kiddig
Feb 22, 12:28 PM
Here is my setup. Old but do the job
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
20" iMac
13" MacBook
And my iPhone 3GS
missing from the pictures are my iPad and my ipods
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286276.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286270.jpg
http://pic50.picturetrail.com:80/VOL1635/8478158/19686294/395286272.jpg
arkitect
Mar 24, 12:51 PM
You weren't born gay, you chose to be gay.
Oh FFS!!! :rolleyes:
How many times more are we going to have to argue this?
It is not a choice.
I no more chose to be gay than you chose to be straight.
Christ! Sometimes this forum reminds me of a Whack the Mole game� hit one on the head and another pops up.
Same stuff over and over�
Oh FFS!!! :rolleyes:
How many times more are we going to have to argue this?
It is not a choice.
I no more chose to be gay than you chose to be straight.
Christ! Sometimes this forum reminds me of a Whack the Mole game� hit one on the head and another pops up.
Same stuff over and over�
Rocketman
Mar 24, 02:07 PM
Wouldn't it be kinda cool to have a Mac Pro with 3 nCore chips, 3 GPU's, 3 SSD's, and an internal HD RAID?
Kinda makes you wonder why we don't just have a chip and memory combo unit. :D
Rocketman
Kinda makes you wonder why we don't just have a chip and memory combo unit. :D
Rocketman
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 04:52 PM
Have to say, whenever these threads crop up, I'm alway left with the opinion that in the U.S., being able to depress a clutch and move a stick at the same time is seen as some kind of divine talent... :p :p :p
That's because in the US most of us drive on two types of roads, crowded ones and dead straight ones. Automatics are superior on crowded ones and it doesn't matter on straight ones.
That's because in the US most of us drive on two types of roads, crowded ones and dead straight ones. Automatics are superior on crowded ones and it doesn't matter on straight ones.
PurrBall
Apr 1, 01:03 PM
Pretty sure this is new. Not sure why they put it in Appearance preferences, though.
279257
279257
MacVixen
Apr 11, 10:46 AM
Learned to drive using a manual transmission and for about 15 years afterwards all of my cars were manuals. Been driving automatics for the past several years - it's fine, but I do miss the "fun" of driving a manual and would love to have one again. As some have noted, it's getting more difficult to find manual transmissions in the US, especially with the suburban "mom" cars I drive these days :D
I recall going over with a friend to the UK and renting a car to drive from London to Edinburgh to Wales and back to London again. It was a manual transmission and at first I was :eek: at the idea of driving a stick with my left hand, but it actually worked out quite fine.
I recall going over with a friend to the UK and renting a car to drive from London to Edinburgh to Wales and back to London again. It was a manual transmission and at first I was :eek: at the idea of driving a stick with my left hand, but it actually worked out quite fine.
Meandmunch
Mar 25, 04:02 PM
Very cool!
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
By the time the big game console companies (xbox, PS3) finally decide it's time to move forward with a new system (2014-15 is what has been projected), a device as mundane as an iPhone sporting a A7-A8 processor will blow right past existing console tech. iDevices and there closest competitors will be biting deeply into console market share.
HecubusPro
Aug 25, 11:52 AM
and whats with all the Prius cars? sheeeeshh.
;-)
I don't know. It's not like I'm a granola-eating-backpacking-through-the-Appalachians hippie. I don't want to save the world. I just want to save gas. :)
And for some reason, Prius' and Mac Mini's go so darned well together.
;-)
I don't know. It's not like I'm a granola-eating-backpacking-through-the-Appalachians hippie. I don't want to save the world. I just want to save gas. :)
And for some reason, Prius' and Mac Mini's go so darned well together.
gkarris
Nov 29, 09:26 AM
I think that 17" is great - they've got'em already with the iMac. Prices to need to drop with the market. They'll still be more as the monitors are of better quality. IMHO:
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
17" - $399
20" - $599
23" - $899
30" - $1899
Bring back a $499 Mac Mini and a basic mouse and you have an inexpensive system!
(Maybe Apple could make a special "bundle" for $899?)
UnreaL
Sep 5, 02:58 AM
Any updates guys?
I mean its the 5th today!
I want a new mac mini! :)
I mean its the 5th today!
I want a new mac mini! :)
Compile 'em all
Jan 5, 08:27 AM
BTW, right-clicking on an Apple notebook is now awesome! The "two-fingers on trackpad" click is great, and actually easier than having two buttons IMO.
Do you have any idea if it is possible to get such a feature working on non-intel machines (e.g powerbook G4)?
