Macula
Jan 11, 10:28 PM
In colloquial modern Greek, "air" is metaphorically a price premium one pays for hype.
Sinister.
Sinister.
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 01:52 PM
I am still really surprised that it seems as if nobody else has had the greyed-out toolbar in fullscreen Safari bug that I've got. Has anyone heard or read something that I haven't? I am much more looking forward to the next preview/beta build now, it suffices to say. ;)
Mine auto-hides as normal. I would file a bug report.
Mine auto-hides as normal. I would file a bug report.
Leet Apple
Feb 17, 10:42 PM
Used my iPhone 3G for the Pic
Sorry for the Quality
Before:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/photo1.jpg
After:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/PhotoFeb17114104PM.jpg
Put my MacBook Pro on a separate table
Sorry for the Quality
Before:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/photo1.jpg
After:
http://i287.photobucket.com/albums/ll155/PASSWORDIS12/PhotoFeb17114104PM.jpg
Put my MacBook Pro on a separate table
0815
Apr 19, 12:18 PM
when apple refresh a line like this, is there a way of buying a current generation model (rather than the latest release), presumably slightly discounted?
if not, where does the stock go?
thanks
Check the 'refurbished' section on store.apple.com - There you usually buy many of the previous generation model, thats where the 'stock' often ends up. You also might get good deals on previous generation on macmall.com or similar sides (but as this article points out, many 3rd party resellers are running low in stock - so there might not be many discounted 'old' models). I often buy machines in the refurbished section from apples site - nothing wrong with those and full warranty (but a couple of hunded dollars cheaper - also for current generation models)
if not, where does the stock go?
thanks
Check the 'refurbished' section on store.apple.com - There you usually buy many of the previous generation model, thats where the 'stock' often ends up. You also might get good deals on previous generation on macmall.com or similar sides (but as this article points out, many 3rd party resellers are running low in stock - so there might not be many discounted 'old' models). I often buy machines in the refurbished section from apples site - nothing wrong with those and full warranty (but a couple of hunded dollars cheaper - also for current generation models)
bigmc6000
Jan 11, 08:39 PM
I don't see the benefit of a MacBook Slim.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Benefit? I would buy one! :) Honestly tho - I don't want a 15" laptop. I'm on a 12" PB and my sister has a 15". While it's cool and looks awesome it's huge (relatively speaking). One of the biggest things I find is portability. I can sit on a plane, have my laptop out and there's still plenty of room for a drink, it's great. I really wouldn't mind having an external optical drive as I use one about once or twice a month. It'd be fine to just shove it in the bag and have it with you if you need it. Actually, I would prefer that over it eating space in my laptop. So is that convincing enough?
1 thing tho - it has to come with the external drive STANDARD. I'm not paying extra for it - that'd just be really really annoying.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Benefit? I would buy one! :) Honestly tho - I don't want a 15" laptop. I'm on a 12" PB and my sister has a 15". While it's cool and looks awesome it's huge (relatively speaking). One of the biggest things I find is portability. I can sit on a plane, have my laptop out and there's still plenty of room for a drink, it's great. I really wouldn't mind having an external optical drive as I use one about once or twice a month. It'd be fine to just shove it in the bag and have it with you if you need it. Actually, I would prefer that over it eating space in my laptop. So is that convincing enough?
1 thing tho - it has to come with the external drive STANDARD. I'm not paying extra for it - that'd just be really really annoying.
MacSA
Sep 6, 12:11 PM
Is it just me, or does the $599 mini *not* let you configure it with a DVD burner?
Apple want you to "upgrade" to the more expensive model. The superdrive was a BTO option of �30. That Superdrive probably costs Apple �5, and they're still using a Combo Drive, which must cost them 99p
Im going to give this Mac Mini a miss.
Apple want you to "upgrade" to the more expensive model. The superdrive was a BTO option of �30. That Superdrive probably costs Apple �5, and they're still using a Combo Drive, which must cost them 99p
Im going to give this Mac Mini a miss.
Plymouthbreezer
Sep 1, 03:11 PM
This would give me a lovely reason to ask for a nice 20" iMac for Christmas!
My 1GHz G4 iMac is starting to show its age!
