justflie
Nov 26, 02:55 PM
Simple...it's NOT gonna happen anytime soon.
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
Lol. I totally forgot about the origami. What a flop!
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
Lol. I totally forgot about the origami. What a flop!
kntgsp
Apr 24, 04:52 AM
Apple's problem is that they put "Looks" before performance.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
They crippled their chances of ever becoming a serious competitor to the PC for games due to deciding to use giant laptops on a stand which meant they could not cool any decent graphics cards, handing the gaming crown to the PC for years on a plate.
As for the future who knows.
That issue could have been largely solved if they had just faced a standard high end GPU with the intake facing towards the back and the exhaust on the side. But Apple is too vain to put a vent on the rear of the iMac to accomodate the intake of a high quality GPU, let alone a slim exhaust vent on the side.
If they had simply used a standard GPU like that it would have opened up quality gaming on the Mac and made it simple to upgrade to newer cards so that people didn't have to chuck the entire computer every time they wanted a new video card.
Ommid
Apr 25, 08:08 AM
Bit harsh, but true.
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
Probably because there is no need for it in that range? Plus most Mac Pro users won't use Apple displays IMO
chasemac
Jul 30, 01:20 AM
Please dont call it an "iPhone" that is so... no. if it was called iPhone I dont think that I would buy it. if it was MacPhone Pro or something like that than maybe... ;). No but please dont name it either of those. Come up with something new and original.
How bout PowerPhone.mac!:)
How bout PowerPhone.mac!:)
Chris5488
Apr 24, 03:49 AM
Note that the 3200x2000 wallpaper is form factor 16/10 and not 16/9!
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
itcheroni
Apr 18, 06:35 PM
Capital gains allows you to choose the timeline and the price to a point. If Capital Gains is special because of time-linked shifts in pricing, why isn't freelance income.
In my mind, income is income.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
In my mind, income is income.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
UmaThurman
Sep 11, 11:30 AM
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
Chase R
Dec 15, 01:10 AM
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
Exactly, there's no reason for a Mac to need virus protection. Just a waste of CPU cycles, RAM, and disk IO.
And any PC user that doesn't have AV protection is just asking for it. It's not our responsibility to save their ass. Maybe if they actually do get a(nother) virus they will make the switch!
Exactly, there's no reason for a Mac to need virus protection. Just a waste of CPU cycles, RAM, and disk IO.
And any PC user that doesn't have AV protection is just asking for it. It's not our responsibility to save their ass. Maybe if they actually do get a(nother) virus they will make the switch!
RebeccaL
May 6, 04:46 AM
The rummor would have been more credible if it said Apple was going to move to AMD processors since both AMD and Intel use compatible X64 architecture.
This would be like going back to the Power PC days... Yes new macs would have compatibility with Windows 8, but in this day and age where most people running Windows on Macs are using Windows XP it is unlikley that everyone needing to run Windows on Mac will be buying Windows 8.
This would be like going back to the Power PC days... Yes new macs would have compatibility with Windows 8, but in this day and age where most people running Windows on Macs are using Windows XP it is unlikley that everyone needing to run Windows on Mac will be buying Windows 8.
daneoni
Sep 11, 11:55 AM
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
Yeah, that was prior to the invites sent out. Jobs from experience will be pitching the movie store hard..meaning the laptop updates have to take a back seat for now. I mean they announced a 24" iMac quietly just to give you an idea of how important this is to them. Laptop updates? i wouldnt count on it...at least for now
Yeah, that was prior to the invites sent out. Jobs from experience will be pitching the movie store hard..meaning the laptop updates have to take a back seat for now. I mean they announced a 24" iMac quietly just to give you an idea of how important this is to them. Laptop updates? i wouldnt count on it...at least for now
professor08
Apr 20, 05:07 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 01:01 AM
It is not necessary it is not better, although I know some of you think anytime has anything with a bigger number in it you think Apple needs to follow. That is not how they work. They make whole devices, they don't just compile disparate parts with no real rhyme or reason.
