DaveGee
Sep 13, 01:29 PM
16 Weeks till MWSF...
Heh when you say it like that it doesn't sound all that far off at all. Hey, not that it's a lock we will see updates to the iBooks @ SF and who knows we could see updates before then... Oct? Nov?? Guessing is a total crap-shoot.
heck going into the weeks before MWNY everyone was SO SURE the PowerMacs would be updated... They weren't... then one month later... they were (not a great update but they were updated).
Fact is you can't base your buying habbits on rumors... You'll be no better off and just drive youself crazy.
Second guessing Apple HW/SW releases? You'd have better luck playing LOTTO. :D
Dave
Heh when you say it like that it doesn't sound all that far off at all. Hey, not that it's a lock we will see updates to the iBooks @ SF and who knows we could see updates before then... Oct? Nov?? Guessing is a total crap-shoot.
heck going into the weeks before MWNY everyone was SO SURE the PowerMacs would be updated... They weren't... then one month later... they were (not a great update but they were updated).
Fact is you can't base your buying habbits on rumors... You'll be no better off and just drive youself crazy.
Second guessing Apple HW/SW releases? You'd have better luck playing LOTTO. :D
Dave
Bobak
Jun 1, 07:30 PM
Then how the heck am I getting through?
it takes about 24 hours for domain names to fully update i believe i'll assume you wont be seeing the site tomorrow.
it takes about 24 hours for domain names to fully update i believe i'll assume you wont be seeing the site tomorrow.
tazo
Oct 13, 10:32 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
I kind of feel that way, since I've been posting a lot...and also since I can remember back to the great spikey vs. joey j wars.
BTW: Not the dreaded nightsextar tazo! :eek:
nightsextar?
I kind of feel that way, since I've been posting a lot...and also since I can remember back to the great spikey vs. joey j wars.
BTW: Not the dreaded nightsextar tazo! :eek:
nightsextar?
CanadaRAM
May 23, 08:28 PM
Judging from the number of orders we are getting for RAM, sales of the MacBook AND the MacBook Pro must be huge.
I think there was a demand holdback on the Pro, waiting for the MacBook shoe to drop, because we are now seeing a huge spike in orders for RAM for both models.
I think there was a demand holdback on the Pro, waiting for the MacBook shoe to drop, because we are now seeing a huge spike in orders for RAM for both models.
Spock
Oct 21, 10:27 PM
Originally posted by jefhatfield
Green Aura iPad Wallpaper
green background wallpaper
Black Background wallpaper
rice_web
Oct 1, 02:18 PM
LOL, I'm taking a sick day from school, so I've still got too much free time.
roy_g_biv
Oct 23, 03:26 PM
everyone keeps saying "mwsf, mwsf, i'm waiting for mwsf," but hasn't just about every source said repeatedly that apple no longer plans to use macworld as a forum for introducing new macs? if apple were smart, they would get new tibooks out for the holiday shopping season. i'm crossing my fingers for nov.
wrldwzrd89
Sep 24, 04:45 PM
let me re-explain it. Gecko is just a driving system in netscaped based browser. There are multiple engines that drive it IE-Bases have multiple enginees behind time.
fatal love green background
Tags: qr code green background
Jeffx342
Sep 23, 06:42 PM
rumor has it that the new line of powerbooks will be coming out
3rd week of October
http://www.powerpage.org/story.lasso?newsID=9977
I hope it has Radeon Mobility 9000....
3rd week of October
http://www.powerpage.org/story.lasso?newsID=9977
I hope it has Radeon Mobility 9000....
benixau
Oct 10, 08:50 AM
Originally posted by MacBandit
None of the sizes he listed were state of the art. The Macintosh IIVx came with up to a 400MB hard drive in '92 and I've never known Apple to use the biggest drive available in any of there computers. Though I do agree that his later sizes seem small by comparison. 4years ago should have 6-10GB and today should be between 80 - 120 GB. Just look at what the new towers are shipping with on the base systems.
Thankyou, I didnt say state of the art. If you knew -zip- about computers then you aren't going to get the best of the best. your going to get the cheapest new computer you can afford. I know, I had an LC630, then (sadly) a PC and now i have a cheapo PC (hey, i have ordered 2 brand new G4s and didnt have enought left over for a PB).
Wallpaper Background Stock
Tags: qr code green background
with green background
Green lime abstract wallpaper
Green Windows 7 wallpaper
green background wallpaper
green background wallpaper
green background wallpaper
Green Fire Live Wallpaper
None of the sizes he listed were state of the art. The Macintosh IIVx came with up to a 400MB hard drive in '92 and I've never known Apple to use the biggest drive available in any of there computers. Though I do agree that his later sizes seem small by comparison. 4years ago should have 6-10GB and today should be between 80 - 120 GB. Just look at what the new towers are shipping with on the base systems.
