chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
remboursemoi11
Apr 8, 02:26 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
KnightWRX
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
I don't mean to say that with a 27" iMac at home, one couldn't be happily mobile with a 13" MacBook Air if they so desired, I just don't think it has enough going for it to make it worthy of being stand-alone to anyone who isn't either (a) bat-**** crazy about about the MacBook Air or (b) very simple in their computing needs.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
Marlor
Apr 8, 02:13 AM
I do not intend to be rude, but there is a difference in HDMI cables, no matter what the Internet tells you. Conductors, shielding materials/layers and the way the connectors are put together are a few differentiators. An AudioQuest Coffee cable, for example, which is several hundred dollars ($600 I believe for a 1.5m) is made of pure silver starting with the tips and going the length of the cable. This is not the same as a no name $5 dollar HDMI cable from Amazon.
That would only make a difference if you are experiencing data corruption on the cheaper cable. However, if a $5 cable transfers all the data without corruption, then the end-result would be no different to what is offered by a $600 cable. Bits are bits, and if they all arrive intact, the cable is, by definition, perfect.
On the other hand, if you have some sort of special needs (e.g. needing a long cable in an area with lots of interference while transferring data with a high bandwidth), then a $5 cable might not be up-to-scratch. But it that is unlikely, so it's worth trying the $5 cable first.
That would only make a difference if you are experiencing data corruption on the cheaper cable. However, if a $5 cable transfers all the data without corruption, then the end-result would be no different to what is offered by a $600 cable. Bits are bits, and if they all arrive intact, the cable is, by definition, perfect.
On the other hand, if you have some sort of special needs (e.g. needing a long cable in an area with lots of interference while transferring data with a high bandwidth), then a $5 cable might not be up-to-scratch. But it that is unlikely, so it's worth trying the $5 cable first.
ugp
Jun 22, 11:50 AM
My district here received their phones today...
Out of 68 PINs generated, only 11 phones were sent. Only to 4 stores and one of the stores that received the most phones did not even generate P any PINs. System was screwed up like I thought it would be with Radio Shack.
Out of the 11 phones 10 are 16GB and 1 32GB. The store that generated the most PINs did not receive any phones at all.
Anyone shocked... I know I am not being I worked for Radio Shack for 7 years.
Out of 68 PINs generated, only 11 phones were sent. Only to 4 stores and one of the stores that received the most phones did not even generate P any PINs. System was screwed up like I thought it would be with Radio Shack.
Out of the 11 phones 10 are 16GB and 1 32GB. The store that generated the most PINs did not receive any phones at all.
Anyone shocked... I know I am not being I worked for Radio Shack for 7 years.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 6, 10:54 AM
Of course we do. The integrated graphics card will perform just as poorly as every other Sandy Bridge processor because it's the same.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
What do you intend to do on an Air that will require what little extra power the nvidia gfx offers over Intel. You sure as hell can't game with it.
camelsnot
Apr 8, 03:59 AM
You know that no one thinks that way right? I never understood all of these "fanboy" posts saying things that these mysterious "fanyboys" that I've never seen supposedly say.
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
You must not frequent Apple forums. There are quite a few people who think Apple can do no wrong and twist their own morals and thoughts to justify things that Apple does in these forums. They think they are Apple's personal crusaders. It's sad really, that some people can't think for themselves and they're so blinded by a tech company who could give two craps about them at the end of the day. While Apple does some good things for customers, it's not because they care. It's because they know by doing that, these customers will return. It's simple business, and $teve Job$ is a business and marketing god.
Good on Apple for keeping people so mentally invested in their company. It's a testament to the power of perception and lack of mental clarity from some of its consumers.
Charge on, Apple. :apple:
VanNess
Aug 7, 09:24 PM
Alright, I'll take these one by one...
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
andy721
Mar 25, 11:57 PM
Mac OS 10.7 is out but for developers so its not GM yet, it's 3.35GB
shartypants
Mar 25, 10:51 PM
Look forward to seeing what additional features where added since the last developer release.
mrsir2009
Apr 6, 02:10 PM
Good for them.
Multimedia
Aug 27, 09:33 PM
I think im gonna wait and buy in 2007 with leopard and iLife 07 :rolleyes:I don't think I will be able to wait another 8 months. Waiting for C2D was brutal enough. But I'm gonna try and hold out for a refurb C2 Mac Pro or MB or MBP.
RedTomato
Aug 11, 12:28 PM
My bets are that it will be either with Nokia or with HTC.
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
Nokia make the best phone interfaces in the world, which is a very Apple-like thing to do. They're also very experienced at phone hardware desigh and integrating it smoothly with the interface.
HTC are a taiwan company that design and make the best phone hardware in the world, and then sell them to companies like O2, T-Mobile etc to put their brand on. Most HTC-built phones run Windows Mobile, which Apple may be interested in replaceing with OSX Mobile...
I can quite easily see Apple commisisoning HTC to make a Apple phone, these people are simply the best at hardware phone design and manufacture.
Someone suggested Blackberry, but Blackberry is more geared to corporate use - not a very Apple-like sector - and also are quite heavily dependent on having access to a Windows server to get the most out of your phone.
Overall, I feel it will be HTC and OSX Mobile...
ergle2
Sep 15, 12:50 PM
More pedantic details for those who are interested... :)
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
NT actually started as OS/2 3.0. Its lead architect was OS guru Dave Cutler, who is famous for architecting VMS for DEC, and naturally its design influenced NT. And the N-10 (Where "NT" comes from, "N" "T"en) Intel RISC processor was never intended to be a mainstream product; Dave Cutler insisted on the development team NOT using an X86 processor to make sure they would have no excuse to fall back on legacy code or thought. In fact, the N-10 build that was the default work environment for the team was never intended to leave the Microsoft campus. NT over its life has run on X86, DEC Alpha, MIPS, PowerPC, Itanium, and x64.
