hayesk
Mar 26, 02:26 PM
I agree entirely.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
I also think 10.4.11 is the best OS ever.
I don't want "wow." I want them to fix the broken things, like IMAP subscriptions in Mail, and sync code for Address book, for example.
daneoni
Sep 19, 09:29 AM
why does anyone need to justify to you why they want 64-bit computing?
I was just gonna say that. All you people trying to tell people want they need and dont need are just wasting your time. At the end of the day people are gonna buy what they want regardless of what you preach to them.
I was just gonna say that. All you people trying to tell people want they need and dont need are just wasting your time. At the end of the day people are gonna buy what they want regardless of what you preach to them.
ergle2
Sep 20, 02:23 PM
...except that he's a she...a demi-goddess.
She certainly has the attitude of one.
Frequent updates are a good thing. I would not want to stop the march of progress just so I could personally feel better about a little money I spent.
The only real downside I see is that Intel Macs are unlikely to hold their value anywhere near as well as the PPC line did due to the quicker changes we'll see now.
I keep systems til they fall apart, pretty much, but there's quite a few on the various forums who say they always buy and sell 2-3 years later to upgrade.
She certainly has the attitude of one.
Frequent updates are a good thing. I would not want to stop the march of progress just so I could personally feel better about a little money I spent.
The only real downside I see is that Intel Macs are unlikely to hold their value anywhere near as well as the PPC line did due to the quicker changes we'll see now.
I keep systems til they fall apart, pretty much, but there's quite a few on the various forums who say they always buy and sell 2-3 years later to upgrade.
ready2switch
Sep 19, 09:32 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.
62% of all statistics are made up to add false weight to the speaker's argument.
:eek:
Unless you have conducted or can site a scientific study calculating exactly how mac users USE their apple machine, stop calling other people annoying and claiming to know exactly how overpowered these systems are for "most" of the users.
cloudnine
Jul 14, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
ctdonath
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
Now it has become a battle of who will get my $500 bucks.
A competitor who fails to show up in time forfeits the match.
Not much of a battle now, is it?
A competitor who fails to show up in time forfeits the match.
Not much of a battle now, is it?
wonderspark
Apr 5, 05:20 PM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience. It's just another way of sucking money out of home consumers. Everything's done online in terms of delivery...
I respectfully disagree. Most of the film festivals we submitted our movie to prefer Blu-ray. That way they get the same quality for previewing as they do for projection, should they accept it. We haven't even had to make an HDCAM copy yet.
I respectfully disagree. Most of the film festivals we submitted our movie to prefer Blu-ray. That way they get the same quality for previewing as they do for projection, should they accept it. We haven't even had to make an HDCAM copy yet.
notabadname
Apr 6, 03:50 PM
Wow, that's success that only a Ballmer could love.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
Not really. They built an excellent product, at what is still a leading price point, all without ANY competition.
It is the other manufacturers that need Apple as a competitor. First the iPod, THEN all the clones that came out after, the iPhone, THEN all the clones and finally the iPad THEN . . . . you get the idea. Apple has been creating innovative products, in a vacuum, that cause the rest of the market to follow, for decades, just fine. Unlike other manufacturers, they strive for excellence with out the need for a product to "duplicate" and spurn them on.
Apple does need some competition. I hope these competitors focus on some of the Apple shortcomings like the religious adherence to the Cocoa Touch UI. Ideally there would be a more hybrid iOS/MacOS functionality in an iPad such that it could morph up to a more desktop like experience when docked. And conversely, it seems like MacBook Air/ Mac OS X Lion is getting a more iOS like feel. There's a middle ground there that Apple needs to get to. I suspect they will. But as with tethering, and allowing re-duplication of core apps by third parties, it will take Apple a while to let go here and allow the iPad to become that perfect combo.
They still seem to ultimately strike this balance better than any other vendor.
Not really. They built an excellent product, at what is still a leading price point, all without ANY competition.
It is the other manufacturers that need Apple as a competitor. First the iPod, THEN all the clones that came out after, the iPhone, THEN all the clones and finally the iPad THEN . . . . you get the idea. Apple has been creating innovative products, in a vacuum, that cause the rest of the market to follow, for decades, just fine. Unlike other manufacturers, they strive for excellence with out the need for a product to "duplicate" and spurn them on.
Funkymonk
Apr 19, 01:37 PM
Couldn't Samsung just claim that the Galaxy S line is an evolution of the Samsung F700? Pretty strong argument for samsung.