Thankyou, I didnt say state of the art. If you knew -zip- about computers then you aren't going to get the best of the best. your going to get the cheapest new computer you can afford. I know, I had an LC630, then (sadly) a PC and now i have a cheapo PC (hey, i have ordered 2 brand new G4s and didnt have enought left over for a PB).
MacBytes
Feb 25, 10:56 AM
Category: 3rd Party Software
Link: Mozilla releases Firefox security update. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050225115641)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
Link: Mozilla releases Firefox security update. (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20050225115641)
Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug
balamw
Mar 30, 03:58 PM
We have a thread about this over here. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=190275&highlight=psp) The other thread seems to be more about comparing Blu-ray to UMD though.
Missed it thanks!
B
Missed it thanks!
B
gotohamish
Sep 26, 10:49 AM
Proof that 'PC' and 'good design' don't come together...
http://www.suntek.co.uk/en/easypc/easypc_open.html
Couldn't they even put a black drive in? AAAAAGGGHHHH!
http://www.suntek.co.uk/en/easypc/easypc_open.html
Couldn't they even put a black drive in? AAAAAGGGHHHH!
nixd2001
Oct 16, 06:04 PM
Originally posted by MacCoaster
I never said that it was depenedent on MHz. I simply stated 2000 sounds puny to 4000... FROM a marketing standpoint.
Agreed, 2000 vs 4000 sounds bad from a marketing performance viewpoint. But my issue was why are we getting in to comparing the numbers? This way of comparing manages to exclude anything about hardware build quality or software quality. I think the Mac community should be trying some agenda setting of its own regarding quality, rather than having to get defensive about numbers. All these number comparisons avoid many significant aspects and I was reacting to seeing another sub-thread starting on just a numbers comparison. For example, I've spent a while reading Cocoa documentation (not quite enough free time to really get down to interesting coding unfortunately though). So, for basically no effort, every text widget can benefit from text-to-speech and textual summarise capabilities - does MS offer this? These have no direct relationship to the performance numbers, but they strike me as pretty significant (at least noteworthy) capabilities. Likewise, when I'm typing, I get a voice telling me that Mozilla needs my attention and the focus remains precisely where it is until I decide to go and see what was upsetting Mozilla. Heck, I've tried that last item on a range of "generic" users and all have them have responded that they'd like to have that feature available. but nowhere in their reaction was there anything close to 2000 vs 4000 comparisons.
So my argument is that, by only talking about how the numbers are not what they seem, Mac users are ignoring the thing that really makes a difference, namely quality.
See post directly above for AMD Hammer. As for Intel's Itanium, I'm not sure. Let me check. I'll post the number in an edit.
Okay. Intel's Itanium has 6.4GB/sec memory bandwidth as stated here: http://www.intel.com/products/server/processors/server/itanium2/index.htm?iid=ipp_srvr_proc+itanium2srvr& so Apple and IBM are behind the pack already.
The memory bandwidth issue is going to be an interesting debate for a good few months to come. Elsewhere, we had a figure of about 19GB/S for Hammer, but spread across three buses, which makes for only fractionally higher peak bandwidth that either PPC970 or Itanium are talking about. It is very believable that the issue of how fast the CPU is is going to be largely irrelevant because future memory systems are going to struggle to keep up.
I never said that it was depenedent on MHz. I simply stated 2000 sounds puny to 4000... FROM a marketing standpoint.
Agreed, 2000 vs 4000 sounds bad from a marketing performance viewpoint. But my issue was why are we getting in to comparing the numbers? This way of comparing manages to exclude anything about hardware build quality or software quality. I think the Mac community should be trying some agenda setting of its own regarding quality, rather than having to get defensive about numbers. All these number comparisons avoid many significant aspects and I was reacting to seeing another sub-thread starting on just a numbers comparison. For example, I've spent a while reading Cocoa documentation (not quite enough free time to really get down to interesting coding unfortunately though). So, for basically no effort, every text widget can benefit from text-to-speech and textual summarise capabilities - does MS offer this? These have no direct relationship to the performance numbers, but they strike me as pretty significant (at least noteworthy) capabilities. Likewise, when I'm typing, I get a voice telling me that Mozilla needs my attention and the focus remains precisely where it is until I decide to go and see what was upsetting Mozilla. Heck, I've tried that last item on a range of "generic" users and all have them have responded that they'd like to have that feature available. but nowhere in their reaction was there anything close to 2000 vs 4000 comparisons.
