Hellhammer
Apr 24, 06:56 AM
My flat mate has one of those new Fusion based Netbooks. Seems pretty good. Could see the next gen of them in an Air. Considering getting one myself when I find one not made by Acer.
AMD E-350's CPU is noticeably worse than the C2Ds in MBAs. It is better than Atom but can't fight against Intel's premium CPUs, especially if we take Sandy Bridge into consideration. The IGP is wonderful though.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
AMD E-350's CPU is noticeably worse than the C2Ds in MBAs. It is better than Atom but can't fight against Intel's premium CPUs, especially if we take Sandy Bridge into consideration. The IGP is wonderful though.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
Erwin-Br
Apr 19, 07:21 AM
But then they'd have been hammered with 2 law-suits, and then lost their 2nd biggest customer. Thats financial suicide, Apple would find someone else for parts.
4% doesn't sound like financial suicide to me. Though I do believe that Samsung would probably try to avoid losing that 4%.
Apple would probably find someone else for parts, but the question is if the quality/price would be the same. If I was a parts manufacturer, I would take advantage of this, knowing Apple is in desperate need of new parts. Cha-ching!!!!
4% doesn't sound like financial suicide to me. Though I do believe that Samsung would probably try to avoid losing that 4%.
Apple would probably find someone else for parts, but the question is if the quality/price would be the same. If I was a parts manufacturer, I would take advantage of this, knowing Apple is in desperate need of new parts. Cha-ching!!!!
DJMastaWes
Aug 29, 07:39 AM
8:40am Est.
arn
Sep 10, 05:06 AM
Surely Conroe needs to go somewhere in Apple's lineup? Great value, fast and soon to be quad-core.
ya, there really appears to be no space for the Conroe chip in Apple's lineup... at least with the decisions they've made so far in updating the iMac to Merom.
arn
ya, there really appears to be no space for the Conroe chip in Apple's lineup... at least with the decisions they've made so far in updating the iMac to Merom.
arn
rockosmodurnlif
Mar 30, 01:06 PM
MP3 player is a broad term to refer to a whole class of products just like DVD player. App Store was not a generic or broad term used to describe anything before Apple made it popular. They put those two words together and created a brand out of it.
That's like arguing no one put Apple can put "i" before a product name.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.
I stand corrected on "Mighty Mouse". There were app stores before Apple, which is why when Apple premiered theirs I didn't get the big hub-bub. PalmGear (http://www.pocketgear.com/us,en,usd/palm/index.html), now PocketGear, was selling apps for Palms when Apple was working on OS X. Handango too I think. These were app stores before Apple's App Store.
That's like arguing no one put Apple can put "i" before a product name.
I see your point, but in that example there were already products in the market using the term "mp3 player". In the case of App Store, was that term previously in use? And by the way, "Mighty Mouse" wasn't a trademark violation, they listed that it was used with permission from day one.
I stand corrected on "Mighty Mouse". There were app stores before Apple, which is why when Apple premiered theirs I didn't get the big hub-bub. PalmGear (http://www.pocketgear.com/us,en,usd/palm/index.html), now PocketGear, was selling apps for Palms when Apple was working on OS X. Handango too I think. These were app stores before Apple's App Store.
mcrain
Apr 20, 08:54 AM
Always makes me lol to see someone attribute slavery to the "right". The mysteries of 7th grade history class, revealed for you:
"The Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln thought no price was too great for the abolition of slavery and the creation of a society in which a man was not judged by the color of his skin."
"The Democratic Party Platform presented a plan of "Compromise with the South", which ... would be to agree to make permanent the institution of slavery in exchange for an end to the Civil War and restoration of the Union. In other words, the Democratic party was ready to "Sell Out" the enslaved, in order to stop further loss of white lives."
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/democratic-party-platform.htm
"an exclusively partisan Democratic organization in the South" ... "the southern Klan remained Democratic, closely allied with Democratic police, sheriffs, and other functionaries of local government. With continuing disfranchisement of most African Americans and many poor whites, the only political activity took place within the Democratic Party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Political_influence
You are right, but there is a great big asterick. The republicans a long, long time ago were the party that opposed slavery, and the southern democrats were the party more representative of slave owners.
What might have changed since the days of Abe Lincoln? Considering his museum is about 200 steps from where I'm sitting right now, I'll offer an answer. The positions of the two parties shifted when the Republicans adopted the southern strategy.
I find it funny (LOL) whenever Republicans point to Honest Abe as a standard bearer for their party when they turned their backs on what he stood for. If he were alive today, he would be a Democrat, and he would be ashamed of the efforts of his party to divide the nation into those who have vs. those who do not.
Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy)
(edit) So, depending on how you look at it, both arguments are correct. Yesterday's Democrats were responsible for slavery, but todays "right" sounds an awful lot like yesterday's southern Democrats. In other words, the "right" by today's standards would have been yesterday's Democrats.