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
Midirose
Nov 28, 10:56 PM
Here is another little tid bit about Universal Music you may not be aware of. The original MP3.com was bought out by Universal Music a few years back. Prior to Universal, MP3.com was privately owned and had music from thousands of indie artist from around the world and no major label artist. You could listen to the artist music for free, but you could also purchase their music for download or actual CD. There was a lot of really awful music there but there was a lot of very good music there also. Some unsigned artist sold thousands of CD around the world like my band. After Universal bought MP3.com they destroyed the catalog even though the original owner offered to purchase it. Economics would lead me to think that Universal believed that the millions of indie songs sold on MP3.com was a direct threat to them not meeting their year over year projections, and it was. Get rid of the competition and get money for nothing.........sounds like big business trying to please their share holders. It is no wonder that our culture is going to hel#, when fair play and morals give way to profits. And yes most labels are pimps and you know who their hoes are.......our favorite artists. I hope Apple does not cave to this type of extortion!!!
gkp
Jun 17, 11:43 AM
I got to my local RS at 8am, nobody there, left and came back around 8:45, there were a few people there. The manager was on his cell phone listening to a conference call. After the call finished, he said that it was decided that they are NOT taking pre-orders, but only reservations. He took our names and info and said he would call later in the day with "Pin Numbers" that were assigned to their store. He also said that he could not reserve any iPhones in their system/computer until 10am. So, basically what happened is another store entered their reservations before the 10am assigned time and took up all the pin numbers for OUR area. (This cheating store is in Sacramento, Ca.)
So, later in the day, I called and the manager said that they could only hope for some iPhones to be sent to our store and if so, they would keep ours aside for us (first come, first serve). But, he said the likelyhood of this happening looks grim.
Why did Apple/RadioShack even bother? Even the manager told me the whole process was screwed up.
So, later in the day, I called and the manager said that they could only hope for some iPhones to be sent to our store and if so, they would keep ours aside for us (first come, first serve). But, he said the likelyhood of this happening looks grim.
Why did Apple/RadioShack even bother? Even the manager told me the whole process was screwed up.
DeVizardofOZ
Aug 28, 07:09 AM
Well, it seems like you are the one having hard feelings...so chill out, since we all try to be polite in this forum...otherwise, just go visit some other place where you can vent your anger on people.
As I said above, I am talking about facts and statistics...I am sure there a few cases where guys are just unlucky and receive one lemon after another...but this does NOT represent a trend nor a relevant percentage. You must have this impression because you go to an Apple Support forum and see 100 posts complaining the hell out of it...you just fail, and fail badly, to realize that there are some 1,000,000 users out there with no problems at all.
Anyway, before you start babbling again, check the link below...these are FACTS, not whines.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006502,00.asp
So please, before you spit out some fire, bring me some real facts, like percentage of failures and so on...the report I've read above shows Apple as having the LOWEST repair rate and HIGHEST trust of all makers. This, for me, is relevant; not random screams in Mac forums.
Really no hard feelings. You are right, and the professionals who do test and write reports
are making their reports up... Statisics, as we all know can be made to look one way or the other. The fact, that APPLE is acknowledging quality issues just proves that they themselves are not happpy with what's going on since the intro of the new MB and MBPs.
(2853) New York Yankees 2009
new york yankees wallpaper
new york yankees wallpaper
new york yankees wallpaper
new york yankees wallpaper
new york yankees wallpaper
As I said above, I am talking about facts and statistics...I am sure there a few cases where guys are just unlucky and receive one lemon after another...but this does NOT represent a trend nor a relevant percentage. You must have this impression because you go to an Apple Support forum and see 100 posts complaining the hell out of it...you just fail, and fail badly, to realize that there are some 1,000,000 users out there with no problems at all.
Anyway, before you start babbling again, check the link below...these are FACTS, not whines.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2006502,00.asp
So please, before you spit out some fire, bring me some real facts, like percentage of failures and so on...the report I've read above shows Apple as having the LOWEST repair rate and HIGHEST trust of all makers. This, for me, is relevant; not random screams in Mac forums.
Really no hard feelings. You are right, and the professionals who do test and write reports
are making their reports up... Statisics, as we all know can be made to look one way or the other. The fact, that APPLE is acknowledging quality issues just proves that they themselves are not happpy with what's going on since the intro of the new MB and MBPs.
aswitcher
Aug 6, 12:26 PM
Another sad person who is worried about their machines not being top of the line :-\
Clearly you are not a Geek!
Clearly you are not a Geek!
gsander
Jun 10, 10:05 AM
You've got questions. We've got transistors.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
I don't think any Radio Shack sales people know what a transistor is.
You got questions? We have cell phones.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:53 PM
I suppose you would be by the cell company.
Well, I had been screwed about 4x as much as a typical cell user... at least when I had the misfortune and poor sense to have a Cingular contract.
Well, I had been screwed about 4x as much as a typical cell user... at least when I had the misfortune and poor sense to have a Cingular contract.
gugy
Nov 28, 06:39 PM
it won't happen. This Universal dude is just trying to be smart ass.
Steve just will say F••• off!