So my argument is that, by only talking about how the numbers are not what they seem, Mac users are ignoring the thing that really makes a difference, namely quality.
See post directly above for AMD Hammer. As for Intel's Itanium, I'm not sure. Let me check. I'll post the number in an edit.
Okay. Intel's Itanium has 6.4GB/sec memory bandwidth as stated here: http://www.intel.com/products/server/processors/server/itanium2/index.htm?iid=ipp_srvr_proc+itanium2srvr& so Apple and IBM are behind the pack already.
The memory bandwidth issue is going to be an interesting debate for a good few months to come. Elsewhere, we had a figure of about 19GB/S for Hammer, but spread across three buses, which makes for only fractionally higher peak bandwidth that either PPC970 or Itanium are talking about. It is very believable that the issue of how fast the CPU is is going to be largely irrelevant because future memory systems are going to struggle to keep up.
RacerX
Jun 20, 05:24 PM
It is hard to believe this was written when it was... this was 7 months after acquiring NeXT and he is saying:"Sales of Rhapsody are $0."The first developer version of Rhapsody was still almost two months away at this, what was he expecting?
More importantly, Apple was making money from NeXT software. Apple had released OPENSTEP 4.2 in January of 1997 and would continue to sell OPENSTEP, and NeXT versions of Enterprise Objects and WebObjects until 2001. While sales of Rhapsody (which didn't exist as a stand alone OS yet) were $0... sales of WebObjects at the time were a completely different story. WebObjects was (back in 1997) the only software of it's kind for the internet at the beginning of the net bubble. While I don't think Apple managed WebObjects that well after the .com burst, they were making good money with WebObjects leading up to that point.
Plus, this person seems to be unaware that Sun would have been willing to pay as much as Apple did (most likely more) to get NeXT. The thing is, NeXT wasn't for sale until Apple bought them. And Sun was throwing money around at anything back then (people even thought they might buy Apple), so had they been able to buy NeXT to secure their plans, they would have (they had just bought Lighthouse Design so that they would have a native office suite for OpenStep Solaris).
It is pretty bad when people make claims like they have some type of inside knowledge when they really don't. Had something like this been written today, I would have bet that Dvorak had written it to boost his numbers.
More importantly, Apple was making money from NeXT software. Apple had released OPENSTEP 4.2 in January of 1997 and would continue to sell OPENSTEP, and NeXT versions of Enterprise Objects and WebObjects until 2001. While sales of Rhapsody (which didn't exist as a stand alone OS yet) were $0... sales of WebObjects at the time were a completely different story. WebObjects was (back in 1997) the only software of it's kind for the internet at the beginning of the net bubble. While I don't think Apple managed WebObjects that well after the .com burst, they were making good money with WebObjects leading up to that point.
Plus, this person seems to be unaware that Sun would have been willing to pay as much as Apple did (most likely more) to get NeXT. The thing is, NeXT wasn't for sale until Apple bought them. And Sun was throwing money around at anything back then (people even thought they might buy Apple), so had they been able to buy NeXT to secure their plans, they would have (they had just bought Lighthouse Design so that they would have a native office suite for OpenStep Solaris).
It is pretty bad when people make claims like they have some type of inside knowledge when they really don't. Had something like this been written today, I would have bet that Dvorak had written it to boost his numbers.
scem0
Sep 14, 10:38 PM
I agree that this is BS, but I still like hearing it :D.
MacViolinist
Oct 7, 04:13 AM
There is good chnce that everyone knows this, but I will state the obvious anyway. I remeber a rumor about Apple buying the domain name iphone.org, but I have never checked it out. The point is that if you go to http://www.iphone.org you get Apple's home page. It's not a redirect, it's just that apple.com and iphone.org have the same homepage. Is this interesting to anyone besides me?
-the gruesome drewsome
-the gruesome drewsome
gerlitzappel
Feb 28, 07:47 PM
some clarification here.
to my knowledge, apple had the 10GB introduced in march 2002 with the scroll wheel and the same thickness as the 5GB. then at macworld of the introduced a touch-wheel 10GB that is slimmer, and the 20GB. maybe the 10GB was always thinner than the 5GB, but i'm pretty sure it went how i just said. please, feel free to correct me.
I believe you are mostly correct. Indepth information on previous as well as current iPods can be found here:
http://everymac.com/systems/apple/consumer_electronics/index.html
to my knowledge, apple had the 10GB introduced in march 2002 with the scroll wheel and the same thickness as the 5GB. then at macworld of the introduced a touch-wheel 10GB that is slimmer, and the 20GB. maybe the 10GB was always thinner than the 5GB, but i'm pretty sure it went how i just said. please, feel free to correct me.
