HecubusPro
Sep 15, 07:17 PM
Just an observation. But, wouldnt it be quicker to just go to an apple store and purchase one rather than wait weeks to get one thru the mail. I know when MBP go to merom, i will be one of the first ones in the store. Maybe im wrong.
That's what I plan on doing. There are 5 Apple stores I can think of I can drive to easily, the closest being 2 miles away. I'll be there day one (if they actually update the MBP's.)
Of course, not everyone lives in close proximity to an Apple Store.
That's what I plan on doing. There are 5 Apple stores I can think of I can drive to easily, the closest being 2 miles away. I'll be there day one (if they actually update the MBP's.)
Of course, not everyone lives in close proximity to an Apple Store.
aliensporebomb
Apr 25, 11:46 AM
If the Android phones are being tracked at every minute, then why couldn't they find my friends' phone that was stolen out of her desk at her workplace?
THX1139
Aug 7, 10:30 PM
I wonder if those processors are soldered. I suppose they aren't since it's build to order? Anyone know if there is a way to verify that? It would be nice to finally get a machine from Apple that won't be cost prohibitive to upgrade to faster chips later.
rjohnstone
Apr 18, 03:28 PM
Apple is devoid of morals and innovation? Are you kidding me? Do you have any idea of Apple's philanthropy? Also, Apple INVENTED the whole concept of touch UI for iPhone and iPad - now the rest of the industry is scrambling to catch up by copying the leader. While imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, the imitators are simply copying for free what took Apple years to develop at a likely cost of several hundred million dollars. And Apple does not have a right to protect its investment?
Apple should just buy Samsung. That will get them a big foot in the consumer electronics sector.
Wrong... Apple didn't invent the concept of the touch UI, they bought most of what they have and own very little rights to it.
Apple should just buy Samsung. That will get them a big foot in the consumer electronics sector.
Wrong... Apple didn't invent the concept of the touch UI, they bought most of what they have and own very little rights to it.
kirky29
Mar 30, 07:47 PM
Downloading now! :)
Been waiting for this!
Been waiting for this!
ucfgrad93
May 4, 12:16 PM
We can spend our time insulting him until then. :)
Sweet!:D
Sweet!:D
kxbcvoi
Apr 20, 01:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I want A5 chip, 64 GB, white version. It will replace my plastic, 412 MHz, 8 GB, no auto-focus camera.
I want A5 chip, 64 GB, white version. It will replace my plastic, 412 MHz, 8 GB, no auto-focus camera.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:34 PM
i am sure apple is finding the world of phone carriers complex and difficult.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
gnasher729
Apr 25, 09:50 AM
+1. My IP is being logged right now most likely. No matter where you go, using any communication device, you can be tracked. If you're that paranoid, get off the grid. Every phone company tracks your location. This for iPhone users is just a log of it on your phone.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
I do agree, however, that the consolidated.db file should at least be encrypted if it is to remain on the device. Now any good crook knows all they need is your iphone to find out when best to rob you.
What is actually tracked is not _your_ location, it is the location of WiFi basestations around the country. Which Google, Apple, and Skyhook use for their "poor man's GPS" that allows a device with WiFi but without working GPS to find its location. Skyhook started this by having cars drive round the country, recording the position of WiFi devices. Google and Apple, having the infrastructure, use a more efficient method to do this - instead of driving cars throught the country, they use people's iPhones or Android phones to collect the same data. Note they are not collecting _your_ data, they are collecting the data of WiFi base stations that you happen to pass with your iPhone.
The database file is most likely there so your phone knows which information it has already sent, so it doesn't send info about the same basestation twice. That should be easily checkable - is the database full with hundreds of copies of your home location or not? Does it have dozens of copies of locations along your way to work? I think each location is recorded only once, so a crook stealing the phone would know places where I have been, but not how often I go where. So they would have very little clue where to find me.
And the whole scenario seems very unlikely. It would be very, very rare that a specific person is robbed intentionally. That robber will most likely come to your home without having any idea who lives there, or wait in a dark alleyway and rob the next person to come along, not stealing your phone in order to find other information about you and rob you again. It is just a hypothetical danger that is not actually going to happen.