My 1GHz G4 iMac is starting to show its age!
crazycat
Sep 1, 03:51 PM
Well if its true all i can say is to late, why could'nt they have brought it out when the intel iMacs came out :(
AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 13, 11:33 PM
Will I be able to get a reasonably priced apple laptop with merom, 802.11n, blueray burner, possibly HD, and leopard (or whatever 10.6 is called) in late 2007 or early 2008?
Well you know you'll get merom and leopard by that timeframe. Personally, I believe you'll get 802.11n and a blueray option as well - and with a blueray option should come HD as well.
Well you know you'll get merom and leopard by that timeframe. Personally, I believe you'll get 802.11n and a blueray option as well - and with a blueray option should come HD as well.
rdowns
Jul 19, 06:33 PM
Here are historical Mac sales by quarter.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 771,000
4Q2004 - 787,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
Tmelon
Mar 31, 04:53 PM
Umm i hope the hell you can change it back? if not well ill no longer be using ical ill find something else.
The color really means that much to you?
The color really means that much to you?
brepublican
Sep 6, 09:40 AM
yes we can! let me show you_:
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
were's my macbook core 2 duo :mad:
were's the new ipod/iphone :(
no new apple displays? apple what are you doing!?! :confused:
how about a new macbook pro? :confused:
how about a new newton! :mad:
were is my sub 500$ macmini? :confused:
no new cases ? bah!
its this easy
I dont think its that simple. This makes the mini wayyy more appealing to alot of people. Its a close call if you're deciding to get a mini or an iMac.
And aren't there more new announcements next week on the 12th? I dread to think of what new killer products/updates they are reserving that for!
Multimedia
Aug 31, 08:19 PM
Let's hope that those specs aren't the final ones. That they're just to clear inventory.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?LIMITED SUPPLY of Merom for the first few months. mini will be the last to get C2D probably in November. But you've gotta give kudos to Apple for adopting the Merom Spec Yonahs into the mini right away. This way the switch to Merom in mini can be almost silent with no disruption to the flow of minis to the market.
kdarling
Apr 21, 03:52 PM
Think about it, no complaints about the cheating but about being caught!!! Just where is the sense of proportion and focus on the real issues???
This is not just about catching cheaters or even your own kids sneaking out of town. (Although I bet all sorts of relationship problems are going to come out of people checking this file. Yikes.)
There is the good possibility that people's lives will be put in danger, simply because the info is so easy to get.
A battered or divorced spouse comes to mind. Sync their phone and find out where their safe house is.
Not to mention how many undercover agents or rebels across the world right now are cringing and wondering if anyone has gotten access to their movements.
This is not just about catching cheaters or even your own kids sneaking out of town. (Although I bet all sorts of relationship problems are going to come out of people checking this file. Yikes.)
There is the good possibility that people's lives will be put in danger, simply because the info is so easy to get.
A battered or divorced spouse comes to mind. Sync their phone and find out where their safe house is.
Not to mention how many undercover agents or rebels across the world right now are cringing and wondering if anyone has gotten access to their movements.
Snowy_River
Nov 15, 11:31 AM
...Most applications are mutli-threaded that isnt the issue. The difference between 4-core and 8-core will be negligible as you can see from the benchmarks...
Uh... maybe we were looking at two different articles.
First off, most applications are not multi-threaded. It's only Pro level applications that tend to be, and even there, there are plenty that aren't. So, multi-threading is an issue.
Second, you say that the difference between 4-core and 8-core is negligible? Take a look at the PyMOL molecular modeling rendering performance! Under OS X with 4-cores, it took 11.18 seconds, whereas with 8-cores it took 6.8 seconds. That's a raw improvement of about 65%! It's a clock speed weighted improvement of about 85%! How on Earth can you consider gains like THAT negligible?!?
Sheesh!
Edit: Corrected a math error.
Uh... maybe we were looking at two different articles.
First off, most applications are not multi-threaded. It's only Pro level applications that tend to be, and even there, there are plenty that aren't. So, multi-threading is an issue.
Second, you say that the difference between 4-core and 8-core is negligible? Take a look at the PyMOL molecular modeling rendering performance! Under OS X with 4-cores, it took 11.18 seconds, whereas with 8-cores it took 6.8 seconds. That's a raw improvement of about 65%! It's a clock speed weighted improvement of about 85%! How on Earth can you consider gains like THAT negligible?!?