Do you have any idea if it is possible to get such a feature working on non-intel machines (e.g powerbook G4)?
vvv
Nov 28, 08:25 PM
Which is a big distraction from the point? And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone one to see that the Zune is a bad idea. The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
MS never made a smartphone, they make the windows mobile software that runs on others hardware. The xbox is ms hardware and software, just like the zune. It's a entertainment market, just like the xbox, windows mobile software isn't in the entertainment market. There are far more direct comparisons between zune and xbox than between windows mobile and zune. As for peeing on their partners, what's new, I think we all know they don't play nice, instead they play to win.
MS never made a smartphone, they make the windows mobile software that runs on others hardware. The xbox is ms hardware and software, just like the zune. It's a entertainment market, just like the xbox, windows mobile software isn't in the entertainment market. There are far more direct comparisons between zune and xbox than between windows mobile and zune. As for peeing on their partners, what's new, I think we all know they don't play nice, instead they play to win.
Eidorian
Aug 26, 11:16 AM
Could the deciding factor be the noise?
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.Noise could be an issue in the iMac. Still, even the Rev. C iMac G5 was much quieter then the Rev. B.
The only noise my iMac Core Duo makes is when it wakes from sleep and reading the SuperDrive.
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.Noise could be an issue in the iMac. Still, even the Rev. C iMac G5 was much quieter then the Rev. B.
The only noise my iMac Core Duo makes is when it wakes from sleep and reading the SuperDrive.
h'biki
Apr 16, 03:21 AM
when marketshare is almost 0 % you are close to dying, look a 1 % of all new machines built is not giving me any confidence in the platform. sure we have 10 % in a installed platform but are loosing everywhere( thank you motorola for holding up the ass end. Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac its time to say so long to Jobs and his croonies. Supported you guys way to long at my expense.
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Layman's version:
When you CEASE TO MAKE A PROFIT then you are dying*. Until then, it doesn't matter what your market share is.
If 1% of the world's population gave me a dollar, I'd be very rich. If 50% of the world's population gave you 1 cent, you'd also be rich, but not as rich as me... even though you have a greater market share. Its all about margins!
For those who are actually interested in understanding the world of business:
*Well, possibly dying... You have to continue to lose money and do it over a period of time before you are dying. Even then, that may be a result of mismanagement, rather than the company itself being dead -- there may still be the potential for money to be made. Really, the only time a company is dead is when its bankrupt and/or when its taken over and its assets stripped (because its been mis-valued).
To give two recent examples. Gateway has been losing money for some time. It has gone from a all time high in 1997 of $61 per share to its current price of around $6 (which it has been at for over the last year). In other words, its been devalued by a magnitude of 10. (They may have refinanced during that time and devalued the price per share, while increasing their overall market value... but I can't remember them doing that. Gateway may have greater marker share, but Apple is valued at around $28 per share. Just to make the comparison properly fair, Gateway has a market value of $1,999 Million, while Apple's market value is around $10,000 million. In other words, Apple is worth ten times as much as Gateway, despite their smaller market share. (Admittely, Apple's share price flucates like crazy, but thats arguably a result of the FUD of uninformed gits, like those at C|Net). Nonetheless, Gateway is likely to be around for some time. Until it continues to burn through money and its share price drops even lower, and it becomes the target of a hostile takeover... which will result in (1) a merger/total buyout/absortion; (2) a massive corporate governance change because the hostile company thinks there's money to be made; and (3) its bought out, its assets stripped and resold.
Example 2 is Media 100. They were also burning through money. Unlike Gateway, however, they weren't generating much gross revenue. Their technology was good, but not that good, and their management was baaad. They weren't generating much gross revenue, which is why no one was really interested in buying them or giving them a loan. They just didn't seem capable of even making a profit (and thats what matters). They were a dying company (unlike Gateway, which is just troubled). So they were forced to file for bankruptcy. Now their assets are being bought by Optibase -- when that deal is complete, they will be dead.
Point is, corporate finance is a very convuluted world. They're like stars. The bigger they are, the longer it usually takes them to die. Sometimes there are corporate "supernovas" (like Enron or HIH or OneTel) in which the whole corporate structure implodes, but thats because of criminal negligence, lack of transparency, and dodgy account practices. (All of which render the mechanisms of the market for corporate control to be rather useless. Noone wants to touch a company when you don't want to know what you're buying).