But what actually does happen and worries me (well, I'm not worried, but some people should be), is that apparently it is possible to access Google's database. There is a website where you can enter the MAC address of your router, and it will find its location. It found mine within about 100 meters. That might make it possible to find people who don't want to be found. So anyone who moves to escape a stalker, or goes into witness protection, they better not take their router with them to the new home.
3N16MA
Apr 26, 03:29 PM
This is not surprising and I'm sure Apple knew this day would come. Android is available on multiple handsets from multiple manufactures. Different price points, form factors, and even different looks with skins. The iPhone will continue to outsell any single Android phone and Apple will gain massive profits from it.
kdarling
May 9, 02:00 PM
The best thing about using the free Google Sync, has been that my family has been able to move between different phone models so easily.
We've swapped between iPhone, WinMo, WebOS, Blackberry and Android... and each new phone gets all our contacts and calendar entries within a few minutes after taking them out of the box and putting in our Google account info.
It's great that the calendar info is shared between every computer we have as well.
Our kitchen Touchsmart computer, running a custom iGoogle homepage with Google calendar, is the nexus point for checking our family schedule each morning.
Does MobileMe support all devices as well? And what's worth $100 a year about it?
We've swapped between iPhone, WinMo, WebOS, Blackberry and Android... and each new phone gets all our contacts and calendar entries within a few minutes after taking them out of the box and putting in our Google account info.
It's great that the calendar info is shared between every computer we have as well.
Our kitchen Touchsmart computer, running a custom iGoogle homepage with Google calendar, is the nexus point for checking our family schedule each morning.
Does MobileMe support all devices as well? And what's worth $100 a year about it?
YS2003
Nov 26, 06:09 PM
I would worry too much about the swivel joint and the connections and cables within breaking, however I do use a touch-screen display ToughBook at work
and I can certainly see where that option might be popular
IF the protective shield to the touch screen could be easily replaced.
They get scratched bad after using them for a while.
I think the swivel mechanism is build to last. I have Fujitsu T4020 and it has the solid swivel mechanism. Passive and Active Screen have their pros and cons. Passive one is like the ones you find on Palm and Pocket PC. Active one requires the special digitizer which is made for active screen. For better sensitivity, the active digitizer unit is better. It's like Wacom's Intuos (pro grade) and Graphire (consumer grade which has less "sensitivity" on your input).
With tablet PC, you need put on screen protector; no question about it. I use Vikuiti screen protector to protect the active digitizer screen. It is un-wise to use Tablet PC without screen protector. If you scratch the screen without using the screen protector, the blame is only on the user of that tablet PC.
and I can certainly see where that option might be popular
IF the protective shield to the touch screen could be easily replaced.
They get scratched bad after using them for a while.
I think the swivel mechanism is build to last. I have Fujitsu T4020 and it has the solid swivel mechanism. Passive and Active Screen have their pros and cons. Passive one is like the ones you find on Palm and Pocket PC. Active one requires the special digitizer which is made for active screen. For better sensitivity, the active digitizer unit is better. It's like Wacom's Intuos (pro grade) and Graphire (consumer grade which has less "sensitivity" on your input).
With tablet PC, you need put on screen protector; no question about it. I use Vikuiti screen protector to protect the active digitizer screen. It is un-wise to use Tablet PC without screen protector. If you scratch the screen without using the screen protector, the blame is only on the user of that tablet PC.
corygreenwell
May 7, 12:16 PM
Sounds to me like they're prepping a full-on clouds-based iTunes
gugy
Aug 2, 01:15 PM
Why is everyone so convinced that there will be significant updates to the Cinema Displays? Remember how long the non-Alu plastic displays were out? It must have been five years, while the Alu displays have been out for less then two years.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
Wow, I have a 30" monitor and I would not mind to have a 40" + monitor.:eek:
Seriously, I have dual monitors and I think a larger monitor would be welcome. Not maybe for dual monitor set up because it would be too large, but for a single large monitor, it would be great. Plus the use for entertainment display to watch movies and TV would be really cool.
