Dorkington
Apr 18, 12:07 PM
That's incredible! How can that be the case? Here it is 28 days paid days off if you work a normal 5 day week.
Welcome to America. Any regulation is called "socialism" here and painted as "Anti American". :(
Welcome to America. Any regulation is called "socialism" here and painted as "Anti American". :(
dolph0291
Mar 30, 01:29 PM
I think he used iTunes as an example because it is something that Mac users would be familliar with as opposed to some other application that you would look at and say "WTF is that?"
Anyway, an .exe in Windows is refered to as an "application". A "program" is a collection of files that includes one or more .exe and possibly other files. This has been the case since Windows XP (possibly earlier).
An .exe is an executable, not an application. Some people may have called them applications, but not MS. Never. Until now.
Anyway, an .exe in Windows is refered to as an "application". A "program" is a collection of files that includes one or more .exe and possibly other files. This has been the case since Windows XP (possibly earlier).
An .exe is an executable, not an application. Some people may have called them applications, but not MS. Never. Until now.
Eidorian
Jul 20, 01:22 PM
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.You're the first one to bring this up. Conroe is well worth the money for its processing power. Getting a higher output power supply for the iMac shouldn't be to hard. So, I really do hope Apple somehow puts a Conroe in the iMac. :D
Oh and no underclocking please. :p
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.You're the first one to bring this up. Conroe is well worth the money for its processing power. Getting a higher output power supply for the iMac shouldn't be to hard. So, I really do hope Apple somehow puts a Conroe in the iMac. :D
Oh and no underclocking please. :p
spinko
Aug 28, 12:06 PM
bring them on...
Huntn
Apr 20, 08:40 PM
We need unions to protect people from abusive BS like this (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/12/walmart-contracted-warehouse-workers_n_848262.html). Either that or we just need to have a limit on how big a company can get before it has to become the property of the employees.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
The lower we sink, the more popular unions will become, that is if Republican's don't succeed in outlawing them.
mrsir2009
Apr 25, 02:48 PM
Yes!!! Can't wait!!!! :D
Clive At Five
Sep 26, 09:18 AM
Hoboy....
Let me just say that even though I am a cingular customer, I don't like the sound of this.
1) Previous reports told us that Apple relinquished developing the "hardware" and settled for common components
2) This report tells us that Apple has settled for a carrier.
What is left for Apple to do? The body and the interface (and let me tell you, only one of those two is really important). And even though Apple will control the interface, they will not control any sort of mobile -> internet interaction, i.e. iTunes. Remember when Apple wanted to allow pseudo-iPhone mobile users to be able to d/l from the iT(M)S for identical prices but carriers wouldn't allow that because it severely undercut their pricing structure (download premiums). I would only assume that mobile downloading from iTS (if possible w/ the iPhone) will be more expensive than d/l-ing from home due to the carrier's resrictions.
*sigh* I guess I'm very skeptical, suddenly, that this iPhone will be worth all the attention it's getting. Maybe the interface will be so outstanding that it'll blow everyone's mind... but I'm not holding my breath.
-Clive
Let me just say that even though I am a cingular customer, I don't like the sound of this.
1) Previous reports told us that Apple relinquished developing the "hardware" and settled for common components
2) This report tells us that Apple has settled for a carrier.
What is left for Apple to do? The body and the interface (and let me tell you, only one of those two is really important). And even though Apple will control the interface, they will not control any sort of mobile -> internet interaction, i.e. iTunes. Remember when Apple wanted to allow pseudo-iPhone mobile users to be able to d/l from the iT(M)S for identical prices but carriers wouldn't allow that because it severely undercut their pricing structure (download premiums). I would only assume that mobile downloading from iTS (if possible w/ the iPhone) will be more expensive than d/l-ing from home due to the carrier's resrictions.
*sigh* I guess I'm very skeptical, suddenly, that this iPhone will be worth all the attention it's getting. Maybe the interface will be so outstanding that it'll blow everyone's mind... but I'm not holding my breath.
-Clive
izzle22
Oct 12, 08:28 PM
Ultimately: who cares?
