Mango Juice
Apr 25, 01:10 PM
I think this 'reliable confirmation' is about the Macbook's, not the Macbook Pro's. The Macbook redesign wasn't very future-proof and is similar to the older ones, and the MBP unibody is pretty much age-less and hasn't been out for very long. So...unibody/carbon fibre Macbook's seems more likely to me, rather than another MBP redesign.
arn
Sep 10, 01:49 PM
What about the patent designs that were just shown of the Cube 2?
http://www.unwiredview.com/2006/09/07/apple-cube-ii-computer/
It's the same patent as the original cube.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=231892
specifically, read:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2812045&postcount=6
nothing new.
arn
http://www.unwiredview.com/2006/09/07/apple-cube-ii-computer/
It's the same patent as the original cube.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=231892
specifically, read:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2812045&postcount=6
nothing new.
arn
Peace
Sep 5, 05:45 PM
There's no point in having a hard drive, why would you even want it if you can stream in real time from your computer? And why make it a "mini" size box when it can just be something tiny enough to hold AV outputs?
In order to receive the movie from the movie store it would stream to the "box".Having a HD would allow you to save the movie.
AND!!
Later in your room you could stream it from the "Box" to your computer :-)
In order to receive the movie from the movie store it would stream to the "box".Having a HD would allow you to save the movie.
AND!!
Later in your room you could stream it from the "Box" to your computer :-)
donlphi
Sep 5, 01:24 PM
Is a streaming box really what you want? I mean, it's one thing to connect my airport express to my bose stereo system and let it play a playlist from my computer in my office, but if we have a streaming video, we still have to go to our office and start the video from the other room. If that's the case, I might as well move my computer to my living room.
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
They will have to have something that allows you to access your audio and video files with a remote. Maybe an aiport express with a remote control and user interface similar, but better than frontrow.
Right now a mac mini can do all of the things you need it to. You can stream video from another computer on the network, you can connect it to your T.V. and stereo. What would be the point of a new airport extreme if for $200 more you can get an entire compuer.
just some random thoughts...
SeaFox
Sep 16, 12:18 PM
why is the US so far behind Europe with this kind of technology?
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
It's certainly why I haven't. I wouldn't say the U.S. is so much behind the rest of the world (although that is true) but keep in mind U.S. carriers are all about keeping people locked into contracts. It's much easier to get a phone and change providers in Europe because they don't do hardware locking to network and prepaid is more proliferant. You can get lots of these great phones (by the way, they do make 10 megapixel camera phones now) if you buy them online, paying retail prices.
The problem is most U.S. consumers are cheap as far as I can tell, most will not pay at all for a phone and even few will pay more than $100. The carriers cannot afford to subsidize these phones because even with them partially covering the cost a consumer will be looking at an over $250 cost with a contract..
The U.S. cell phone is behind other countries because the U.S. cell phone network is behind other countries. We're just now getting 3G out in most of the country but Japan has had it and two way video calls for years.
If I could afford it and was willing to take the gamble of learning a new UI, I would get the Nokia N73. But it's hard to justify spending that much on a cell phone for me and I'm more familiar with Nokia series 40 phones.
(edit: maybe it isn't i haven't shopped for a phone in nearly a year)
It's certainly why I haven't. I wouldn't say the U.S. is so much behind the rest of the world (although that is true) but keep in mind U.S. carriers are all about keeping people locked into contracts. It's much easier to get a phone and change providers in Europe because they don't do hardware locking to network and prepaid is more proliferant. You can get lots of these great phones (by the way, they do make 10 megapixel camera phones now) if you buy them online, paying retail prices.
The problem is most U.S. consumers are cheap as far as I can tell, most will not pay at all for a phone and even few will pay more than $100. The carriers cannot afford to subsidize these phones because even with them partially covering the cost a consumer will be looking at an over $250 cost with a contract..
The U.S. cell phone is behind other countries because the U.S. cell phone network is behind other countries. We're just now getting 3G out in most of the country but Japan has had it and two way video calls for years.
If I could afford it and was willing to take the gamble of learning a new UI, I would get the Nokia N73. But it's hard to justify spending that much on a cell phone for me and I'm more familiar with Nokia series 40 phones.
RollTide
Mar 22, 06:23 PM
Maybe all those "OS on SD and everything else on HD was aimed more at iMac????
Here's hopin.