The technology is here. I really expect Apple to come up something bigger for the Pro crowd and WWDC is the perfect event for that. Remember, people never thought the 30" would ever come up.
Regarding the design, I agree that Apple will keep the same enclosure. Is a very nice design and I don't think will change anytime soon.
As for Isight built in, I like the idea, but if you have dual monitors, seems weird to have dual Isight. I rather have the BTO option for an extra price.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
Wow, I have a 30" monitor and I would not mind to have a 40" + monitor.:eek:
Seriously, I have dual monitors and I think a larger monitor would be welcome. Not maybe for dual monitor set up because it would be too large, but for a single large monitor, it would be great. Plus the use for entertainment display to watch movies and TV would be really cool.
The technology is here. I really expect Apple to come up something bigger for the Pro crowd and WWDC is the perfect event for that. Remember, people never thought the 30" would ever come up.
Regarding the design, I agree that Apple will keep the same enclosure. Is a very nice design and I don't think will change anytime soon.
As for Isight built in, I like the idea, but if you have dual monitors, seems weird to have dual Isight. I rather have the BTO option for an extra price.
hyperpasta
Aug 2, 11:42 AM
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
McGiord
Apr 11, 06:24 AM
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
padapada
Nov 5, 06:45 AM
Sophos is terrible on Windows; why would anyone want to install that garbage on their Mac? :confused:
From this comment I can tell you have had absolute NO EXPERIENCE with the product.
We have had it in our company for 10 years and it's absolutely non-intrusive and hassle free.
Please don't generate noise if you don't have any relevant experience.
Patrick
From this comment I can tell you have had absolute NO EXPERIENCE with the product.
We have had it in our company for 10 years and it's absolutely non-intrusive and hassle free.
Please don't generate noise if you don't have any relevant experience.
Patrick
DOUGHNUT
Mar 26, 10:00 PM
sounds plausible, but i really don't see iPad 3 coming out any time this year. it's way too soon
timbloom
Apr 22, 12:24 PM
Go back and read my post please...thoroughly.
I am referring to the wider market. Sure, you manage 600+ Mac workstations. But on the grand scale of things, thats not worth anything to Apple.
Put it this way:
Why spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on redevelopment for an audience of, lets say 50,000 customers when you can spend the same amount on an audience of 1million+ customers. See my point? The server market for Apple is clearly not worth it. Yes, it sucks big time for people like yourself who rely on it, but at the end of the day Apple will focus on products that bring in cash, not products that break even at best.
Have you ever heard the phrase "all your eggs in one basket"? Diversification at Apple is very needed at the moment. Half of their profit comes from the sale of one device. Say that the iPhone 6 was a flop, imagine having to tell your investors you're losing 50% projected profit nearly overnight. Something like that can crush a company. You want diversification, and apple has the resources currently to really invest in some fairly stable markets such as enterprise. Currently their inroads are IOS in the enterprise, if they can leverage that to sell servers for management it will feed back on itself and support more mutual growth between mac and iOS in these coveted markets. Apple should have struck harder in this area during the vista debacle, but their mac team brushed off the opportunity.
A machine like this with dual purposes is a godsend for us. It means apple only needs production lines for one case, and we get a more flexible server and workstation in one. True hot swap bays on a mac?! F-yeah! I can convince my clients to hook up a rackmount mac pro server in their data center or server closet. LOM is nice, but I don't think it's going to be a make or break deal in most businesses. I don't see why it either couldn't be an optional module with the Server preconfig, or on all of them with the prices apple charges.
The server market is the backbone of the business market. Macs will be niche in enterprise as long as the backbone isn't there, and stronger than last time.
I am referring to the wider market. Sure, you manage 600+ Mac workstations. But on the grand scale of things, thats not worth anything to Apple.
Put it this way:
Why spend hundreds of thousands of pounds on redevelopment for an audience of, lets say 50,000 customers when you can spend the same amount on an audience of 1million+ customers. See my point? The server market for Apple is clearly not worth it. Yes, it sucks big time for people like yourself who rely on it, but at the end of the day Apple will focus on products that bring in cash, not products that break even at best.