Sheesh!
Edit: Corrected a math error.
NAG
Jan 12, 05:11 PM
I just want them to get the thickness and weight down.
citizenzen
Mar 22, 10:32 AM
So what are your thoughts? Should Apple have rejected the app?
I don't think that apple should be in the business of approving apps.
I think they should do their best to categorize them and create methods to protect certain age groups from accessing inappropriate apps.
But otherwise get out of the business of approving 'this' while denying 'that'.
I don't think that apple should be in the business of approving apps.
I think they should do their best to categorize them and create methods to protect certain age groups from accessing inappropriate apps.
But otherwise get out of the business of approving 'this' while denying 'that'.
Doraemon
Apr 2, 07:24 AM
Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, [...]
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
Yeah, right. A $2500 "low-cost" computer. :rolleyes:
Again, check the facts.
What are you talking about? iTMS not generating profit? Geez, check your facts!
So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
Yeah, right. A $2500 "low-cost" computer. :rolleyes:
Again, check the facts.
gakh
Oct 23, 03:10 PM
Have they announced a mobile version of the Core 2 Quadro? I had thought that was only a desktop chip.
Not that I've read, but I don't see why there wouldn't be a notebook equivalent... some day.
Not that I've read, but I don't see why there wouldn't be a notebook equivalent... some day.
lyzardking
Dec 21, 11:51 AM
Congrats to Lyzardking for 5 million points!
Thanx for the props!
Now, if I could only get the big units to complete on a regular basis I could hold you off a bit longer
;-)
Thanx for the props!
Now, if I could only get the big units to complete on a regular basis I could hold you off a bit longer
;-)
MattG
Nov 28, 12:05 PM
Heh.
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
Do you have anything to support that MS lost billions on the xbox, I heard it was more like they broke even...
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
Suck it, Microsoft :cool:
Do you have anything to support that MS lost billions on the xbox, I heard it was more like they broke even...
I watched a television show on the history of video games a couple of weeks ago. I forget what channel it was on...History or Discovery or something like that, but I specifically remember them saying that Microsoft lost a lot of money on the xbox, but that they didn't care...they just wanted to get their foot in the door.
I think it was this show:
http://games.ign.com/articles/744/744878p1.html
iJohnHenry
Mar 19, 02:42 PM
Absolutely. Bloody politicians... where's Wikileaks when you need it! :D
The public can be tough, so they require marination, before eating.
The public can be tough, so they require marination, before eating.
theBigD23
May 2, 07:01 PM
I feel the same way. I just want to delete an app that delete all of the junk that comes with it. Just moving it to e trash does not do that. Some programs have an uninstall and some don't. That's more confusing for people.
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
tinman0
May 2, 05:56 PM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I doubt that the Mac is getting the type of multi tasking that you see with the iPhone, more likely it's getting the option to suspend something in the background, but for everything else, life goes on as normal (eg I can batch stuff in an application whilst I continue surfing, reading mail, watching porn etc).
As for the crippled multi tasking on an iPhone - it's a phone for heavens sake. The BIGGEST problem that all smartphones are suffering from is battery - batteries are not able to cope with the demands of the modern phone.
If you let people multi task properly, the phone would eat its battery alive. And we've all seen bad programming (cough...flash) which given half a chance will kill your battery in 15 seconds stone dead just to show you some crappy ad.
So a phone does need a sensible trade off when it comes to multi tasking, and both Apple and Google (with Android) made a very sensible choice to put battery before true background multitasking.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
I doubt that the Mac is getting the type of multi tasking that you see with the iPhone, more likely it's getting the option to suspend something in the background, but for everything else, life goes on as normal (eg I can batch stuff in an application whilst I continue surfing, reading mail, watching porn etc).
As for the crippled multi tasking on an iPhone - it's a phone for heavens sake. The BIGGEST problem that all smartphones are suffering from is battery - batteries are not able to cope with the demands of the modern phone.
If you let people multi task properly, the phone would eat its battery alive. And we've all seen bad programming (cough...flash) which given half a chance will kill your battery in 15 seconds stone dead just to show you some crappy ad.
So a phone does need a sensible trade off when it comes to multi tasking, and both Apple and Google (with Android) made a very sensible choice to put battery before true background multitasking.
No comments:
Post a Comment