The most important thing to the world of corporate finance -- the one in which a company lives or dies -- is profit per share, then revenue. Both of which Apple has. Thus it is healthy. Oh, and its debt free. This is a good thing, because it signals to potentially future creditors that it pays off it loans... thus they're likely to bail it out, if it finds itself in trouble again. (Of course, there are mitigating factors there, but thats true of anything).
The only reason that Apple's market share is an issue is because uninformed gits in the IT press (tautology that) scream about it being an issue. This creates information asynchronicity (imnsho) and distorts the market (both the share market and the IT market). Personally I reckon that if people didn't think market share was an issue, Apple would actually be increasing its marketshare. Of course, thats exactly the reason companies like C|NET do scream about it, so it becomes a quasi self-fulfililng prophercy.
Here endeth the lesson on "Introduction to Corporate Financing 101"
Tonsko
Jan 6, 10:14 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
Mattsasa
Mar 22, 03:49 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
heffemonkeyman
Sep 7, 12:59 PM
On my lunch break at work, I just downloaded a couple of HD trailers, both 2min30sec in length; 1 at 480p and the other at 720p. My set up is an 3.0Ghz Pentium D, 1G ram, 256K Nvidia Gforce 6800, 20" Dell Digital LCD.
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
I could tell no difference in file quality. The problem lies in download time. Both files average dl speed was 150KBps. Thats 1.2Mbps if my math is right. The 420p file took 4:28 to dl, translating to 3:34:24 for a 2hr movie. For 720p, it took 12:39, meaning a full movie would take 9:28:45.
I know my cable provider offers up to 4Mbps downlaods, for about $120/month. And thats before the cable servise itself. Even then its not dedicated. Most people with cable will opt for their providers basic service ,like $40 - 50/month for 500-600kbps, or 1/2 as fast as my test. The movies would take twice as long to dl. 19hrs to downlaod will not fly. 7hrs may not either.
If the compression works to get a DVD quality movie down to 1G, then it could be downloaded in about 1h50mim, nearly realtime at work, or 3h40min at home. At work, I would only need maybe a 15min buffer before I start watching, and not catch up to the dl. But at home, I would need about 1h40min buffer. Maybe this is acceptable to some, but if I can walk to Wal-mart or Blockbuster and back in that time, then what's the consumer advantage beyond the novelty?
I'm sure apple engineers can do these same napkin calculations. There would have to be some alternative to the straight dl. Maybe a torrent of some kind built into iTunes 7. I don't know. Just thinking.
This is a good test, but your connection is not fast enough for this to be viable. If your getting only getting 1.2mbps, that not going to cut it.
Bandwith is a huge issue. In my area, Seattle, I can get Comcast cable for about $50/mo and I get 6-8mbps solid download. So I can stream anything that is encoded at 6-8mbps just fine. The 720p trailers are about 4-8mbps, so it works for me.
I know not everyone can get that kind of bandwidth/price, but they will soon. I think this is where Apple is going, but it's not going to work for everyone. At least not right away. But maybe enough to be profitable?
levitynyc
Mar 25, 03:50 PM
Time to grab a 10 foot HDMI cord.
lordonuthin
Mar 27, 10:02 PM
I have it all back together now and hope to ride it tomorrow, weather permitting. The paint chip didn't look like this, but I love it! The original silver frame and pipes contrast nicely.
durvivor
Oct 23, 01:19 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Awesome, this means there will be further Macbook and Macbook Pro updates on April 24th (a Tuesday). I'm guessing that will be too early for Santa Rosa w/ Robsin caching technology. But, I bet there will be speed increases, graphics and hd increases.
caspersoong
Apr 22, 05:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
I don't mind. Location is not so important.
I don't mind. Location is not so important.
gkarris
Mar 21, 02:05 PM
What country hasn't been used as "target practice" (from the US or any other for that matter...)? :eek:
:D
:D
nagromme
Apr 21, 11:50 AM
If someone breaks into my home and hacks into my Mac (using the OS X DVD to do a password reset), I have a lot more worries than whether they know how to find out what neighborhoods’ cell towers I’ve used! Luckily, encrypting your iPhone backup is simple, automatic, and unbreakable; and has the added benefit that then your iPhone’s keychain gets included in the backup. (Otherwise it doesn’t, with good reason.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they’re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I’d be surprised if they didn’t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they’re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I’d be surprised if they didn’t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
coolfactor
Apr 2, 07:19 PM
This ad campaign is trying to do what Think Different (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4oAB83Z1ydE) did. Let's see how good it gets, but nothing will top the Think Different campaign. Nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment