modul8tr
Mar 27, 04:28 PM
In this "Guess" Gruber is flat out wrong and just speculating. I think other journalist agree that there will most likely NOT be another iPad release in 2011.
A real journalist, of which there seems so few these days, would have to ask: "Who manufactures these displays." "Are they able to manufacture enough to meet current demand and future orders for this product?" "Can existing production lines be converted easily to manufacture new products without impacting existing lines?" "Are there any manufacturers ramping for an unannounced product, especially if Apple is its customer?" "Who would be the display manufacturers suppliers of parts that might also indicate a shift in production to a new product?" "How Might the global economy and events in Japan impact supply?" "How long does it take to build the product and in sufficient number meeting QC and then ship it an assembly plant?" "Where is the assembly plant for the product and is there unusual activity at the plant?" "Has anyone actually TALKED to someone who works at these facilities?"
There are people in the Apple Rumors blogosphere asking those questions. I think most of the larger players in that world, including Gruber, are up on the leaks/rumors coming out of Apple's manufacturing pipeline and factor that into their speculation. Outside of that, unless you're Tim Cook or Steve Jobs, no one knows with absolute certainty the answers to your questions.
As far as news that could point to mass Retina Display production, there's the $7.8 billion display/component deal with Samsung that had everyone buzzing earlier this year, and the $1.9 billion Retina Display factory they are building with Toshiba. The factory will build around 17 million displays a month and is expected to go online in the second half of 2011.
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Again, I have to wonder, what does this mean for the 2012 iPad? Assuming the Retina Display is the iPad 2 HD's main selling point, will next years iPad revision lack the Retina Display that all other iOS devices have? Or will they go with a "lower quality" (looks great to me) Retina like the iPod Touch?
Why would Apple release such an expensive iPad during the Q1 holiday season? Would they really expect an iPad at that price point to spur holiday sales?
If an "additional" iPad debuts in September, I think it will be something priced to set the holiday season on fire. Subsidised $199 3G iPads? Or a 7 inch iPad with Retina Display at a lower price point?
A real journalist, of which there seems so few these days, would have to ask: "Who manufactures these displays." "Are they able to manufacture enough to meet current demand and future orders for this product?" "Can existing production lines be converted easily to manufacture new products without impacting existing lines?" "Are there any manufacturers ramping for an unannounced product, especially if Apple is its customer?" "Who would be the display manufacturers suppliers of parts that might also indicate a shift in production to a new product?" "How Might the global economy and events in Japan impact supply?" "How long does it take to build the product and in sufficient number meeting QC and then ship it an assembly plant?" "Where is the assembly plant for the product and is there unusual activity at the plant?" "Has anyone actually TALKED to someone who works at these facilities?"
There are people in the Apple Rumors blogosphere asking those questions. I think most of the larger players in that world, including Gruber, are up on the leaks/rumors coming out of Apple's manufacturing pipeline and factor that into their speculation. Outside of that, unless you're Tim Cook or Steve Jobs, no one knows with absolute certainty the answers to your questions.
As far as news that could point to mass Retina Display production, there's the $7.8 billion display/component deal with Samsung that had everyone buzzing earlier this year, and the $1.9 billion Retina Display factory they are building with Toshiba. The factory will build around 17 million displays a month and is expected to go online in the second half of 2011.
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Again, I have to wonder, what does this mean for the 2012 iPad? Assuming the Retina Display is the iPad 2 HD's main selling point, will next years iPad revision lack the Retina Display that all other iOS devices have? Or will they go with a "lower quality" (looks great to me) Retina like the iPod Touch?
Why would Apple release such an expensive iPad during the Q1 holiday season? Would they really expect an iPad at that price point to spur holiday sales?
If an "additional" iPad debuts in September, I think it will be something priced to set the holiday season on fire. Subsidised $199 3G iPads? Or a 7 inch iPad with Retina Display at a lower price point?
myca
Apr 5, 02:42 PM
Much of it is the automatic association that "jailbreak = pirated apps" which for many of us is not the case. I have spent $52 on apps in the last 3 weeks of having iPad... they're making a killing off me. Even with all of the apps I have, I can't stand looking at the device's home screen with an inch of space between each app, and it drives me nuts that I am limited to how many icons i can put in each folder. IF I can't jailbreak this thing in the next week, it's going back to the store, and I'll buy the Xoom. It solves all the issues. Would rather stay with Apple because the hardware is so much better than android, but I have to be realistic, software is what makes any device (hence why I like my Mac so much)
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
ssk2
Mar 30, 06:55 AM
I'm not going to give a full critique to Amazon's UI and UX design, but when you look at Apple's UIs and Apple's apps next to these Amazon one's do you not notice a major difference in simplicity, fit and finish, and polish???