I look forward to the day artists will be their own labels and ditch those huge greedy companies. It's amazing that they don't learn. CD's should cost $5 bucks by now, but because their greed is almost $20. Manufacture costs are so low and it's just the price we pay to fill the pockets of those bastards.:mad:
and they wonder how unfair is people downloading illegal music. If they listened the consumer this would be not a big deal.
Steve just will say F••• off!
I look forward to the day artists will be their own labels and ditch those huge greedy companies. It's amazing that they don't learn. CD's should cost $5 bucks by now, but because their greed is almost $20. Manufacture costs are so low and it's just the price we pay to fill the pockets of those bastards.:mad:
and they wonder how unfair is people downloading illegal music. If they listened the consumer this would be not a big deal.
gregarious119
Jul 14, 02:34 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
McGiord
Mar 31, 10:57 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
All the traditional phone manufacturers were used to release a new hardware every year and get the carriers financing the hardware coat over the 2 year contract, even allowing the loyal customers a free or small fee upgrade when the right one comes for them. So google fragmented model might be in sync with the traditional way of delivering new ozone hardware/with updated software for the typical mobile phone user.
Having more control for the benefit of the end user is a must for any of these players. Apple model has been highly successful, as well as google's model. How they will continue, is just a matter of time.
Derekasaurus
Jul 20, 05:18 PM
If you want wild speculation, here goes.... Apple might use the Conroe and ConroeXE in the first Mac Pros and then add in support for Kentsfield (quad) when it becomes available. This could well be the reason why Intel has brought forward the release of Kentsfield.
Apple is playing with the big boys now. Intel moved up Kentsfield in response to AMD's 4x4, not anything Apple might do. Intel sells hundreds of millions of CPUs per year; Apple's demand is barely above the noise.
Apple is playing with the big boys now. Intel moved up Kentsfield in response to AMD's 4x4, not anything Apple might do. Intel sells hundreds of millions of CPUs per year; Apple's demand is barely above the noise.
ssamani
Sep 13, 07:28 PM
I have to say that I think a lot of people have missed the point around various software not using all the cores. There is a simple reason. Developing multi threaded apps is hard. And until recently (~1 yr since G5 Quad) developing for more than 2 simultaneous threads (cores or processors) was pretty pointless on a Mac and completely pointless on a PC. Why would a developer bother to develop for more than two thread unless they expect threads to get blocked easily or there to be more than two cores? That's why browsers are one of the few genuine multithreaded apps, rather than 2-4 threads, the threads block easily, so having multiple makes sense. In a lot of cases where there was the opportunity for parallelism using a vector processing unit often makes more sense than multiple threads. Why spend development and testing effort on a solution with no hardware to even test it on, let alone deliver and make use of?
The whole industry is taking a 90 degree turn and the tools for developing multithreaded applications are not up to scratch. Look at some of the commentary about XBox 360 and PS3 development.
The dev tools will come, the software will catch up with the hardware, in the meantime just be glad that you can play your stolen MP3's and browse your pr0n without interfering with each other and stop whinging.
The whole industry is taking a 90 degree turn and the tools for developing multithreaded applications are not up to scratch. Look at some of the commentary about XBox 360 and PS3 development.
The dev tools will come, the software will catch up with the hardware, in the meantime just be glad that you can play your stolen MP3's and browse your pr0n without interfering with each other and stop whinging.
CorvusCamenarum
Feb 28, 05:14 PM
According to the school's website (http://www.chc.edu/News/2011/February/statement_regarding_jim_st_george/), he was not fired as the OP's article suggests. Rather, his contract was not renewed. AFAIK, adjunct instructors do not enjoy the same privileges as tenured professors. If his contract ran out and was simply not renewed, then that's that, unless it can be argued that the college has some legal obligation to offer a new contract.
zacman
Apr 6, 03:55 PM
It seems nobody learned from Apple's iPhone debacle:
"Hahaha, look at Android they only ship 1/10 of iPhones!!!" - 12 months later: "Uh, ok, Android outsells iOS 3:1 but Apple only ships 1 phone!!!!"
Now with tablets:
"Hahaha, look at the Android tablets, they only ship 1/10 of iPads." - 12 months later: Well you know...
"Hahaha, look at Android they only ship 1/10 of iPhones!!!" - 12 months later: "Uh, ok, Android outsells iOS 3:1 but Apple only ships 1 phone!!!!"
Now with tablets:
"Hahaha, look at the Android tablets, they only ship 1/10 of iPads." - 12 months later: Well you know...
Number 41
Apr 25, 03:57 PM
People are idiotic.
I'll bet half of the idiots out there whining about this blindly log in to Facebook, twitter, and foursquare on a daily basis and don't give a whit about their privacy.
I'll bet half of the idiots out there whining about this blindly log in to Facebook, twitter, and foursquare on a daily basis and don't give a whit about their privacy.
No comments:
Post a Comment