Kranchammer
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
Northgrove
Apr 11, 02:35 PM
I don't think a September release is a problem. My contract ends next year anyway, and that's a contract signed for an iPhone 3Gs... (binding plan for 2 years) So it's time for me to upgrade *at earliest* at a time when this iPhone 5 will supposedly recently have been released anyway. Sounds perfect to me, and I don't feel "bored" of my 3Gs in the slightest. It's the apps that does the heavy lifting of this "experience" for me, and not the physical phone model/design. :)
As for new, cheaper, entry points for iOS... A guy at work *and* also a friend of mine both recently bought an iPhone 3G. Not 4. Not 3Gs. There's your very cheap entry point iOS phone today. And they're happy with theirs, knowing that they didn't get the latest CPU etc. But they knew this, and they were very cheap. Not a big problem IMHO. Don't forget the after market.
As for new, cheaper, entry points for iOS... A guy at work *and* also a friend of mine both recently bought an iPhone 3G. Not 4. Not 3Gs. There's your very cheap entry point iOS phone today. And they're happy with theirs, knowing that they didn't get the latest CPU etc. But they knew this, and they were very cheap. Not a big problem IMHO. Don't forget the after market.
MrCrowbar
Aug 27, 04:26 PM
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
I've seen tons of laptops with the keyboard marks on the screen among powerbooks and the expensive Sony things. And those were all matte screens. My glossy Macbook screen is still as it was when I bought it (2 or 3 days after they were announced). The keyboard is a bit lower than on most laptops, so the re's quite some space between the keys and the screen whan it's closed. Unless you have a thick layer of chocklate/peanut butter/anal lube etc.. on your Keyboard, your screen is fine.
As opposed to Multimedia, I don't use foam barriers at all. Those things actually touch your screen, so if you have any dirt on the foam barrier, it's likely to scratch the screen if it moves. I like to bang my laptop lid like a car door and the Macbookhas this nice smooth sound when closeing (gotta love the magnetic latch). :-)
dr Dunkel
Apr 25, 04:43 PM
Very expected. Like I said, this was going to hit the fan...
Now, we the customers are the only winners here, as Apple may be forced to reveal everything regarding its alleged monitoring of phones.
Now, we the customers are the only winners here, as Apple may be forced to reveal everything regarding its alleged monitoring of phones.
paul4339
Apr 8, 12:10 AM
can't BB HQ send some ghost/mystery shoppers out and audit the store managers?
dornoforpyros
Aug 27, 11:48 AM
I'm thinking 17" MBP or MacBook depending on if MBP has the MB removable easy access HD feature.
Reading through this thread you've mentioned that the MBP should have a removable HD on pretty much every page. We get it, you really want a user replaceable HD in a MBP. Mentioning it 100 times won't make it happen, however clicking your shoes together and saying 'there's no place like home' just might :rolleyes:
Reading through this thread you've mentioned that the MBP should have a removable HD on pretty much every page. We get it, you really want a user replaceable HD in a MBP. Mentioning it 100 times won't make it happen, however clicking your shoes together and saying 'there's no place like home' just might :rolleyes:
shawnce
Jul 27, 01:12 PM
The next gen of chips has 4 core versions of conroe and woodcrest, each with the same sockets as the ones they're replacing.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Those aren't next generation version of the Core 2 just MCM (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multi-Chip_Module) of the existing Core 2.
Eidorian
Jul 15, 05:18 AM
We have that already on the Refurbished page. :) Dual Core 2GHz G5 is only $1699 there. Quad only $2799. So your dream of $1499 will come when the 2GHz Core 2 Duo Mac Pro hits the refurb page - which, according to recent history, should happen before Christmas.I believe that the MacBook was on the refurb page in around 3-4 weeks. The iMac Core Duo took AGES though.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 3, 10:05 AM
And I don't see the point in being sexually attracted to anyone of the opposite sex, but since society tells me it's "normal" I live with it nonetheless. It's all a matter of perception and experience. You have yours, I have mine and they're both normal to us.