From a 5 second google search - a different view of the same issue...
I find it extrememely hard to believe that Abe Lincoln would be a Republican today since the Republican Party of the 1860s was a completeley different animal than today's conservative GOP. Even though he was a moderate, his party's base of support was in the Northeast/New England and was made up of former Whigs, Free Soilers, Radical Republicans and abolitionists (i.e., America's first "bleeding-heart liberals"). The Democratic Party was the party of "states rights", wealthy plantation owners and slave-holders, and rather arch-conservative elements.
Abe Lincoln first made a name of himself by speaking out against the Mexican-American War in the Illinois legistlature, as a war that was only meant to expand slavery westward (can you say "ANTI-WAR LIBERAL")
Abe Lincoln was also hated in the South (he didn't recieve a SINGLE VOTE in the South!), was even accused to being half-black, even though he was not as radical as some other Republicans.
"The Republican Presidential Candidate Abraham Lincoln thought no price was too great for the abolition of slavery and the creation of a society in which a man was not judged by the color of his skin."
"The Democratic Party Platform presented a plan of "Compromise with the South", which ... would be to agree to make permanent the institution of slavery in exchange for an end to the Civil War and restoration of the Union. In other words, the Democratic party was ready to "Sell Out" the enslaved, in order to stop further loss of white lives."
http://www.sonofthesouth.net/democratic-party-platform.htm
"an exclusively partisan Democratic organization in the South" ... "the southern Klan remained Democratic, closely allied with Democratic police, sheriffs, and other functionaries of local government. With continuing disfranchisement of most African Americans and many poor whites, the only political activity took place within the Democratic Party."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ku_Klux_Klan#Political_influence
You are right, but there is a great big asterick. The republicans a long, long time ago were the party that opposed slavery, and the southern democrats were the party more representative of slave owners.
What might have changed since the days of Abe Lincoln? Considering his museum is about 200 steps from where I'm sitting right now, I'll offer an answer. The positions of the two parties shifted when the Republicans adopted the southern strategy.
I find it funny (LOL) whenever Republicans point to Honest Abe as a standard bearer for their party when they turned their backs on what he stood for. If he were alive today, he would be a Democrat, and he would be ashamed of the efforts of his party to divide the nation into those who have vs. those who do not.
Southern Strategy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy)
(edit) So, depending on how you look at it, both arguments are correct. Yesterday's Democrats were responsible for slavery, but todays "right" sounds an awful lot like yesterday's southern Democrats. In other words, the "right" by today's standards would have been yesterday's Democrats.
From a 5 second google search - a different view of the same issue...
I find it extrememely hard to believe that Abe Lincoln would be a Republican today since the Republican Party of the 1860s was a completeley different animal than today's conservative GOP. Even though he was a moderate, his party's base of support was in the Northeast/New England and was made up of former Whigs, Free Soilers, Radical Republicans and abolitionists (i.e., America's first "bleeding-heart liberals"). The Democratic Party was the party of "states rights", wealthy plantation owners and slave-holders, and rather arch-conservative elements.
Abe Lincoln first made a name of himself by speaking out against the Mexican-American War in the Illinois legistlature, as a war that was only meant to expand slavery westward (can you say "ANTI-WAR LIBERAL")
Abe Lincoln was also hated in the South (he didn't recieve a SINGLE VOTE in the South!), was even accused to being half-black, even though he was not as radical as some other Republicans.
iApples
Apr 4, 12:28 PM
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?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
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?
Well said.
I don't feel bad for criminals... I rather see him die than an innocent bystander that was just visiting the Apple store.
EagerDragon
Sep 9, 03:30 PM
I like to see some benchmarks against G4 machines and see if they make me pull the credit card out.
petej
Aug 23, 06:51 PM
Apple can recoup a portion of its payment if Creative is successful in licensing this patent to others.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
ECUpirate44
Mar 29, 11:25 AM
Microsoft should work on perfecting windows before starting a mobile OS
min_t
Apr 22, 11:29 AM
Should I be pissed having bought the new SSD MB Air 4 months ago?:confused: I deserved some TB speeds.
munkery
Apr 11, 02:54 PM
Yeah, let's all waste time worrying about a "possible" threat that hasn't proved to be any significant danger in the wild. It's even better that we can worry about it in an obsolete version of the OS!
:rolleyes:
If this is in response to my post, I was just clarifying some details related to an article discussed earlier in the thread.
For those interested, this threat vector in Leopard would allow a similar means of exploitation as ELF viruses in Linux, which were not very serious and did not manifest as any significant threat in the wild.
:rolleyes:
If this is in response to my post, I was just clarifying some details related to an article discussed earlier in the thread.
For those interested, this threat vector in Leopard would allow a similar means of exploitation as ELF viruses in Linux, which were not very serious and did not manifest as any significant threat in the wild.
