Adamb18c5
Jun 9, 10:25 PM
I tried to send you a pm, I'm not really sure why I couldn't.
I tried to PM you too couldn't get it to work either. You can email me at adamb18c5@gmail
I tried to PM you too couldn't get it to work either. You can email me at adamb18c5@gmail
Ivan P
Apr 8, 02:25 AM
Well right now I'm looking at both their online stores. Both sites have the Apple TV @ $99, so... uh.. Lol.
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
toddybody
Apr 6, 02:57 PM
This is like ESPN reporting on a 12min mile time for a Special Olympic Runner...
THX1139
Aug 17, 03:22 PM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
cgc
Jul 21, 03:20 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
LethalWolfe
Apr 10, 04:59 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; 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)
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Booted from NAB? No. Booted from the SuperMeet? Yes. Like I said before, I hope that those who signed up before the 'Apple take over' will still have a chance to see the presentations that have been displaced.
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in?
Obviously they are interested in more than just FCP because the SuperMeet was a successful event prior to Apple's take over.
Lethal
Are you sure you understand what is happening here? Apple is presenting at the FCP Users Group Supermeet, no one is getting booted from the NAB show!
Booted from NAB? No. Booted from the SuperMeet? Yes. Like I said before, I hope that those who signed up before the 'Apple take over' will still have a chance to see the presentations that have been displaced.
Now step back for a minute and THINK what are the members of this group interested in?
Obviously they are interested in more than just FCP because the SuperMeet was a successful event prior to Apple's take over.
Lethal
daneoni
Aug 26, 03:51 PM
I dont see much change really, the 1.66GHz merom chip will find its way into the mini (they'll scrap the solo model).
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
iCrizzo
Apr 6, 01:34 PM
It's no surprise though. How can they sell something that even Google says has an OS that isn't ready.
eoblaed
Apr 25, 02:48 PM
Thinking it's only stored on the device and not used by Apple is naive. What's the point of logging your every location if it's not going to be used in some way.
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
When you bought your device (even if you didn't purchase one, I'm speaking to the general 'you'), you knew that it had GPS capabilities. You knew that the phone knew where you were at any given time.
You also knew it had network capabilities. Nothing stops any GPS device with networking capabilities from broadcasting this data without you knowing. We trust the manufacturers of these devices to not do that.
Saying you don't trust Apple/Google/etc to not secretly broadcast your data just because it's backed up like your contacts/phone-conversation-information/texts/etc runs counter to the same trust you placed in those companies when you bought the device; if they're willing to broadcast that data because it's saved on your device they could just as easily broadcast that data as it's being gathered, real time without storing it. In fact, it'd be easier to do that since there wouldn't be an easy artifact left behind for people to gawk at.
Seriously, if you trust these companies to not broadcast your data behind your back while you're using it, why do you think they're going to broadcast it because it's part of your backup?
bretm
Apr 10, 10:44 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; 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)
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
Visually still similar. Until you look at the timeline. Since then the entire patch bay system is changed and we have keyframe editing in the timeline. As well as audio tool, waveform vector tool, and pretty high end 3 way color corrector built in.
It's still a more functional and better looking interface than premiere CS5.
http://screenshots.en.softonic.com/en/scrn/12000/12809/adobe-premiere-pro-cs5-07-700x541.png
Hoping for some better multi-core support(although probably going to have to wait for Lion for the newer QuickTime engine) and a UI that isn't from the 90's:
http://www.candlerblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/03_ambit_fullscreen-300x232.jpg
^ Final Cut on Mac OS 9
Final Cut on Tiger/Leopard/Snow Leopard:
http://adobe-discount.com/product_images/o/apple_final_cut_express_hd_4__90390.jpg
Only thing that's changed is the scroll bars.
Visually still similar. Until you look at the timeline. Since then the entire patch bay system is changed and we have keyframe editing in the timeline. As well as audio tool, waveform vector tool, and pretty high end 3 way color corrector built in.
It's still a more functional and better looking interface than premiere CS5.
http://screenshots.en.softonic.com/en/scrn/12000/12809/adobe-premiere-pro-cs5-07-700x541.png
lorductape
Nov 28, 06:39 PM
I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
charlituna
Apr 11, 10:00 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas.
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
jrb363
Apr 7, 10:39 PM
Quota? Are these guys idiots?
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
bamerican
Apr 25, 03:23 PM
Where did this attorney go to law school...
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
If you want a free consultation, check him out here (http://www.mayerlawgroup.com/).
And one of the counts in the complaint doesn't even allege a civil claim.
He's in way over his head. Apple's lawyers are going to eat him alive.
