RayLancer
Oct 2, 10:43 AM
I also bought mine from ebay
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160479649119
I bought one shipped from California on ebay. Maybe I just have horrible luck seeing that you and wolfboy had no issues. I already bought some silcone cases for protection for the 2 iPods I own, but I guess I can give this another shot...
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160479649119
I bought one shipped from California on ebay. Maybe I just have horrible luck seeing that you and wolfboy had no issues. I already bought some silcone cases for protection for the 2 iPods I own, but I guess I can give this another shot...
Unspeaked
Sep 1, 01:56 PM
i don't think this rumor will come out to be true because this might take a lot of people from getting Mac Pro, unless this iMac comes out to be north of $2500, at which point nobody will buy this.
Yeah, wouldn't that be terrible if Apple lost sales to - Apple!!!
Come on, people who need a Mac Pro are going to buy a Mac Pro.
People who need an iMac will buy an iMac.
The small overlap between these users isn't enough to justify or kill off a product. It's still going to be a duo (not quad), lack PCI, lack the number of RAM slots, etc, etc.
They're different markets.
Yeah, wouldn't that be terrible if Apple lost sales to - Apple!!!
Come on, people who need a Mac Pro are going to buy a Mac Pro.
People who need an iMac will buy an iMac.
The small overlap between these users isn't enough to justify or kill off a product. It's still going to be a duo (not quad), lack PCI, lack the number of RAM slots, etc, etc.
They're different markets.
Zadillo
Oct 23, 03:07 PM
I'll probably be waiting awhile, but I won't be purchasing a MBP until it has the Core 2 Quadro, built-in bootable flash memory for quicker booting times, and a hard drive that can be easily swapped out like the MB line currently has. It makes more sense to me to have a Professional line of notebooks with a hard drive that can be replaced easily than having consumer notebooks with this feature. After a user returns with my company's shared notebook, I could simply swap out the HD with a cleanly imaged HD to give to the next user. Why would the average home user or a non-tech college student with a MB need to swap out their drives through the battery compartment, but not a professional user? Steve - I'm not asking for a lot here.
Until I see these features or at least two of the three, I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade just yet.
Gene Huller
http://genehuller.com
Have they announced a mobile version of the Core 2 Quadro? I had thought that was only a desktop chip.
Until I see these features or at least two of the three, I don't see a compelling reason to upgrade just yet.
Gene Huller
http://genehuller.com
Have they announced a mobile version of the Core 2 Quadro? I had thought that was only a desktop chip.
BenRoethig
Aug 29, 10:04 AM
If the MacBook and Mini stay with core 1 CPUs, sales will grind to a halt.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 11:13 AM
Interesting. Instead of jailbreaking, know what I do? I copy my files onto my iOS devices as a backup. No problem. I have several GB of data on both my iPod touch and my iPad.
I have yet to find a single Windows or Linux computer at work that will allow me to simply drag and drop some files onto the device as if it were a mounted drive like any other USB stick or Android/Symbian phone.
It's why the girlfriend has the iPhone4 and I am using Android at the moment (which I am growing to detest for lack of decent VNC options)
I have yet to find a single Windows or Linux computer at work that will allow me to simply drag and drop some files onto the device as if it were a mounted drive like any other USB stick or Android/Symbian phone.
It's why the girlfriend has the iPhone4 and I am using Android at the moment (which I am growing to detest for lack of decent VNC options)
Austin M.
Nov 23, 02:08 PM
The SwitchEasy TRIM case (lime color) for iPhone 4.
Butthead
Oct 23, 11:46 AM
Unfortunately, the current MBP is restricted to about 3.2GB because of the 32bit CPU *AND* the 32bit i945 chipset. Intel won't have a 64bit mobile chipset until they ship Crestline (the i965 mobile chipset for Santa Rosa). So, unless Crestline is ready early and Apple has some sort of exclusive agreement, the updated MBP still will not allow anyone to use more than approximately 3.2GB of RAM.
...
Arrgh, MR Administrator should now be boiling up a pot of linguine noodles for self-flagellation. ;P Then do the right thing and fold this thread back into the main MBP rumor thread...sheesh! Not another thread of people who have not read through the 3.6k posts in the main thread on the MBP, all this people rehashing the same stupid "it better have this, I want crestline, I hope, I hope upgraded GPU (not gonna happen, sorry), I want this upgrade and that...NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Look it's simple Apple couldn't get enough if the lower yield, highest speed Merom chips after they decided to use them in the iMac 1st (while all the PC manufacturers used Conroe for their desktops). meaning that Apple had to wait for Intel to supply them with enough chips to roll out the laptop Meroms, based on exactly the same Napa chipset/platform that the Yonah MBP's are based on. It's simply a minor speed bump by changing over to the 64bit Merom, with very few other upgrades that would constitute a 'silent' upgrade.---same as iMac, just later than iMac cause they couldn't get enough chips for both the iMac & MBP at the same time. End of story.