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
ariza910
Aug 11, 12:43 PM
Yes, actualy all the worlds puppies will die
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Sedrick
Mar 27, 07:00 AM
cloud-based hosting for music, videos, and photos
Great, now I can pay data charges to access all my stuff. **** that.
Great, now I can pay data charges to access all my stuff. **** that.
Tyrion
Apr 20, 09:06 AM
So many has bought an iPhone 4. At&t and Verzion.
We all are on a 2 year contract.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
We all are on a 2 year contract.
Yes, the US is literally the entire world. There are no other countries, let alone other countries with 12-month contracts. Why, Sir, that would be inconceivable!
verces
Apr 20, 03:21 AM
Hopefully Apple will be sensible and call this the iPhone 4S. Which means I will wait for the real iPhone 5.
Just realised my last post was exactly one year ago! What a coincidence.....freaky.
Just realised my last post was exactly one year ago! What a coincidence.....freaky.
Cedd
Sep 11, 04:55 AM
Ooooh... how we used to dream of wheels made out of lead. Ours were made of depleted uranium. :eek:
You 'ad wheelbarrows and paper! Y'soft southern nancies...We 'ad to remember the binary code in our 'eads and if we got one number wrong our dads would kill us and dance on our shallow graves...
'onestly, kids today. :rolleyes:
You 'ad wheelbarrows and paper! Y'soft southern nancies...We 'ad to remember the binary code in our 'eads and if we got one number wrong our dads would kill us and dance on our shallow graves...
'onestly, kids today. :rolleyes:
milo
May 4, 03:22 PM
Since when is an operating system an "app"?
Since when does the App Store have to be limited to selling "apps"?
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that.
Since this will be the first time they're selling the OS itself via the app store, they most certainly ARE changing things. I find it baffling that people can even imagine a scenario where they do a download like this but make no other changes to their terms or functionality.
Great... just have to download 3+ gigabytes every time I want to install it.
Why? You don't have to do that now with apps, right?
Since when does the App Store have to be limited to selling "apps"?
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that.
Since this will be the first time they're selling the OS itself via the app store, they most certainly ARE changing things. I find it baffling that people can even imagine a scenario where they do a download like this but make no other changes to their terms or functionality.
Great... just have to download 3+ gigabytes every time I want to install it.
Why? You don't have to do that now with apps, right?
iGary
Aug 4, 07:54 AM
Isn't that what Rosetta is for :p :D
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Don't blame Apple at all, I just have a hard time getting excited about hardware that can't do what I need it to do. Looking forward to a Universal app from Adobe and Macromedia so I can be excited about Apple's offerings.
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Don't blame Apple at all, I just have a hard time getting excited about hardware that can't do what I need it to do. Looking forward to a Universal app from Adobe and Macromedia so I can be excited about Apple's offerings.
Brometheus
Apr 25, 09:28 AM
I think Steve Jobs is someone who doesn't suffer idiots gladly. Note how he didn't say "there is no list of locations on people's iPhones", what he said was "we don't track anyone". The opposite of "we don't track anyone" is "Apple is tracking some people's movements". Do you have any evidence of this? Do you _believe_ it?
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.
Just think about his statement. Then consider that 1. Steve Jobs is just slightly wiser and more intelligent than you and is more likely to have a clue what he is talking about and 2. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company and can't afford to lie in public.
You are an anonymous poster on MacRumors. Steve Jobs is the CEO of a major company. You can say whatever you like. Steve Jobs can't. Plus whatever I said above.
Well said.
Tsunami911
Apr 5, 02:31 PM
Well you're among a shrinking crowd statistically.
Actually that's an ignorant and factually incorrect statement.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
Actually that's an ignorant and factually incorrect statement.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
robvas
Apr 21, 02:57 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
You mean depth. 1U's are DEEP.
http://i.imgur.com/sM1sK.jpg
You mean depth. 1U's are DEEP.
http://i.imgur.com/sM1sK.jpg
Object-X
Aug 7, 02:03 PM
They updated the specs of the displays too along with lowering the price.
corywoolf
Aug 4, 01:08 AM
I'm gonna go on record and say they will NOT intro new MBP at wwdc. Some sales of the current MBP are better than none and if they they intro a new one they will not sell any and probably just take pre orders. Not gonna happen. They will wait until late August or early September to announce them when they are actually ready.
word
word
iMacZealot
Jul 31, 04:24 AM
For goodness sakes, the delivery date aside, Apple has already virtually confirmed that an Apple phone is on the way.