Bono still sucks, U2 has always sucked, and, much as i like a) the color of the new iPod and b) fighting AIDS, Apple's weird extended relationship with Bono makes very little sense to me.
P.S. Damn, Bono sucks.
By the way what kind of music do you like? New Kids On The Block?
Bono still sucks, U2 has always sucked, and, much as i like a) the color of the new iPod and b) fighting AIDS, Apple's weird extended relationship with Bono makes very little sense to me.
P.S. Damn, Bono sucks.
By the way what kind of music do you like? New Kids On The Block?
Gurutech
Sep 10, 10:08 PM
I'm expecting to see multimedia oriented (that looks like dvd players) that uses conroe and upgradable gpu.
waiting for the Showtime!!
:p
waiting for the Showtime!!
:p
MrFirework
Oct 27, 03:37 PM
Am I the only one who thinks this is a non-story? You want to raise my eyebrows?... show me a time that Greenpeace, PITA or any of those other wack-o groups behaves like a bunch of grown-ups and doesn't get thrown out. Here's a headline:
Greenpeace Attends Apple Expo, Spreads Message of Environmental Responsablility Through Logical Debate and Sound Logic
Now, THAT's a headline...
Greenpeace Attends Apple Expo, Spreads Message of Environmental Responsablility Through Logical Debate and Sound Logic
Now, THAT's a headline...
IntelliUser
Jan 13, 09:52 AM
Not if you have UAC set correctly, although unfortunately it was weakened by default in 7, because of whining.
Even at that level it's a real PITA. Seriously, not only it pops up way too often, but it slows down installations. Some older computers and netbooks just freeze for several minutes after trying to open large installers, while UAC is analyzing or something.
Even at that level it's a real PITA. Seriously, not only it pops up way too often, but it slows down installations. Some older computers and netbooks just freeze for several minutes after trying to open large installers, while UAC is analyzing or something.
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 02:11 PM
Sorry, but I think you are taking the settlement at face value and making just a surface interpretation.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
Nothing, but it's also not very accurate.
First, $100 million is load of money for anyone. Time was, not so long ago, that reporting a $100 million quarterly profit was a big deal for Apple. The iPod doesn't "make" $6 billion a year for Apple. That's just revenue. Profits are a faction of that revenue.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
There are already several industry analysts who have now gone on record saying this is a win for Apple.
$100 million may be a big load of money for you, me and Creative, but it's chump change when we're talking about the fact that iPod makes $6+ BILLION PER YEAR (and growing) for Apple.
It's like Creative accused Apple of stealing the goose that lays golden eggs. In return, Apple gives Creative one of the eggs and Creative goes, "Wow! Thanks! You can keep the goose!"
The face-value interpretation says that Creative won because it was a pauper who now has a golden egg that's worth a lot of money. The deep interpretation is that Apple still has the goose and Creative just gave up all claims of ownership over it.
What's so hard to understand about that?
Nothing, but it's also not very accurate.
First, $100 million is load of money for anyone. Time was, not so long ago, that reporting a $100 million quarterly profit was a big deal for Apple. The iPod doesn't "make" $6 billion a year for Apple. That's just revenue. Profits are a faction of that revenue.
Second, Creative doesn't "give up" anything but a license to Apple for technology Apple was using before for nothing. No matter how you cut it, the license fee come right out of Apple's bottom line.
If this can be called a "win" for Apple, it's in their getting this issue squared away relatively quickly, so it doesn't overhang the next generation of iPod releases. The long-term impacts of allowing the suit to drag on could have been considerable, just as it was for RIM. Especially if in the end, they lost.
cirus
Apr 22, 08:54 PM
An important detail is that one needs to add the graphics TDP to those Intel numbers, so there's still hope for some Llano goodness.
uh... They already are included. The graphics processor is on the die and the TDP of the chip is for the CPU and the GPU. So do the Llano CPU.
At least wikipedia it.
uh... They already are included. The graphics processor is on the die and the TDP of the chip is for the CPU and the GPU. So do the Llano CPU.
At least wikipedia it.
p0intblank
Sep 14, 01:22 PM
All I have to say is....
