolete much faster than the $1199 iMac? Do the dedicated video RAM and Core 2 Duo (iMacs) make much of difference? I already have an external DVD burner and plan to buy 2GB RAM.
Philberttheduck
Nov 29, 08:30 PM
What'll be the price on this badboy, you think?
jowie
Apr 26, 01:17 PM
App Store [TM]
I think you mean App Store�
Never forget cmd-alt-2 (or apple-option-2 if you're old-skool) ;)
I think you mean App Store�
Never forget cmd-alt-2 (or apple-option-2 if you're old-skool) ;)
lu0s3r322
Jul 19, 04:04 PM
that's great news. w00t im a first time conference call listener! :p
Yakuza
Nov 24, 08:53 AM
Crystal Head Vodka for turkey day.
Mando
Dude!! that's freakin' awsome! :D
Mando
Dude!! that's freakin' awsome! :D
Earendil
Nov 27, 09:49 PM
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
And what, exactly, is your point? Really, did you read the thread? Okay, mb not, did you read anything that I wrote? No? Did you follow the linked thread that has been used as a counter point to the FUD that is spread? No?
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
Bad apple for not offering a $400 laptop, that pressures me into getting a Dell! Bad apple for not offering me a fast car, that pressures me into buying a BMW!!
I'm sorry, but your conclusions are horrible. You aren't looking at all the "facts", and then with the few you are using (out of context) you are drawing very stretched conclusions.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck,
No, but we have little reason to believe that they aren't selling well enough, and good reason to believe they are. Why? Because if they weren't selling well, and they were highly marked up, than it wouldn't hurt apple to lower the price, and sell more units. But they haven't yet done that. So either Apple's marketing guys are complete idiots and missed business 101, or they are selling enough units to justify the price.
but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
A very interesting theory, that seems plausible. However what is more likely is that Apple is selling enough units, and that they aren't overly priced for their intended purpose and intended competition (which is NOT Dell).
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program.
News flash, any monitor on the market today will work with your Mac. I know, it's amazing. Buy a cheap monitor and slap an Apple sticker on it if you like. Or go complain that NEC is limiting your choice by not offering a monitor in your price range, or that BMW is screwing you out of a car by not offering a car at 10 grand.
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
They might do it, but it won't be a prosumer level monitor like the rest. It will use a cheaper panel so that it's in line with it's target audience (consumer budget mini buyers). There aren't many companies, if any, that sell pro specced monitors at 17" any more. And as those better panels become cheaper, there is even less reason to offer the pro guys such small screen space.
Now, would you please, for the love of knowledge, go read the first post in this thread before making another reply. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Thank you,
~Tyler
Chundles
Aug 16, 07:22 AM
Digitimes?
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
iBook G5 and PowerBook G5 Digitimes?
Yah right.
Sorry but I've had it with new iPod rumours. They'll come when they come and they won't be as revolutionary as we'd thought.
Massively fed up now.
GregA
Dec 30, 12:03 AM
it seems like most people are dying for HD over here. <snip> I don�t think anyone anticipated the demand for HD. People watch programs they normally wouldn�t if it�s HD.It's possible to both be quite right here. HD is underestimated, but having greater demand than expected is a separate issue to overall market size.
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Digital 480p isn�t bad, but it�s 4:3 aspect.Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
Anyway, as you say... there are 2 separate markets - the 2 evolutions of PayTV are "on demand", and HD (or both together). People who have invested in a top notch TV will easily pay for HD players (like an iTV-HD). Others may just want to watch what they want, when they want it.
If Apple only releases a HD system, and it costs a premium, I won't end up buying it. I'd be paying for a premium that I couldn't take advantage of. And besides, at the moment the iTS sells 640x480 anyway.
Digital 480p isn�t bad, but it�s 4:3 aspect.Really, is that what you're doing in the US?
We've got Digital 576i in Australia as our standard definition, but it's in the 16:9 aspect ratio. Apple can choose whatever combination they want, I'm sure.
quagmire
Mar 7, 09:57 AM
But prior to that the Mk1 was the same in both the U.S. & Europe.
Was only a young kid when that Focus was around.......
Anyway, when the current US Focus debuted back in 1999 I believe it was, it wasn't a bad car. In typical bad Ford fashion, it was left to rot on the vine. It got a heavy redesign/MCE for the 2008/9 MY I believe it was, but it was too late. The 2012 Focus is so much better. Although I prefer the Chevy Cruze.
So far this generation of world cars are going fairly well. The Buick Regal is selling in China and in the US fairly well( with the Regal being the Opel Insignia). The Cruze isn't doing too badly either. I don't know the exact number of Cruze sales in Europe, but I heard it was decent. They just sold 18,000 units in February in the US. Holden survives as it is today due to its export business. World cars can be done. They just have to be implemented correctly.
Was only a young kid when that Focus was around.......