Let me rephrase that: I think we're all getting way too ahead of ourselves. The source of this all is some "tech-unsavvy photographer that Apple hires" according to another crappy tech website. I don't know if it's true or not, but we're all just way too ahead of ourselves with free phone calls through AirPort or whatever.
Let me rephrase that: I think we're all getting way too ahead of ourselves. The source of this all is some "tech-unsavvy photographer that Apple hires" according to another crappy tech website. I don't know if it's true or not, but we're all just way too ahead of ourselves with free phone calls through AirPort or whatever.
Slurpy2k8
Apr 7, 02:19 PM
Some of you people are ****ing hilarious, and heinously hypocritical.
The same people who bash (and are still bashing) Apple for not having enough iPad2 supply (to satiate an absolutely insane demand), calling it some sort of conspiracy to create demand, are the same people now bashing Apple for procuring and guaranteeing these components ahead of time, which inevitably has had a negative effect on companies.
What the hell do you people want? Apple will clearly sell every damn iPad2 they produce, and they'll do what they need to do to produce as much as they can. Having a ton of cash reserves, and the foresight to pay for these compoenents in advance makes them an effective, and intelligent company, not monopolistic. Should Apple shoot itself in the face to please its competitors? Should any company? Unbelievable.
The same people who bash (and are still bashing) Apple for not having enough iPad2 supply (to satiate an absolutely insane demand), calling it some sort of conspiracy to create demand, are the same people now bashing Apple for procuring and guaranteeing these components ahead of time, which inevitably has had a negative effect on companies.
What the hell do you people want? Apple will clearly sell every damn iPad2 they produce, and they'll do what they need to do to produce as much as they can. Having a ton of cash reserves, and the foresight to pay for these compoenents in advance makes them an effective, and intelligent company, not monopolistic. Should Apple shoot itself in the face to please its competitors? Should any company? Unbelievable.
iphone3gs16gb
Mar 28, 10:25 AM
God (Steve), if you are reading this, please say it ain't so man
sunspot42
Apr 22, 01:05 AM
Replacing the desk make add 5% to the total cost of the new computer
It's not a desk, it's a wardrobe, and it holds a ton of stuff besides the computer. Replacing it would cost at least $1,000, which is about half as much as a Mac Pro costs.
It's not a desk, it's a wardrobe, and it holds a ton of stuff besides the computer. Replacing it would cost at least $1,000, which is about half as much as a Mac Pro costs.
brewno
May 7, 04:14 PM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
Well, maybe they will make it free and they will make it exactly like Google.
Have you thought about that?
Well, maybe they will make it free and they will make it exactly like Google.
Have you thought about that?
jaduffy108
Nov 26, 03:24 PM
I want a Wacom Cintiq with an Apple computer inside.... seems simple enough to *me*.....
netdog
Jul 30, 01:54 AM
Why on earth should Apple "go with" a company like Verizon or anybody else?
Just sell the phone unlocked and let anybody with GSM service pop their sim into their iPhone. Perhaps make an unlocked CDMA phone as well.
If they have it right with this phone and there is then therefor the sort of demand for it that we have seen for the iPod, the providers will be forced to offer it according to how Apple dictates (can put music on using computer, etc.), rather than disabling the phone to suit the company's marketing schemes, and the providers will offer it at a discount to attain/retain customers.
You guys seem to think that the service providers dictate what phones we use. Beyond having to be compatible with the network that we choose to use (GSM or CDMA), they don't. I haven't gotten a phone from a service provider for years as I need a phone that I can pop a sim into that is appropriate for whatever country I am in.
Just sell the phone unlocked and let anybody with GSM service pop their sim into their iPhone. Perhaps make an unlocked CDMA phone as well.
If they have it right with this phone and there is then therefor the sort of demand for it that we have seen for the iPod, the providers will be forced to offer it according to how Apple dictates (can put music on using computer, etc.), rather than disabling the phone to suit the company's marketing schemes, and the providers will offer it at a discount to attain/retain customers.
You guys seem to think that the service providers dictate what phones we use. Beyond having to be compatible with the network that we choose to use (GSM or CDMA), they don't. I haven't gotten a phone from a service provider for years as I need a phone that I can pop a sim into that is appropriate for whatever country I am in.
fswmacguy
Apr 25, 06:12 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; 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)
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
The size of screen is irrelevant. It's resolution that matters here.
512x512 icons expanded on an ultra high resolution will come out horribly blocky and pixelated since the pixels of the image are no longer 1:1.
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
The size of screen is irrelevant. It's resolution that matters here.
512x512 icons expanded on an ultra high resolution will come out horribly blocky and pixelated since the pixels of the image are no longer 1:1.