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Sure, different people have different experiences. That's partly why some people feel same-sex attractions and why others feel opposite-sex attractions. Macaroony doesn't see any point in opposite-sex attractions. I don't see any point in same-sex attractions. Here are two videos that explain what I believe about why some people feel same-sex attractions. I think the speaker works for NARTH.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rFAJXvxcGrk&feature=player_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UziWSdC8Zhw&feature=related
Pedophilia is immoral - no matter man or woman. Please do not put both homosexuality and pedophilia into the same boat. There are plenty of grown men who abuse underage girls, it's when they happen to be gay that elevates the problem and lazily ties it to homosexuality.
Just as no one chooses to feel same-sex attractions, no one chooses to be a pedophile. I know some pedophiles. But some pedophiles do choose to molest children. I don't want to conflate pedophilia and immoral actions that some pedophiles do because they're pedophiles.
Many people ignore the difference between homosexuality and homosexual acts. Many Christians insist that homosexuality is immoral. But homosexuality is a property, not an action. Nor is it a sin of omission. Homosexuality the property is morally indifferent. Homosexual acts are, I think, immoral. An action can be immoral, even if someone doesn't deserve any blame for doing it.
No, I shouldn't put homosexuality and pedophilia in the same boat. I mentioned the Catholic Church's homosexual-abuse because skunk seems to think my opinions about sexual morality are feelings, not beliefs that are either true or false. Even psychotherapists I've talked with have agreed that feelings are neither truths nor falsehoods. Feelings are neither of those, but there are truths about feelings and there are falsehoods about them. If I only feel that homosexual acts are immoral, should some government outlaw feeling that way?
The phrase "a fact" is ambiguous. It can mean "a truth." It can also mean "a set of actual set of circumstances." There are truths about feelings, and there are feelings about truths. But my feelings aren't truths. Even if moral relativism is true, there are still objective truths about whether some society or other considers some action morally acceptable. And some relativists still hold a self-inconsistent belief when they believe that since every belief is relative to some context or other, there's no such thing as absolute truth. In one sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true about every context. In that sense of the phrase "absolute truth," I imply a self-contradiction myself when I say that since every truth is relative to some context or other, I imply that it's an absolute truth that there's no absolute truth.
In another sense of the phrase "absolute truth," a truth is absolute when it's true whether anyone believes it or not. Even if I'm mistaken when I believe that homosexual sex is gravely immoral, it's still true that either they're moral or not moral.
Too often, people who feel same-sex attractions suffer needlessly partly because they, others, or both ignore important distinctions. Unfortunately, people often ignore them when their feelings determine too much of what those people believe.
Immoral behavior continues partly because of moral relativism. Instead of conforming our minds to reality, we try to conform reality to our minds. Moral relativists talk as though an action is moral if and only if someone believes that it's moral. Some moral relativists even insist that if you believe that homosexual acts are morally acceptable, and I believe they're immoral, then we're both right. A moral relativist might say the same about the morality or immorality of gay-bashing. But someone is right when he thinks that gay-bashing is morally right, should a court punish him for gay-bashing someone?
Thunderhawks
Mar 22, 03:31 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Thank you.
Getting in line tomorrow morning 4:30 a.m. with all the other people in front of Best Buy.
MikeD23nu
Apr 6, 06:26 PM
I just got my low end 13" MacBook Air with 4GB of RAM today too. Should I keep it?
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
Me too! It's killing me...don't know what to do.
fastlane1588
Jul 30, 10:36 PM
why not just upgrade a new macpro w/ ur hard drives and all that stuff, and then just bootcamp into windows....ud have a pretty sweet pc if the mac pros have all the goodies that people keep saying they will have
DeathChill
Apr 19, 09:18 PM
I agree, Samsung has copied Apple.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
In fact I'm truly impressed with Samsung's expertise. Their Galaxy S is every bit as nice as my iPhone 4.