Eidorian
May 3, 10:14 AM
macpro dead in 2 years...my prediction:mad:Maybe in 2015. Then again we might be on PCIe 4.0 by then.
Squonk
Sep 12, 02:59 PM
In the past, when Apple has released new models, on the "deals" page, they would sell off the old *new boxed* stock for a little less than the new models. Sometimes these were a great deal, other times, not so much. Anyway, with the iMac and Mac Mini updates last week and the iPod updates today, it appears that there is no "old stock" products for sale from Apple. I was hoping to pick up the 5G/60GB to replace my 4G/60GB as I'd now like the bigger screen. Yes, I am looking for a deal... Or how about a 1G/1G shuffle for $49???
Does anyone know how Apple is getting rid of the old?
Does anyone know how Apple is getting rid of the old?
Chundles
Aug 31, 10:28 PM
Nike kit for 5G iPod
Oh hell no. Apple are never going to release the Nike kit for HDD-based iPods. That would constitute an admission that running with the iPod is a normal activity and that any damage to the HDD from jolts and shock would need to be covered by Apple Care, ie A VERY BAD IDEA.
Oh hell no. Apple are never going to release the Nike kit for HDD-based iPods. That would constitute an admission that running with the iPod is a normal activity and that any damage to the HDD from jolts and shock would need to be covered by Apple Care, ie A VERY BAD IDEA.
stockscalper
Mar 22, 01:13 PM
Another hot grill coming from Apple! This one will be big enough to fry steaks!
cozmot
Mar 21, 02:16 PM
The point is that MisterMe said nothing that your response would have fit. You can infer all you want, but it's very clear that MisterMe was talking about the market share myth, and was not inferring that Macs are immune to malware.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
jz1492
Nov 13, 03:25 PM
So they "knew" they were Right after being told otherwise. :rolleyes:
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
manosaurus
Oct 12, 12:57 PM
My gues is that all these whiners would not even notice if you snuck in at night and swapped out ther procesor for a C2D chip. They'd just wake up the next moring fire up the computer and never even notice.
It's like those audiophiles who argue endlessly about if gold plated or silver plated speaker wire sounds better.
Oh... Core 2 Duo gold and silver plated speaker wire tomoorow too!
It's like those audiophiles who argue endlessly about if gold plated or silver plated speaker wire sounds better.
Oh... Core 2 Duo gold and silver plated speaker wire tomoorow too!
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:18 PM
Oh boo hoo. No new case since 2008?
We Mac-Pro user are so very sad for you.
Lol, same design since 0 AD
We Mac-Pro user are so very sad for you.
Lol, same design since 0 AD
kozmic stu
Aug 24, 02:10 AM
At least this gets it all out of the way, hey.
Stu
____________________________________
Phantom Rouge (http://phantom-rouge.co.uk) - The Artwork of Eleanor Hirst
Stu
____________________________________
Phantom Rouge (http://phantom-rouge.co.uk) - The Artwork of Eleanor Hirst
Unorthodox
Sep 14, 03:14 PM
September 25th (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/09/14/photokina/index.php).
Not the 24th.
Not the 24th.
donlphi
Sep 6, 07:41 PM
I don't think low rez is even an option for TV viewing, apple wouldn't release something they'd know was doomed to fail.
uh...
Apple III
LISA
The Newton
The G4 Cube
The Apple Hi-Fi (who the hell got suckered into that one?)
I swear steve jobs had a nephew or something that he let design a product for the iPOD. What a worthless system that is. IT FITS ON THE SHELF, BUT NOT WITH AN IPOD IN IT!!! GENIUS!!
APPLE REMOTE??
Do I really need to keep listing things?
All this Disney talk and it could get ugly at the iTUNES Movie Store.
:D
uh...
Apple III
LISA
The Newton
The G4 Cube
The Apple Hi-Fi (who the hell got suckered into that one?)
I swear steve jobs had a nephew or something that he let design a product for the iPOD. What a worthless system that is. IT FITS ON THE SHELF, BUT NOT WITH AN IPOD IN IT!!! GENIUS!!
APPLE REMOTE??
Do I really need to keep listing things?
All this Disney talk and it could get ugly at the iTUNES Movie Store.
:D
bigbossbmb
Aug 28, 12:14 PM
This really doesn't matter. Apple will update stuff tomorrow. Steve likes to wait for tuesdays cuz he's a rockstar like that. :D
Apple announced the Intel iMac and MBP like 5-7 days after Yonah was brought out at the begining of Jan. It'll be announced tomorrow (75%) or next Tuesday (25%), but no later than that.
Apple announced the Intel iMac and MBP like 5-7 days after Yonah was brought out at the begining of Jan. It'll be announced tomorrow (75%) or next Tuesday (25%), but no later than that.