Have you ever heard the phrase "all your eggs in one basket"? Diversification at Apple is very needed at the moment. Half of their profit comes from the sale of one device. Say that the iPhone 6 was a flop, imagine having to tell your investors you're losing 50% projected profit nearly overnight. Something like that can crush a company. You want diversification, and apple has the resources currently to really invest in some fairly stable markets such as enterprise. Currently their inroads are IOS in the enterprise, if they can leverage that to sell servers for management it will feed back on itself and support more mutual growth between mac and iOS in these coveted markets. Apple should have struck harder in this area during the vista debacle, but their mac team brushed off the opportunity.
A machine like this with dual purposes is a godsend for us. It means apple only needs production lines for one case, and we get a more flexible server and workstation in one. True hot swap bays on a mac?! F-yeah! I can convince my clients to hook up a rackmount mac pro server in their data center or server closet. LOM is nice, but I don't think it's going to be a make or break deal in most businesses. I don't see why it either couldn't be an optional module with the Server preconfig, or on all of them with the prices apple charges.
The server market is the backbone of the business market. Macs will be niche in enterprise as long as the backbone isn't there, and stronger than last time.
KnightWRX
Mar 28, 12:05 PM
I'm not missing anything. Developers care about three things:
1. Good tools
2. A device that can run their software well.
3. A market that lets them get paid
Devs do NOT care about specs unless it prevents them from writing good software. Apple will make sure specs keep up with developer needs. Beyond that, it simply does not matter except to geeks who obsess over specs. No one else cares.
Yes, and 2. and 3. are more and more lagging behind Android in iOS. Keep ignoring the competition and keep believing "Apple will all make it work". Seems to me they are repeating their mistakes of the 80s.
As an iOS device owner and as a developer that's now invested quite some time in an app for iOS (that has yet to ship mind you), I am watching the situation closely and hoping Apple does not let iOS fall behind the competition.
1. Good tools
2. A device that can run their software well.
3. A market that lets them get paid
Devs do NOT care about specs unless it prevents them from writing good software. Apple will make sure specs keep up with developer needs. Beyond that, it simply does not matter except to geeks who obsess over specs. No one else cares.
Yes, and 2. and 3. are more and more lagging behind Android in iOS. Keep ignoring the competition and keep believing "Apple will all make it work". Seems to me they are repeating their mistakes of the 80s.
As an iOS device owner and as a developer that's now invested quite some time in an app for iOS (that has yet to ship mind you), I am watching the situation closely and hoping Apple does not let iOS fall behind the competition.
j26
Jul 22, 08:05 AM
Don't forget the Mac Mini :D
Surely they can't continue to justify a Core Solo.
Surely they can't continue to justify a Core Solo.
twoodcc
Aug 3, 12:14 AM
You have said this before and it is TOTALLY WRONG if you are comparing the Merom to Yonah (http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.aspx?i=2711&p=4). The first slide is directly from Intel's Spring Developer Conference. Consistent battery does not mean 2X.
thank you for that information. sorry i was late with my response
thank you for that information. sorry i was late with my response
NebulaClash
Mar 28, 09:57 AM
Why because it doesn't have a dual core processor, 1GB of RAM and a 3D screen with 5G radio?
It's the usual geek misconception of what a device needs. They are all about checklist items. And thus they are missing the fact that a major paradigm shift is occurring in this world where the far larger non-tech audience is now buying tech toys. This audience does not know much about specs, and cares even less. All they care about is cost (Apple is right there in phones), how their apps work (just great on the iPhone), choice of apps (no one has more choice than Apple), and what they have read or heard about (Apple is the advertising leader).
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
It's the usual geek misconception of what a device needs. They are all about checklist items. And thus they are missing the fact that a major paradigm shift is occurring in this world where the far larger non-tech audience is now buying tech toys. This audience does not know much about specs, and cares even less. All they care about is cost (Apple is right there in phones), how their apps work (just great on the iPhone), choice of apps (no one has more choice than Apple), and what they have read or heard about (Apple is the advertising leader).
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:25 PM
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"