Anyway, when the current US Focus debuted back in 1999 I believe it was, it wasn't a bad car. In typical bad Ford fashion, it was left to rot on the vine. It got a heavy redesign/MCE for the 2008/9 MY I believe it was, but it was too late. The 2012 Focus is so much better. Although I prefer the Chevy Cruze.
So far this generation of world cars are going fairly well. The Buick Regal is selling in China and in the US fairly well( with the Regal being the Opel Insignia). The Cruze isn't doing too badly either. I don't know the exact number of Cruze sales in Europe, but I heard it was decent. They just sold 18,000 units in February in the US. Holden survives as it is today due to its export business. World cars can be done. They just have to be implemented correctly.
jav6454
Mar 24, 01:48 PM
Probably a daft question but i'll ask anyhows so forgive my techie noobness!
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
It would be very well possible. Remember, Thunderbolt is derived from LightPeak. One of the reasons to develop LightPeak was to transmit data at very fast rates over a distance. Essentially, not have everything so closed together.
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe 2.0 x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
With the advent of thunderbolt and its high bandwidth, will it possible for a gfx card to be sited externally in some kind of cradle and be used as the main gfx card or wouldn't the internal "plumbing" allow it to happen ?
/noob mode off
;)
It would be very well possible. Remember, Thunderbolt is derived from LightPeak. One of the reasons to develop LightPeak was to transmit data at very fast rates over a distance. Essentially, not have everything so closed together.
In other words, you can the CPU in room A and the RAM in room B which is 20 feet away and get the same result. This is one of the reasons Intel developed LightPeak. There are many other reasons for development obviously.
However, Thunderbolt in its current stage is not suited for such lengthy exchange due to its copper nature. However, say you have a GFX cradle on your desk, you could well use Thunderbolt's current implementation to feed data. However, you'd need multiple implementations of Thunderbolt in order for it to work great. Currently, many GFX solutions use PCIe 2.0 x16 interface which pretty much uses 8 GB/s bandwidth so one Thunderbolt interface will do fine and still have a nice 2GB/s overhead. However, the newer PCIe 3.0 interface pushes 16GB/s now so you'd need two Thunderbolt interfaces.
SeaFox
Dec 27, 11:15 PM
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
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.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma,
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.
...which now outsells tube tvs?
Do you have a source for that statement?
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
Apple thinks you are.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
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.
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.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma,
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.
...which now outsells tube tvs?
Do you have a source for that statement?
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
Apple thinks you are.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
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.
celticpride678
Apr 1, 12:01 PM
Has anyone else experienced that the temps has gone up with this release?
my macbook 5,1 2ghz core 2 duo seems to run well over 70 celcius all the time which means that my fans are going crazy, and i hate that high sound. its fine in idle mode, but as soon i start a program like Xcode or Netbeans or just browse the web.
its idling at 60-6x celcius.
and nothing is running at all only activity monitor.
this didn't happen in preview 1
or on my SL partition.
It's likely that Spotlight is still indexing.
my macbook 5,1 2ghz core 2 duo seems to run well over 70 celcius all the time which means that my fans are going crazy, and i hate that high sound. its fine in idle mode, but as soon i start a program like Xcode or Netbeans or just browse the web.
its idling at 60-6x celcius.
and nothing is running at all only activity monitor.
this didn't happen in preview 1
or on my SL partition.
It's likely that Spotlight is still indexing.
rhett7660
Apr 3, 12:13 AM
Good commercial! Liked it!
TheBobcat
Nov 29, 03:57 PM
My guess would be too much cost for such a small market. There's not a lot of 1080p content out there and even less 1080p displays. For a first gen device, I think 720p would be good enough. Maybe even 480p if it's cheap enough.
Although, in the end it'll probably depend on bandwidth limitations. They never said what protocol they'll be using. Some are assuming 802.11n, but that would limit them to the newest Intel Macs with a firmware upgrade.
True, but two things with that. First, 1080p is expanding rapidly, and it would seem unApple to not go all out with supporting an emerging standard.
Second, didn't iTV have an ethernet jack? If it was wired, they could stream whatever they wanted at almost any res if you had a fast enough network.
Maybe it would limit or upconvert if you were wireless only.
Although, in the end it'll probably depend on bandwidth limitations. They never said what protocol they'll be using. Some are assuming 802.11n, but that would limit them to the newest Intel Macs with a firmware upgrade.
True, but two things with that. First, 1080p is expanding rapidly, and it would seem unApple to not go all out with supporting an emerging standard.
Second, didn't iTV have an ethernet jack? If it was wired, they could stream whatever they wanted at almost any res if you had a fast enough network.
Maybe it would limit or upconvert if you were wireless only.
Lurchdubious
Nov 26, 06:14 PM
Lurchdubious, are you building a glasses case?:p
/ok, I'll stop now
ROTFL!!! :D Indeed I AM!
/ok, I'll stop now
ROTFL!!! :D Indeed I AM!
No comments:
Post a Comment