IBM and Microsoft worked together on OS/2 1.0 from 1985-1989. Much maligned, it did suck because it was targeted for the 286 not the 386, but it did break new ground -- preemptive multitasking and an advanced GUI (Presentation Manager). By 1989 they wanted to move on to something that would take advantage of the 386's 32-bit architecture, flat memory model, and virtual machine support. Simultaneously they started OS/2 2.0 (extend the current 16-bit code to a 16-32-bit hybrid) and OS/2 3.0 (a ground up, platform independent version). When Windows 3.0 took off in 1990, Microsoft had second thoughts and eventually broke with IBM. OS/2 3.0 became Windows NT -- in the first days of the split, NT still had OS/2 Presentation Manager APIs for it's GUI. They ripped it out and created Win32 APIs. That's also why to this day NT/2K/XP supported OS/2 command line applications, and there was also a little known GUI pack that would support OS/2 1.x GUI applications.
All very true, but beyond that -- if you've ever looked closely VMS and at NT, you'll notice, it's a lot more than just "influenced". The core design was pretty much identical -- the way I/O worked, its interrupt handling, the scheduler, and so on -- they're all practically carbon copies. Some of the names changed, but how things work under the hood hadn't. Since then it's evolved, of course, but you'd expect that.
Quite amusing, really... how a heavyweight enterprise-class OS of the 80's became the desktop of the 00's :)
Those that were around in the dim and distant will recall that VMS and Unix were two of the main competitors in many marketplaces in the 80's and early 90's... and today we have OS X, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, etc. vs XP, W2K3 Server and (soon) Vista -- kind of ironic, dontcha think? :)
Of course, there's a lot still running VMS to this very day. I don't think HP wants them to tho' -- they just sent all the support to India, apparently, to a team with relatively little experience...
brownpaw
Jun 14, 11:56 AM
BTW...
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Basically, yes.
Does Radio Shack have access to your AT&T
account to determine your upgrade price?
Basically, yes.
Tones2
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Yeah, like all those trailblazing Android tablets that are 1-2 years ahead of the iPad, right? :rolleyes:
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
I'm talking PHONE. Wait 2 years or so on the tablets and it'll be the same thing. Apple just got too big of a head start on tablets.
Tony
ehoui
Apr 27, 05:35 PM
It's just like kings, innit?
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
bassfingers
Mar 26, 04:02 AM
Since the release of Leopard, the subsequent releases haven't had the wow factor of before.
Just what I think anyway.
translation: "snow leopard was okay"
Just what I think anyway.
translation: "snow leopard was okay"
marksman
Mar 22, 01:31 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Yeah a 50% smaller screen for the same price and less battery life is certainly going to crush the iPad2.
xlii
Apr 8, 05:48 AM
Well fill me in. Our family used to run a small local (and successful) computer store in the 80's and if we had it, we sold it.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
With cost of inventory being fairly high, why would you stop if you met a "quota"?
The only reason I can think of (and I know nothing down these lines) is to push more revenue into this quarter (the last quarter just ended March 31st). Perhaps BB made their number for the quarter from Jan 1 to Mar 31 and want to get a running start on this current one.
totoum
Apr 10, 08:43 AM
I used to come to Macrumors to read about Mac news, but now its all anit-apple crap.
Just skip that article and watch the video
Just skip that article and watch the video
�algiris
Apr 6, 03:30 PM
But hey, haven't you heard, Honeycomb is a real tablet OS. (Whatever the heck that means.)
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D
Google must have used that line in a PowerPoint somewhere because I see it regurgitated verbatim on every single iPad vs. Honeycomb thread.
The Google brainwashing continues. ;)
Real tablet OS, Full internet, True multitasking - the list's expanding fast :D
intlplby
Nov 28, 09:05 PM
the way i see it, MP3 players have been the single biggest factor in increasing sales of music (as well as song piracy) so in a way the ipod is driving the purchase of CDs, not CDs driving the purchase of iPods
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
both items feed each other
Music increases iPod sales and iPod sales increase music sales... it's a feedback loop
Universal owes Apple money on the same logic......
tyroja00
Sep 19, 10:37 AM
If you're still using the PPC, then you won't notice the difference between 2.0 and 2.16 on Intel. It will simply be "faster." Go out, get yourself a nice new MacBook, and enjoy.
I don't know if all the super hard-core Apple "fanatics" are listening or not to us Apple "users". We don't care about the clock speed of the laptop with concern to the Merom. We care about the 64-Bit. It may not be faster now, but wait till late next year, when 64-Bit native programs are out.
This is not just a bump in speed...this is a bump in Platform bigger than G4 vs G5.
It was Apple who chose to enter the Intel/PC realm. It was Apple who promised to be one of the first to utilize Merom chips. It was Apple who started the taunting of their competitors.
I don't know if all the super hard-core Apple "fanatics" are listening or not to us Apple "users". We don't care about the clock speed of the laptop with concern to the Merom. We care about the 64-Bit. It may not be faster now, but wait till late next year, when 64-Bit native programs are out.
This is not just a bump in speed...this is a bump in Platform bigger than G4 vs G5.
It was Apple who chose to enter the Intel/PC realm. It was Apple who promised to be one of the first to utilize Merom chips. It was Apple who started the taunting of their competitors.
No comments:
Post a Comment