This is going to be fun to watch.
farmboy
Apr 27, 10:51 AM
If locations are recorded AND time/date stamp - then how much time you spend in each location is tracked inherently. If you "log in" at one time here and then another 20 minutes later - there's a history of time spent. Maybe not foolproof... but to say that no information is there isn't accurate.
There are a myriad of ways to track you if someone really wants to, and it's been that way since last names became popular in the 13th century (and phone numbers, driver's licenses, SSNs, W-2s, passports, time cards, tax returns, mail box contents, garbage, written receipts, passenger lists, customer surveys, relatives, friends, credit cards, personal checks, street cams and literally a thousand more).
Information has always been out there, long before the iPhone/iPad and the Benign DB. It's the use that matters.
There are a myriad of ways to track you if someone really wants to, and it's been that way since last names became popular in the 13th century (and phone numbers, driver's licenses, SSNs, W-2s, passports, time cards, tax returns, mail box contents, garbage, written receipts, passenger lists, customer surveys, relatives, friends, credit cards, personal checks, street cams and literally a thousand more).
Information has always been out there, long before the iPhone/iPad and the Benign DB. It's the use that matters.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 11:26 AM
They should stick to the June update each year. I know it may not be their fault but Apple need to keep the iPhone up to date, otherwise they will lose ground. Mobile phones are very competitive.
ThunderSkunk
Mar 23, 12:38 AM
can you say "last ditch effort"
Kaching!!!
BOOM!
Goodbye.
Nobody wants to f around with all your mess, bleckburry.
Kaching!!!
BOOM!
Goodbye.
Nobody wants to f around with all your mess, bleckburry.
shamino
Jul 20, 11:28 AM
Not quite the first. Sun has been shipping a commercial 8-core systems for about a year now.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
Yes. This is their UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) chip.
The T2000 has all 8 cores on one chip but each core also does four-way hyper threading so they claim 32 hardware threads.
The T1 chip ships in several different configurations. 4-, 6- and 8-cores, at 1.0 or 1.2GHz. All sporting 4 threads per core.
The price for an 8-core T1000 is about $8K.
While this is their least expensive 8-core box, you should point out (for the benefit of everyone else reading this message) that the price is not just for the CPU. It's for a high-end server that includes 8G of RAM, 4 Gigabit Ethernet ports, remote management software, Java Enterprise, and Solaris 10. All in a 1U-high rack chassis.
A system with 8 cores and 8GB RAM burns about 250W.
You are being very misleading here. According to Sun's spec sheet (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/t1000/specifications.jsp), it has a 300W power supply. Peak power consumption for the entire system is 220W, and typical consumption is 180W.
But those are for the entire system. Sun's page on the UltraSPARC T1 (http://www.sun.com/processors/UltraSPARC-T1/) processor itself says that the CPU (in its 32-thread configuration) consumes 72W. The rest of that power consumption is from parts other than the CPU.
It's also worth noting Intel's Xeon spec sheet (http://www.intel.com/products/processor/xeon/specs.htm), which lists the fastest chips as consuming 130W for the CPU package alone! And that is with only four threads (two cores with 2-way hyperthreading.) I can guarantee you that a system based on one of these will have peak power consumption far greater than 220W.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:23 AM
Maybe that's what you heard.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm still confused how you think the "hype" was correct then.
Your points don't even support it.
As was said before, this was way overblown.
I heard that the database couldn't be user purged (easily)
The the database kept data from Day one
and that Location services being turned off didn't change the recording of the data.
Apple fans were "more correct". Wow. Ok - if you say so.... and if it helps you sleep at night
I'm still confused how you think the "hype" was correct then.
Your points don't even support it.
As was said before, this was way overblown.
bbruneau
Aug 7, 03:28 PM
Did anyone see the nifty link in the iCal page that is supposed to direct to calDAV standards page www.calconnect.org but insted linked to www.calconnect.com whicdh has a beautiful picture of a 1948 Chrysler? Didn't take them long to find that one.
Overall looks good, and I could really use the iCal sharing, but Spring? Come on!
Overall looks good, and I could really use the iCal sharing, but Spring? Come on!
freebooter
Nov 28, 09:39 PM
Just greed, plain and simple.
mmmcheese
Nov 28, 09:09 PM
Anyone who didn't see this coming is a complete idiot...
iJohnHenry
Mar 20, 10:21 AM
This should all go public.
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
But they have worked so hard, all these decades, to diminish the "one man, one vote" to something much less than that.
Won't you think of their children, and reconsider?
:rolleyes:
shandowee
Aug 5, 03:34 PM
�and my new macbook pro...?