Here's hopin.
mknopp
Mar 29, 11:53 AM
I will pay any attention to this when someone can show me that in 2007 that they predicted that Android would be the market share leader in smartphones in 2011.
One year projections are tricky. Four year projections in an emerging tech category are a joke. What about WebOS or Motorola's new OS for smartphones? They may not go anywhere or they might and these yahoos don't even account for them at all.
The very fact that they honestly seem to think that the only smartphone OSes that will have any sort of market share in four years are the ones that exist today tells you just how much anyone should pay attention to this.
One year projections are tricky. Four year projections in an emerging tech category are a joke. What about WebOS or Motorola's new OS for smartphones? They may not go anywhere or they might and these yahoos don't even account for them at all.
The very fact that they honestly seem to think that the only smartphone OSes that will have any sort of market share in four years are the ones that exist today tells you just how much anyone should pay attention to this.
dba7dba
Apr 21, 07:01 PM
if samsung stops providing displays to apple, it would be the best thing ever..NO MORE YELLOW TINT ISSUES!!!
yellow tinted displays are from LG i believe. in fact i don't think samsung supplies displays for iphone/ipad/
I'm pretty sure there will countless companies willing to take on Apple as a new customer.
Willing but are they able?
Desire and Ability don't always come together.
In Korea, they even run the government through many arms.
And you think US is run by our govt? Nope, people on wall street. try again, samsung hater.
yellow tinted displays are from LG i believe. in fact i don't think samsung supplies displays for iphone/ipad/
I'm pretty sure there will countless companies willing to take on Apple as a new customer.
Willing but are they able?
Desire and Ability don't always come together.
In Korea, they even run the government through many arms.
And you think US is run by our govt? Nope, people on wall street. try again, samsung hater.
milescortez
Mar 22, 05:23 PM
GeekBoner here.
Multimedia
Sep 9, 12:21 PM
Looks like MacCentral forgot to mention the fact that no matter how few cores an application can use - even if it's only ONE, the fact that more can be run at full speed SIMULTANEOUSLY is the whole reason for wanting-having-needing more cores - not wiether or not what you normally run can use 2, 3 or even all 4 cores at this time. OS X automatically delegates work to however many cores are vacant or underused so the user gets immediate benefit from 4 cores they will never get from 2. And I am 100% certain that tthe benefit is radically more than 20-30%.
It's an old think I always do only one thing at a time mentality that overlooks this otherwise obvious reason - a new way of working and a new way of thinking about how to do work - for going with more cores if you can afford it.
It's an old think I always do only one thing at a time mentality that overlooks this otherwise obvious reason - a new way of working and a new way of thinking about how to do work - for going with more cores if you can afford it.
bitWrangler
Mar 30, 12:53 PM
Thought it was clear so I'll try again.
Notice the iTunes.exe in the middle? It being the actual program but is denoted as Application.;)
The question was, "yeah, so what". How does this factor into this discussion?
Notice the iTunes.exe in the middle? It being the actual program but is denoted as Application.;)
The question was, "yeah, so what". How does this factor into this discussion?
EagerDragon
Sep 4, 07:15 PM
The device would not make a lot of sense by itself. There is more to this. Most people are waiting for a Media Center system. Sounds like the device would replace some cables that you can get for 40 bucks. I am refering to the cables that allow you to connect your Mac to the TV.
Maybe I am dense, but why stream it to the TV wen a mini can connect to the TV after downloading the show? Maybe to send it to multiple TVs in the house at the same time? Sounds expensive and short lived.
Need hear more, a single device and movie downloads seem to be only part of the picture.
Maybe I am dense, but why stream it to the TV wen a mini can connect to the TV after downloading the show? Maybe to send it to multiple TVs in the house at the same time? Sounds expensive and short lived.
Need hear more, a single device and movie downloads seem to be only part of the picture.
martg
Sep 13, 03:01 AM
So the reasons to buy if you live in GB include:
Housekeeping updates to the year old 5G iPod
No access to TV shows - but if you could they would be 60% brighter!!!
No access to movies - again potentially 60% brighter though
But best of all you can pay �260 for the 80GB version (only �70 more than those in America) or you can buy the 30GB version for �200 - a massive price drop of �10 and indeed the price that the Americans will pay for the 80GB iPod.
Yet another great endorsement for Apple international PR - and to be honest I agree with the whole �don�t blame the company thing� but with a little knowledge of import tax and the fact that other services allow downloads of their programing in the UK - it is genuinely Apple that are lacking here to support their non US fan-base!