I believe you are mostly correct. Indepth information on previous as well as current iPods can be found here:
http://everymac.com/systems/apple/consumer_electronics/index.html
McFreggle
Sep 11, 02:32 AM
Originally posted by ksksks
Take a look at this ... Yup, I saw it yesterday, and it's awfull! Sooooooo nice!
k.
Take a look at this ... Yup, I saw it yesterday, and it's awfull! Sooooooo nice!
k.
TMay
Oct 30, 04:14 PM
Dell is putting a little pressure on Gateway with this. A detente with Apple is just a temporary measure.
Not having the premier MP3 player is a disadvantage in Gateway's goal of selling consumer products via its retail stores. In a way, Apple and Dell are "colluding" to accelerate Gateway's downfall.
Gateway made a mistake with the iMac comparison ad.
Not having the premier MP3 player is a disadvantage in Gateway's goal of selling consumer products via its retail stores. In a way, Apple and Dell are "colluding" to accelerate Gateway's downfall.
Gateway made a mistake with the iMac comparison ad.
wowser
Dec 7, 07:59 PM
check out www.mozilla.org
anyone have experience with this program?
I'm gonna check it out.
Back in my Windows days, this was great (even on a very early release) - more like Apple's Mail, than Outlook.
anyone have experience with this program?
I'm gonna check it out.
Back in my Windows days, this was great (even on a very early release) - more like Apple's Mail, than Outlook.
PlaceofDis
Jun 9, 08:42 AM
no apple shouldn't start going out in all directions, perhaps diversify thier product lines a bit more though.
perhaps a tablet computer. perhaps an ultra portable. things like that.
perhaps a tablet computer. perhaps an ultra portable. things like that.
the_mole1314
Mar 18, 11:11 AM
How long before the CEO of Napster writes a letter to the RIAA about this? Talk about karma.
But it's still not as bad as Napster's dilemma. With iTunes, you still have to actually BUY the song for this to work. Not everyone who purchases songs from iTunes will take out the DRM, most people don't even mind or know it's there to begin with.
Fishes,
narco.
And that rental services are based on per play, not per download, so without DRM, the music companies don't get paid. With iTunes, they still get paid the full amount as if it was a DRM file. I don't think this will hurt Apple at all, mainly because the companies are still getting paid in full for each download. Also, Apple can then inforce their Terms of Serive about how you have to use iTunes to download the songs, or they can cancell your account.
But it's still not as bad as Napster's dilemma. With iTunes, you still have to actually BUY the song for this to work. Not everyone who purchases songs from iTunes will take out the DRM, most people don't even mind or know it's there to begin with.
Fishes,
narco.
And that rental services are based on per play, not per download, so without DRM, the music companies don't get paid. With iTunes, they still get paid the full amount as if it was a DRM file. I don't think this will hurt Apple at all, mainly because the companies are still getting paid in full for each download. Also, Apple can then inforce their Terms of Serive about how you have to use iTunes to download the songs, or they can cancell your account.
Gelfin
Sep 13, 03:13 AM
Originally posted by Thirteenva
You can make the text as big as you want, but your credibility just keeps dropping. You've posted this in multiple places now.
Oh, it's not really a matter of credibility. It's a matter of perspective, specifically that our Venezuelan pal has been steadily losing perspective for a while now. He decided early on that he didn't like OS X in a totally subjective "I prefer chocolate to vanilla" sort of way. Over time he's gotten more and more anti-X and more and more vocal about it. I think he's working to rationalize his subjective dislike into a set of objective shortcomings, which unfortunately means that it's not enough that he doesn't use OS X. He's got to convince the rest of us that we're blind fools for not feeling the same way as he does about the subject.
I like mymemory, really I do. But I've gotten the feeling he's just one of those people for whom anything that's a change from what he's used to is automatically Bad.
You can make the text as big as you want, but your credibility just keeps dropping. You've posted this in multiple places now.
Oh, it's not really a matter of credibility. It's a matter of perspective, specifically that our Venezuelan pal has been steadily losing perspective for a while now. He decided early on that he didn't like OS X in a totally subjective "I prefer chocolate to vanilla" sort of way. Over time he's gotten more and more anti-X and more and more vocal about it. I think he's working to rationalize his subjective dislike into a set of objective shortcomings, which unfortunately means that it's not enough that he doesn't use OS X. He's got to convince the rest of us that we're blind fools for not feeling the same way as he does about the subject.
I like mymemory, really I do. But I've gotten the feeling he's just one of those people for whom anything that's a change from what he's used to is automatically Bad.