Major upgrades or case redesign (for better cooling, which would require new motherboards) will not come until Santa Rosa chipset/platform becomes available NEXT year.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2943835&postcount=2906
But to repeat from that prior post link of a Sept 26th story:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2006/09/27/intel_intros_santa_rosa/
"Intel is still saying Santa Rosa will ship in H1 though it's expected to come late Q1/early Q2"
No, Santa Rosa (which Crestline is a part of) will not be showing up miraculously early for Apple this year (or any other manufacturer) only via "exclusive" lol- the mighty Steve-O is all powerful, yet IBM & Freescale blew him off, dream on.
GM965 official name for 'Crestline' mobile chip that comes with integrated Intel GPU (MB's will likely get this one too to the dismay of the MB hopeful; sorry Apple goes for the absolute cheapest solutions in the MB line, this is their history, remember the 1st iBooks that omitted the FW port, even though the MB had the FW support on it!). PM965 would be the one Apple will use for separate ATI or Nvidia GPU.
...
Arrgh, MR Administrator should now be boiling up a pot of linguine noodles for self-flagellation. ;P Then do the right thing and fold this thread back into the main MBP rumor thread...sheesh! Not another thread of people who have not read through the 3.6k posts in the main thread on the MBP, all this people rehashing the same stupid "it better have this, I want crestline, I hope, I hope upgraded GPU (not gonna happen, sorry), I want this upgrade and that...NOT GONNA HAPPEN.
Look it's simple Apple couldn't get enough if the lower yield, highest speed Merom chips after they decided to use them in the iMac 1st (while all the PC manufacturers used Conroe for their desktops). meaning that Apple had to wait for Intel to supply them with enough chips to roll out the laptop Meroms, based on exactly the same Napa chipset/platform that the Yonah MBP's are based on. It's simply a minor speed bump by changing over to the 64bit Merom, with very few other upgrades that would constitute a 'silent' upgrade.---same as iMac, just later than iMac cause they couldn't get enough chips for both the iMac & MBP at the same time. End of story.
Major upgrades or case redesign (for better cooling, which would require new motherboards) will not come until Santa Rosa chipset/platform becomes available NEXT year.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2943835&postcount=2906
But to repeat from that prior post link of a Sept 26th story:
http://www.channelregister.co.uk/2006/09/27/intel_intros_santa_rosa/
"Intel is still saying Santa Rosa will ship in H1 though it's expected to come late Q1/early Q2"
No, Santa Rosa (which Crestline is a part of) will not be showing up miraculously early for Apple this year (or any other manufacturer) only via "exclusive" lol- the mighty Steve-O is all powerful, yet IBM & Freescale blew him off, dream on.
GM965 official name for 'Crestline' mobile chip that comes with integrated Intel GPU (MB's will likely get this one too to the dismay of the MB hopeful; sorry Apple goes for the absolute cheapest solutions in the MB line, this is their history, remember the 1st iBooks that omitted the FW port, even though the MB had the FW support on it!). PM965 would be the one Apple will use for separate ATI or Nvidia GPU.
critter13
Mar 25, 05:01 PM
I think this is a glimpse of what will be achievable with AirPlay technology. visible controls on the device, and maps like in this case, with the gameplay pushed to big screen thru :apple:tv2
Lord Blackadder
Mar 19, 01:31 PM
Maybe he thinks if he does enough of nothing, he'll get himself another Nobel Prize.
Still, it's good to see other governments taking the point on this. We've got enough on our plate as it is.
Why should we "take point" on everything? I think that's a ridiculous idea.
Still, it's good to see other governments taking the point on this. We've got enough on our plate as it is.
Why should we "take point" on everything? I think that's a ridiculous idea.
chameleon81
May 2, 04:33 PM
you people like to discuss about everything.
mazola
Sep 7, 09:53 AM
And 'The Boatniks' too!
angelwatt
Jul 13, 10:28 PM
Well I hope it doesn't come too soon. Blu-ray is just too expensive right now and it would jack up Mac cost significantly. It's also better to see how the Blu-ray vs HD DVD thing works out as well just to make sure Apple doesn't back a dead horse.