Housekeeping updates to the year old 5G iPod
No access to TV shows - but if you could they would be 60% brighter!!!
No access to movies - again potentially 60% brighter though
But best of all you can pay �260 for the 80GB version (only �70 more than those in America) or you can buy the 30GB version for �200 - a massive price drop of �10 and indeed the price that the Americans will pay for the 80GB iPod.
Yet another great endorsement for Apple international PR - and to be honest I agree with the whole �don�t blame the company thing� but with a little knowledge of import tax and the fact that other services allow downloads of their programing in the UK - it is genuinely Apple that are lacking here to support their non US fan-base!
Misplaced Mage
Sep 18, 05:58 PM
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
Verizon and Sprint have used EVRC (Enhanced Variable Rate Codec) for several years now. EVRC, in turn, replaced QCELP (a.k.a. Qualcomm PureVoice). Down the road we should see EVRC replaced by SMV (Selectable Mode Vocoder), 4GV (Qualcomm's Fourth Generation Vocoder), or VMR-WB.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
Well said! People must understand that the codecs for digital phones in use today were originally designed to squeeze voice through a very narrow upstream pipe—typically 9.6kbps and under—resulting in different approaches to the problem of quality vs. bandwidth given the processing power available in phone chipsets at the time. Now that upstream data bandwidth and portable processing power are becoming less of a problem, we should start hearing improvements as newer codecs are adopted by the carriers in the phones they sell their customers. And I'm sure they'll trumpet the fact when they do. :D
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
Verizon and Sprint have used EVRC (Enhanced Variable Rate Codec) for several years now. EVRC, in turn, replaced QCELP (a.k.a. Qualcomm PureVoice). Down the road we should see EVRC replaced by SMV (Selectable Mode Vocoder), 4GV (Qualcomm's Fourth Generation Vocoder), or VMR-WB.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
Well said! People must understand that the codecs for digital phones in use today were originally designed to squeeze voice through a very narrow upstream pipe—typically 9.6kbps and under—resulting in different approaches to the problem of quality vs. bandwidth given the processing power available in phone chipsets at the time. Now that upstream data bandwidth and portable processing power are becoming less of a problem, we should start hearing improvements as newer codecs are adopted by the carriers in the phones they sell their customers. And I'm sure they'll trumpet the fact when they do. :D
dashiel
Sep 15, 06:26 PM
Wasn't the iPod introduced in late 2001?
What is NIH syndrome?
Thanks
you are correct, brain glitch on my part, i'm looking at by 1g ipod purchased the weekend they were in stores -- i really should know better.
NIH = not invented here. apple was notorious for this behavior in the 80s and 90s, much to their detriment, and success.
What is NIH syndrome?
Thanks
you are correct, brain glitch on my part, i'm looking at by 1g ipod purchased the weekend they were in stores -- i really should know better.
NIH = not invented here. apple was notorious for this behavior in the 80s and 90s, much to their detriment, and success.
thadgarrison
Sep 19, 03:35 PM
You want HD quality downloads but you can "stick" with DVD's? Do you understand how much information there is for a HD movie? Try one of the new disc formats, but you want to be able to download it? Crazy!
It's actually very possible to download HD content if Apple adopts a shared-bandwidth system like BitTorrent. It was rumored that they might do so. I download HD TV shows all the time - and it's fast and they're gorgeous.
It's actually very possible to download HD content if Apple adopts a shared-bandwidth system like BitTorrent. It was rumored that they might do so. I download HD TV shows all the time - and it's fast and they're gorgeous.
Bertmg
May 4, 11:00 AM
No Blue Ray, no 30 inch monitors, no new OSX (yet), Bootcamp still requires re-start, no new included software like Pages, and prices did not come down... Waited several years to replace my TI laptop and my 30 inch external monitor (yup I still use them and they work really good).