Encore of the John Legend performance will have the crowd going NUTS :rolleyes:
What do you mean by this? Dull crowd...? If so, then I agree. The crowd hardly cheered like they usually do.
Encore of the John Legend performance will have the crowd going NUTS :rolleyes:
What do you mean by this? Dull crowd...? If so, then I agree. The crowd hardly cheered like they usually do.
0815
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I don't usually read SLA's, but it's all right there, Page 1, Section 4, subsection b. And if don't want your iPhone to collect this data, turn off the feature.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdf
Interesting find - but it seems that it is not possible to turn just the data collection in the center of this discussion off. You can only turn everything off or specific apps (but I don't think I saw this one listed somewhere as an app)
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdf
Interesting find - but it seems that it is not possible to turn just the data collection in the center of this discussion off. You can only turn everything off or specific apps (but I don't think I saw this one listed somewhere as an app)
foo10
Sep 9, 05:13 AM
I was thinkin of buying a C2D MBP 17" + 23" ACD, but no i've been thinking of going for a 24" iMac and later for the cheapest Macbook. It will be still some time thought, this G5 iMac is still running good for me. Maybe when Leopard is released.
Rivix
Mar 23, 07:57 PM
Hopefully prices won't go up any. But I shouldn't count on it.
Voltes V
Sep 12, 02:32 AM
i didn't know they glueintel chips to the motherboard. super glue? :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
zwida
Sep 4, 08:44 PM
An iPod update is way overdue. It's been almost a year since the last major iPod update.
I think it's reasonable to say that an iPod update is due. It's hard to argue that an iPod update is "way overdue." Apple times this stuff deliberately, and even if we'd all like flashy new kit every three months, I think they've got the update cycle just about perfect.
I think it's reasonable to say that an iPod update is due. It's hard to argue that an iPod update is "way overdue." Apple times this stuff deliberately, and even if we'd all like flashy new kit every three months, I think they've got the update cycle just about perfect.
bilals
Apr 13, 04:16 AM
Even if McAfee tried making an antivirus app for iOS devices, App Store mods would most likely just decline it anyway, and besides, apps don't have much access to the device anyway. It could probably scan its own folder and that's it.
McAfee's response: "But...but... users NEED it! The viruses are EVERYWHERE"
What users NEED is Angry Birds 2
McAfee's response: "But...but... users NEED it! The viruses are EVERYWHERE"
What users NEED is Angry Birds 2
Lebowski
Sep 7, 04:04 AM
Finally G5 Powerbooks.
i know. i have been waiting forever. tablet G5PBs.....
i know. i have been waiting forever. tablet G5PBs.....
cube
Apr 22, 07:52 PM
I would also prefer AMD, but I don't think there will be Llanos low-powered enough for the MBA.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
An important detail is that one needs to add the graphics TDP to those Intel numbers, so there's still hope for some Llano goodness.
Look at the Zacate E-350. It's 18W, and CPU-wise it's at a dual core Atom level.
OK, it's bulk 40nm, and Llano is 32nm SOI, but the quad mobile Llano I've seen is supposed to be 45W. MBAs are at 10W and 17W.
Llano is still a Stars+ core. Maybe next year with Bulldozer Fusion.
An important detail is that one needs to add the graphics TDP to those Intel numbers, so there's still hope for some Llano goodness.
speakster
Aug 31, 03:06 PM
So, Leopard has some features that haven't been revealed yet.
Could one of them possibly be the rumor of having a Bit Torrent client built into the OS.....
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/software/rumor-os-x-leopard-to-have-bittorrent-client-for-itunes-store-170791.php
Which would make the possibility of downloading higher quality videos plausible....
Could one of them possibly be the rumor of having a Bit Torrent client built into the OS.....
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/software/rumor-os-x-leopard-to-have-bittorrent-client-for-itunes-store-170791.php
Which would make the possibility of downloading higher quality videos plausible....
musiclover137
Aug 23, 05:32 PM
Which is probably why they sued. Knowing they are running out of cash, they figured "Let's jump on the bandwagon and sue someone".
If you believe that, then please give me a valid reason why Apple settled for 100 million...
If you believe that, then please give me a valid reason why Apple settled for 100 million...