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 01:01 PM
No way would I pay an extra $500 for an 8% faster machine and a slighly larger display, when for that money I can go with the 20" and buy a second widescreen 20" display and have a HUGE viewable area.
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...
ell amp; nikki running scared.
ell amp; nikki running scared
ell amp; nikki running scared.
Running scared on stage?
ell amp; nikki running scared
ell amp; nikki running scared
The 23" is going to have to be a LOT closer to the 20" in order for it to sell. I'm thinking $1899 or $1999, or else it will have to be decked out with extra RAM, HD space, or CPU speed.
There are of course disadvantages to dual displays...
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 16, 08:59 AM
Wireless iPod? I just don't see the point. Given how energy dense batteries are today syncing with iTunes would drain the battery in no time.
Wireless headsets? Big cluncky things that needs to be charged too.
The only rational for a wireless iPod would be if it became more of a PDA with GPS, or if went iPhone.
Wireless headsets? Big cluncky things that needs to be charged too.
The only rational for a wireless iPod would be if it became more of a PDA with GPS, or if went iPhone.
da5id
Oct 23, 03:29 PM
I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....
Unless the new MBPs are shipping tomorrow..:rolleyes:
Unless the new MBPs are shipping tomorrow..:rolleyes:
aquajet
Aug 31, 04:03 PM
Acording the story in the link I posted above, it's happened to at least one person so far. That may be what they're going for with the Mini's. Would they do the same thing with C2D and MBP's, MB's, etc.?
I can't recall Apple ever doing this on any machine besides the mini. I hope it's just an oversight of some sort. Regardless, I can already feel the pressure mounting in my brain...
I can't recall Apple ever doing this on any machine besides the mini. I hope it's just an oversight of some sort. Regardless, I can already feel the pressure mounting in my brain...
MacMan86
Apr 26, 12:20 PM
EDIT - wrong thread - nothing to see here
Tommyg117
Aug 16, 08:34 AM
hmmm, I don't think this will come in the next version. And if it does, it would need to fix up the user interface and make it so it really works perfectly for on line.
petpirepete
Jun 22, 01:24 PM
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
I gess you mean OS XI or OS 11.0 :rolleyes:
csHokie
May 3, 11:38 PM
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Yeah, it would work great for quick loading, full screen or minimized applications. I'm afraid it would fall apart most everywhere else... and they would have to have more background options than in iOS (can I listen on a socket for incoming connections in a daemon?). Anyway, I don't think they will get rid of the traditional <blank>top multitasking.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
Use Firefox and save tabs on exit...
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Yeah, it would work great for quick loading, full screen or minimized applications. I'm afraid it would fall apart most everywhere else... and they would have to have more background options than in iOS (can I listen on a socket for incoming connections in a daemon?). Anyway, I don't think they will get rid of the traditional <blank>top multitasking.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
Use Firefox and save tabs on exit...
PaperQueen
Sep 20, 08:12 PM
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
Unless my memory is off, things don�t line up correctly. I considered a couple of 3G cases as a temporary fix (until something irresistible comes out) while at the Apple Store. Everything I liked either made getting to the volume/power buttons challenging or they covered up something critical. Can�t recall in great detail, since each was such an obvious no-go the moment I slipped the 4G in.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
Unless my memory is off, things don�t line up correctly. I considered a couple of 3G cases as a temporary fix (until something irresistible comes out) while at the Apple Store. Everything I liked either made getting to the volume/power buttons challenging or they covered up something critical. Can�t recall in great detail, since each was such an obvious no-go the moment I slipped the 4G in.
regandarcy
Apr 19, 11:06 AM
I can't wait! My G5 iMac has officially died and gone to that big computer desk in the sky. It served me well for 5 years, but it's over. Darn thang won't even turn on anymore. I hear the apple start up chime, but the screen stays black and then the iMac just shuts off. But even if I could fix it, it's so old it can't run the latest OSX or even play HD movies. Yup...it's time to buy a new iMac.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
dsnort
Aug 31, 08:45 PM
It seems like there is so many iPod ideas floating around. Full video iPod, wireless iPod, iPhone. Why not put it all into one machine. I mean it is Apple. They can do what they want.
I have said this same thing before. An iPhone in the vein of a Treo or Blackberry, utilizing some of the Newton tech, that is also a video iPod! Call it a DLA, (Digital Life Appliance).
I have said this same thing before. An iPhone in the vein of a Treo or Blackberry, utilizing some of the Newton tech, that is also a video iPod! Call it a DLA, (Digital Life Appliance).
No comments:
Post a Comment