Very, very disappointing. :(:(:(:mad:
Very, very disappointing. :(:(:(:mad:
BigHat
Sep 13, 10:59 AM
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, someone reply to my post....
as a person who just purchased the last version of 5gen video ipod, this comes to me as quite a shock really.... i knew this was coming but actaully hoping that it was everything 'rumor' but turns out it's not.....
anyway, my point is:
WHY DIDN'T STEVE MENTION 30 GIG IPOD, WHILE MOST OF THE ATTENTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON 8O GIG SOLELY??
although 30 and 80 seem to share most of the new features which are obviously crap(game? who plays that? and search bar? i don't need that crap, too shabby, biatch)
but the thing is BATTERY, gosh
they've plugged about how their new 80 gen has total 20 hrs of battery life and 6.5 hrs of video play, but what about freaking 30???? I SERIOUSLY WANNA KNOW.
i've been to apple store and engadget for live broadcast, but there was no info whatsoever on 30's battery, other than its MAXIMUM battery was 14.... the thing i wanna know is its VIDEO MAXIMUM BATTERY.... is it, again 2 hours? i hope so!! cause i just bought this ol' **** at such higher price and now i feel totally duped. well it was my fault in the first place but i thought it was all RUMOR......................GAWD
Did you fall asleep watching it? He started the dicussion on battery life WITH the 30gb model and explained the improvement there before mentioning the 80gb. True, the 80gb was discussed a tad bit more, but the wrap up on price, songs held, display brightness AND batttery life watching video covered the 30gb.
Edit: I stand corrected on what's on the site. You're right about that. Even in the detailed comparison only music battery life is compared. Of course, you could simply compare that spec and get a ratio you could apply. A 30gb should have 4.55 hours of video capacity.
as a person who just purchased the last version of 5gen video ipod, this comes to me as quite a shock really.... i knew this was coming but actaully hoping that it was everything 'rumor' but turns out it's not.....
anyway, my point is:
WHY DIDN'T STEVE MENTION 30 GIG IPOD, WHILE MOST OF THE ATTENTION SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN FOCUSED ON 8O GIG SOLELY??
although 30 and 80 seem to share most of the new features which are obviously crap(game? who plays that? and search bar? i don't need that crap, too shabby, biatch)
but the thing is BATTERY, gosh
they've plugged about how their new 80 gen has total 20 hrs of battery life and 6.5 hrs of video play, but what about freaking 30???? I SERIOUSLY WANNA KNOW.
i've been to apple store and engadget for live broadcast, but there was no info whatsoever on 30's battery, other than its MAXIMUM battery was 14.... the thing i wanna know is its VIDEO MAXIMUM BATTERY.... is it, again 2 hours? i hope so!! cause i just bought this ol' **** at such higher price and now i feel totally duped. well it was my fault in the first place but i thought it was all RUMOR......................GAWD
Did you fall asleep watching it? He started the dicussion on battery life WITH the 30gb model and explained the improvement there before mentioning the 80gb. True, the 80gb was discussed a tad bit more, but the wrap up on price, songs held, display brightness AND batttery life watching video covered the 30gb.
Edit: I stand corrected on what's on the site. You're right about that. Even in the detailed comparison only music battery life is compared. Of course, you could simply compare that spec and get a ratio you could apply. A 30gb should have 4.55 hours of video capacity.
ucfgrad93
Apr 25, 02:35 AM
And yet, you sounded almost human when you posted about your grandparents and their cancer. Now we know otherwise.
gwangung
Apr 4, 11:51 AM
As the story says: "A private armed security guard interrupted the burglars and at some point, gunfire was exchanged with the two male burglars, who were also armed, Facicci said."
The burglars were shooting at him also. So the security guard acting in self defense. It wasn't like they were unarmed and while they ran away he shot them.
Oh, yeah, nothing illegal or hinky there.
But the guard's still gotta live with the fact that a life was taken. Bad stuff all the way around....
The burglars were shooting at him also. So the security guard acting in self defense. It wasn't like they were unarmed and while they ran away he shot them.
Oh, yeah, nothing illegal or hinky there.
But the guard's still gotta live with the fact that a life was taken. Bad stuff all the way around....
cwt1nospam
Feb 1, 11:07 AM
Yeah, the fact that there are no Mac viruses and Mac trojans are spectacularly unsuccessful means nothing. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And IOS devices are sitting ducks, being locked down to the point where users cannot load un-vetted applications. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sheesh!
And IOS devices are sitting ducks, being locked down to the point where users cannot load un-vetted applications. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sheesh!
THX1139
Jul 20, 08:48 PM
Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.