In fact after doing the research, I decided to add a line to my family plan so I could try the Android powered phone.
Now I have two great phones. However I must say I'm shocked that I like the Galaxy better than the more diminutive iPhone.
Really? Based on all your previous posts which I glanced through I'd only be surprised if the opposite was true.
There's a lot to be said for a spacious and gorgeous 4.0" Super AMOLED display. I had no idea of the advantages it offers.
Then there's a huge advantage with SWYPE. Instead of hammering on a hard glass keyboard when messaging, Swype allows you to glide one finger across the keys to form words. It's the single greatest advancement in touchscreen input technology to date.
Swype submitted their app to Apple nearly a year ago, but it was rejected.
One can only guess, its excellent, trouble free and easy operation triggered Steve's jealousy.
Yet it's important that we give credit to Apple for insisting on a old school slow yet familiar keyboard. I must admit it took me ten minutes of watching the tutorial, and fifteen minutes more to adapt.
That said it quickly has become my favorite.
I really wish Apple would overcome their fear of including it on the iPhone. My Galaxy S gives me the choice of two other keyboards on case I didn't like Swype. Apple could do the same.
I really like Apple, I have many of their products.
Just think of how much greater they could be, if not for their closed minded ways towards anything outside of their comfort zone.
Why is the iPhone's implementation slow?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/08/24/fastest-texting-in-the-world-actually-on-an-iphone/
EDIT: Not that I think that Apple shouldn't open up more and allow things like Swype; they should.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 11:26 AM
Yeah, Apple is reaching a bit here.
I'd say even the icon grid claim is reaching. The pictures shown all show the Android application drawer. The actual home screen on Galaxy S devices, what shows up after unlocking, is not the icon grid with a dock. You have to dig into the phone to get to the grid of icons, which frankly again has been shown to be a pretty standard phone UI. Older Palm/Sony models had the "icon grid" UIs in their phones also. :
http://www.mobiledia.com/reviews/sonyericsson/t610/images/front.jpg
http://www.mobileincanada.com/images/unlock/att-palm-treo-600.jpg
Let's face it, the "icon grid" has been a UI for quite a while now :
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/progman.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/jzzc53.png
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/system/managers/filemanager/cde15solaris9.png
I'd say even the icon grid claim is reaching. The pictures shown all show the Android application drawer. The actual home screen on Galaxy S devices, what shows up after unlocking, is not the icon grid with a dock. You have to dig into the phone to get to the grid of icons, which frankly again has been shown to be a pretty standard phone UI. Older Palm/Sony models had the "icon grid" UIs in their phones also. :
http://www.mobiledia.com/reviews/sonyericsson/t610/images/front.jpg
http://www.mobileincanada.com/images/unlock/att-palm-treo-600.jpg
Let's face it, the "icon grid" has been a UI for quite a while now :
http://www.computerhope.com/jargon/p/progman.jpg
http://i55.tinypic.com/jzzc53.png
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/system/managers/filemanager/cde15solaris9.png
smiddlehurst
Mar 31, 03:15 PM
Emphasis on the important bit for those who didn't bother to actually read the article. If you want to wait a bit, you can get the code and do whatever you want. Well that's my reading of it anyway, but please, don't let get in the way of giving the new enemy number one a good kicking.
Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
Except Google have made it very clear with Honeycomb that they're not willing to release the source code for the foreseeable future so 'a bit' could be a lot longer than you'd think. More to the point that does manufacturers very little good. If, f'instance, Google decide to only release a version of Android as open source when they release the next version any manufacturer wanting to use it is going to have to grab the open version, make whatever tweaks they want, get it on a device, get it built in bulk and launch it into the relevant sales channel(s). By the time they do that Google is likely to have released another version of Android and they'll be hopelessly out of date.
Make no mistake about this, Google tightening up on the Android T&C's like this makes it almost impossible for anyone outside of Google's control to launch a device that really competes with the manufacturers who are on the inside track, at least from an OS point of view.