But if it would have gotten the 4" screen it would have been just right, right? I love this "if Apple does something, it is great and if they don't, it's not needed anyway" - regardless of what it is... Haters gonna hate, but maniacs are blind.
But if it would have gotten the 4" screen it would have been just right, right? I love this "if Apple does something, it is great and if they don't, it's not needed anyway" - regardless of what it is... Haters gonna hate, but maniacs are blind.
Stella
Jul 30, 01:26 AM
any apple phone would be too good basic to use... plus be baised torwards the north amercian market.
Apple are such retards sometimes.
Go get a sonyericsson phone instead.
( ie., u.s., not Canadian, being the greatest country on this planet.
GO CANADA ).
Apple are such retards sometimes.
Go get a sonyericsson phone instead.
( ie., u.s., not Canadian, being the greatest country on this planet.
GO CANADA ).
gonnabuyamacbsh
Apr 18, 05:15 PM
Maybe LG should sue Apple.
they made a rectangular touchscreen phone before the iphone
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/LG_prada_phone_private_picture.jpg/250px-LG_prada_phone_private_picture.jpg
:p
they made a rectangular touchscreen phone before the iphone
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/LG_prada_phone_private_picture.jpg/250px-LG_prada_phone_private_picture.jpg
:p
iliketyla
Apr 18, 04:54 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
The LG KE850, also known as the LG Prada,[1] is a touchscreen mobile phone made by LG Electronics. It was first announced on December 12, 2006. -
Wikipedia
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
The LG KE850, also known as the LG Prada,[1] is a touchscreen mobile phone made by LG Electronics. It was first announced on December 12, 2006. -
Wikipedia
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 10:48 AM
By now you should know that Apple is a greedy company, just wanting to hurt others and bankrupt several in the process.. its corporate america at its best.. hopefully NOT FOR TOO LONG.
Apple makes products that people want. RIM makes products that cause people to point and laugh. Google makes products that they can only sell two for one or give away for free. Microsoft makes products that sit on the shelves until they are sent of to be recycled.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google. Gmail is great and Google is the only search I use. Unfortunately, they don't know how to make mobile devices.
Apple makes products that people want. RIM makes products that cause people to point and laugh. Google makes products that they can only sell two for one or give away for free. Microsoft makes products that sit on the shelves until they are sent of to be recycled.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google. Gmail is great and Google is the only search I use. Unfortunately, they don't know how to make mobile devices.
asdf542
Mar 30, 05:42 PM
Is there a changelog?
MacMan93
Nov 27, 10:14 PM
Actualllly somthing like this with a touch screen and it flips around like other tablets..
http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macdesign/ibookmini_r01.html
Pic From^^^^^^
http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macdesign/images/pict05_ibookmini_r01c.jpg
http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macdesign/ibookmini_r01.html
Pic From^^^^^^
http://www.theapplecollection.com/design/macdesign/images/pict05_ibookmini_r01c.jpg
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
rdrr
Sep 15, 05:05 PM
According to this review, it runs measurably (not necessarily significantly) cooler with longer battery life, etc.
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288
And according to Steve, when he announed the Intel switch, one of the reasons was the G5 couldn't fit into the PB because of heat. Well the MBP runs hotter than my G4 PB. I'll believe it once I feel them at the store.
http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=288
And according to Steve, when he announed the Intel switch, one of the reasons was the G5 couldn't fit into the PB because of heat. Well the MBP runs hotter than my G4 PB. I'll believe it once I feel them at the store.
roland.g
Aug 2, 11:16 AM
what is the date for MW Paris?
tekksan
Mar 28, 12:33 PM
hmmm...I wonder how this affects the Macbook Air announcement that was expected?
Benjy91
Mar 27, 05:56 AM
Going to be fun on my 500MB data limit.
Eidorian
Aug 11, 10:35 AM
so once these are released, what are the chances if my MBP was broken Apple Care would replace it with a new Core 2 Duo one?It's possible. I've heard of iBooks replaced with MacBooks and iMac G5's with Intel ones.