Exactly! I think the orginal argument was someone saying that there was no way a Conroe was going into a tower or workstation. That the line-up was to be all Woodcrest because that was the only chip that would be feasible to use in a workstation. My counter point to that is - if it was all Woodcrest, they would be out by now. Waiting for WWDC says to me that Conroe is going in there somewhere. My guess is that the Conroe will be used to replace the currently shipping duals at a speed increase. Others argue that the proline will be all Quad... or at least all Woodcrest even if they use only one Woodcrest chip in the lower-end. My best guess is they split the line-up and use both processors. Woodcrest on top in Quad, Conroe on the bottom and middle. They will continue to offer G5 until MWSF to accommodate legacy users.
It's going to be interesting to see what path Apple chooses. The unknown element is that they "might" have something in secret development that will allow them to produce machines we haven't considered. Doubtful but fun to think about.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.
Exactly! I think the orginal argument was someone saying that there was no way a Conroe was going into a tower or workstation. That the line-up was to be all Woodcrest because that was the only chip that would be feasible to use in a workstation. My counter point to that is - if it was all Woodcrest, they would be out by now. Waiting for WWDC says to me that Conroe is going in there somewhere. My guess is that the Conroe will be used to replace the currently shipping duals at a speed increase. Others argue that the proline will be all Quad... or at least all Woodcrest even if they use only one Woodcrest chip in the lower-end. My best guess is they split the line-up and use both processors. Woodcrest on top in Quad, Conroe on the bottom and middle. They will continue to offer G5 until MWSF to accommodate legacy users.
It's going to be interesting to see what path Apple chooses. The unknown element is that they "might" have something in secret development that will allow them to produce machines we haven't considered. Doubtful but fun to think about.
asdf542
Apr 22, 01:24 PM
Netbooks do not have optical drives. Ultraportables do.
The MBA looks good as a netbook. It looks bad as an ultraportable.
MBA and MBP are two different markets.
MBA is for people that want light. MBP is for people that want a full featured notebook.
So you want a big MBA.
If they could have the same processors, that would happen already at 13".
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/gadgetreviews/new-asus-eee-pc-netbook-with-optical-drive/2658
The MBA looks bad as an ultraportable? L.O.L.
The MBP is for people who want a powerful notebook. People who want a laptop capable of using parts that equal 85-watts or higher.
I don't want a MacBook Air. I want a MacBook Pro without an optical drive that is slightly thinner than the current MacBook Pro.
If you think the only thing that separates the MacBook Air from the Pro is an optical drive then I'm wasting my time arguing with you. Clearly someone that thinks a 15" Zacate notebook with an optical drive makes a 15" MacBook Pro with a quad core 45 watt CPU and a 25W+ GPU without an optical drive look bad is someone that knows little about what they're talking about.
I don't see HP Envy owners complaining about their lack of an optical drive inside their machines nor do I see people knock that particular fact about the Envy.
The MBA looks good as a netbook. It looks bad as an ultraportable.
MBA and MBP are two different markets.
MBA is for people that want light. MBP is for people that want a full featured notebook.
So you want a big MBA.
If they could have the same processors, that would happen already at 13".
http://www.zdnet.com/blog/gadgetreviews/new-asus-eee-pc-netbook-with-optical-drive/2658
The MBA looks bad as an ultraportable? L.O.L.
The MBP is for people who want a powerful notebook. People who want a laptop capable of using parts that equal 85-watts or higher.
I don't want a MacBook Air. I want a MacBook Pro without an optical drive that is slightly thinner than the current MacBook Pro.
If you think the only thing that separates the MacBook Air from the Pro is an optical drive then I'm wasting my time arguing with you. Clearly someone that thinks a 15" Zacate notebook with an optical drive makes a 15" MacBook Pro with a quad core 45 watt CPU and a 25W+ GPU without an optical drive look bad is someone that knows little about what they're talking about.
I don't see HP Envy owners complaining about their lack of an optical drive inside their machines nor do I see people knock that particular fact about the Envy.
jaknudsen
Apr 11, 03:24 PM
Hi
You already can, it's called Home Sharing (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3819), which is also available on your iDevice using iOS 4.3 and later.
I didn't know it was possible to use Home Sharing to play music simultaneously between several Macs - care to tell how? (not being sarcastic, just curious)
You already can, it's called Home Sharing (http://support.apple.com/kb/ht3819), which is also available on your iDevice using iOS 4.3 and later.
I didn't know it was possible to use Home Sharing to play music simultaneously between several Macs - care to tell how? (not being sarcastic, just curious)
0 comments:
Post a Comment