Gatesbasher
Mar 31, 08:26 PM
This is where the Android "community" is going to split.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
The ones we've heard from today don't give a crap about "open" or "closed" or Google or anything else other than the fact that Android is not Apple and is stealing some sales from Apple. They'll defend whatever Google does, because all they want is a platform that's not by Apple to take over the mobile space.
The true believers in the "open" propaganda, as ridiculous as it is and as untrue as it's always been, are probably still in a state of shock. By tomorrow they'll split into two warring camps. One will defend everything Google does because they perceive—wrongly of course—that Android is still in some indefinable way more open than iOS, and they'll blow that little invisible kernel of "openness" up until that's all they can see.
The other camp will be viciously angry at Google's betrayal of the True Religion™ and will be flailing around for some other messiah to deliver them from the "Walled Garden" of Apple and now, Android. These are the people who were saying the other day that "Motorola could rot" with their own OS.
Any suggestions on who the zealots will turn to in their hour of despair? I honestly can't think of a candidate, but then I'm not nuts—at least not that way.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:43 AM
The iPhone is voluntary. You enabled location services.
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
Did you read ANY of the news articles.
With location services turned off, this data was still be collected. And Apple says this was a "bug"
So you're wrong.
pyramid6
Mar 22, 01:16 PM
It's going to come down to the experience, and the experience is in the apps.
Developers aren't going to create applications for the Android, unless people buy them, people are not going to buy Android tablets unless there are applications. The same thing with RIM.
Developers aren't going to create applications for the Android, unless people buy them, people are not going to buy Android tablets unless there are applications. The same thing with RIM.
Multimedia
Jul 15, 05:22 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.
In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. :confused: I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.
I think we can look at what Apple has done with its other lineups this past year as a guide to the future. Based on what we've seen, I don't think Apple will be redesigning the Mac Pro case -- it's large enough to accommodate anything they wish to throw in there. I also think it's a great industrial design, physically alluding to the power within.
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
I'll be watching the announcement closely, although my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 (single core) handles everything I throw at it and has never ever given me reason to even want to upgrade. However, if the new Mac Pro hits 3 GHz I may be very tempted... if it doesn't, I'll wait it out. If the new high end Mac Pro doesn't go to 3 GHz like Dell and others, the Mac Pro will sink plenty fast.Well my Dual 2.5 GHz G5 was easily brought to it's knees once I started simultaneously recording EyeTV, Encoding DVD Images and Ripping MP4s from those Images. Thank GOD the Quad went refurb in early February and I was able to sell your model for $2500.
In any event, I think we are all grasping at straws for the next three weeks waiting for Monday morning August 7. :confused: I'm sure there will be some sort of surprise. But I have no idea what that surprise will be. I'll be glad when it's over since we'll all be able to see much more clearly how the next year will be looking.
IBradMac
Jun 14, 12:36 AM
Correct to the even though your an authorized user. Authorized users can do anything but add or upgrade, atleaset at RS.
NAG
Mar 31, 03:39 PM
What the heck is this? The "Steve was right" month?
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
toddybody
Apr 6, 11:15 AM
BTW: Im so glad to have some MAC rumors to talk about...the 24/7 iOS fest gets tiresome :rolleyes:
Iconoclysm
Apr 20, 04:14 PM
Copying is copying. If someone else came out with an iProduct you can bet that Apple would slap a lawsuit on them. The Apple record logo was around for several years before Apple computer. I'm sure Jobs knew of the Beatles, he was a long haired hippie back in the 70's. So the logo could have been influenced by the Beatles.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.
Copying is not copying when you don't even know about what was done before...and we know the story about what influenced Apple, the alphabet. And the logo isn't even the same - it's the name that the suit was over, not the logo. Knowing about the record label wasn't on the front page of the newspaper, this was the 1970's...there was no internet, it's more than just a little possible that Jobs did not know this. And you're assuming that logo was everywhere, and you're wrong.