MrXiro
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
kentkomine
Apr 11, 03:42 PM
Aww, I was really hoping/expecting for a summer release :( But with all the other rumors suggesting that WWDC 2011 will be software-oriented, it makes sense. The iPhone 5 better be AWESOME, or else!!
treblah
Jul 27, 10:43 AM
Wowzers, that expensive.
"$999 for the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme X6800"
$999 for the 4.0GHz Core 2 Extreme (http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18)� :)
"$999 for the 2.93GHz Core 2 Extreme X6800"
$999 for the 4.0GHz Core 2 Extreme (http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18)� :)
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues because if you are using facebook/twitter and whatever else you are using to broadcasting your information. If you don't want advertisers to use your information, stop using social networking sites and search engines and stop being connected.
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
Bubba Satori
Apr 6, 08:17 AM
Forget about new Macs! just give us FCS A.S.A.P. :eek:
That makes a lot of sense.
Can't the most profitable corporation in the universe do two things at once?
That makes a lot of sense.
Can't the most profitable corporation in the universe do two things at once?
Stridder44
Apr 8, 01:12 AM
To be fair - Apple themselves were doing the same thing - in the UK at least.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
That just defies all reason. I mean it's not like they need to create more demand for these things.
I experienced, on a number of occasions, Apple Stores actually had stock in store available for reservation, but were forcing an entirely unnecessary, half an hour 'unboxing and setup' appointment.
That just defies all reason. I mean it's not like they need to create more demand for these things.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 05:19 PM
hmmm... the funny part is that it's been done to death.* that's the bit.* i guess you don't see it as funny.* ever heard of a reoccuring joke with a little aphormism mixed in?
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
supmango
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I might have to get my hands on one of these. Hopefully the store demos will work. I love my new iPad, so it will be a hard sell for me.
Zadillo
Aug 27, 05:19 PM
hmmm... the funny part is that it's been done to death.* that's the bit.* i guess you don't see it as funny.* ever heard of a reoccuring joke with a little aphormism mixed in?
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
But that's the problem. The joke was that it was done to death...... but THAT part has been done to death too, which is why most people no longer find it to be all that funny.
I'm happy that some people still seem to be able to find humor in it, but that doesn't mean that the people who no longer find it to be funny just don't "get it". It just means that the lifespan of this joke has long since passed for many people.
Piggie
Apr 8, 07:13 AM
I don't know if anyone has explained Best Buy's actions at all and why they would hold back on selling stock the have yet.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
I run a branch for a construction supply company and am judged based on daily and monthly goals.
It doesn't matter if I do three times my monthly goal this month if I don't hit goal at all next month. It doesn't make sense but it is the way business works. I have held orders that come in at the end of the month for the beginning of the next if I have already hit this month's goal so that I get a head start on next month's.
For the manager at Best Buy he probably felt that it served him better to the corporate big wigs if he hit his goal every day rather than pass his goal one day and not reach it the next.
Is it best for the COMPANY or for the CONSUMER? No... But in this world of sales and numbers managers tend to do what will make their bosses happy, which is to make sure that when they check the numbers on the spreadsheet every day they hit their numbers and don't get yelled at.
100% agree with you and people need to realise how stupid people high up the ladder are, and out of touch with reality with these things, which then cause the behaviour you have explained to happen.
Actually by selling more than your expected quota this month may even end up with your expected quota being increased for future months.
Effectively shooting yourself in the foot.
To put it in it's simplest form, say someone paid you $5 to walk to the shops and buy them a pizza, and give you 15 mins for the journey. You go the task, get your $5 dollars and everyone is happy.
Now, once you decide to jog a little and arrive back in 10 mins, wow that's great, so much quicker. but from now on, will will only allow you 11 mins to get the pizza for the $5 payment.
Then you are silly enough to run a little one day and come back in just 5 mins, wow, this is an improvement. Head office have now decided to allow you 6 mins to perform the task for your $5.
How stupid are you, when you could have been walking all this time and still of had your original 15mins for your $5 payment.
Perhaps you could of run in just 5 mins, but you really should of stopped and chatted to someone for 10 mins to use your allowed time up.
MacRumors
Aug 11, 10:05 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Despite being uncharacteristic of the secretive Steve Jobs we have grown to know, AppleInsider reports that the Apple CEO has been boasting about Apple's upcoming phone offering (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1959) to his inner circle. Apparently, Steve's own excitement over the product has lead him to produce a few "zealous ramblings" dating back as early as this past spring.
AppleInsider also offers a little more information (although cryptic) on the characteristics of the phone.
One person familiar with the ongoings believes the Apple cofounder has commissioned the release of cell phone prototypes to at least two potential OEM manufacturing partners in recent months. Current designs are said to conform to Apple's integrated model and leverage its tightly-knit digital media franchises, that person added.
In addition, AppleInsider quotes a source who states that the phone is indeed set to launch "earlier than some people may be expecting, in the form of a 'big bang' introduction that will catch even some insiders off-guard." ThinkSecret has previously stated that the phone has seen delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml) that could set it back as far as next year, whereas Engadget has recently stated that the phone could arrive as early as this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060729213347.shtml).
Despite being uncharacteristic of the secretive Steve Jobs we have grown to know, AppleInsider reports that the Apple CEO has been boasting about Apple's upcoming phone offering (http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1959) to his inner circle. Apparently, Steve's own excitement over the product has lead him to produce a few "zealous ramblings" dating back as early as this past spring.
AppleInsider also offers a little more information (although cryptic) on the characteristics of the phone.
One person familiar with the ongoings believes the Apple cofounder has commissioned the release of cell phone prototypes to at least two potential OEM manufacturing partners in recent months. Current designs are said to conform to Apple's integrated model and leverage its tightly-knit digital media franchises, that person added.
In addition, AppleInsider quotes a source who states that the phone is indeed set to launch "earlier than some people may be expecting, in the form of a 'big bang' introduction that will catch even some insiders off-guard." ThinkSecret has previously stated that the phone has seen delays (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml) that could set it back as far as next year, whereas Engadget has recently stated that the phone could arrive as early as this month (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060729213347.shtml).
Fabio_gsilva
Jul 28, 04:52 PM
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
A headless iMac would be very nice to mee, indeed. I own a Mini, so I don't want to throw my keyboard, mouse and display right now... And I don't have enough money to replace them now too.
zero2dash
Sep 18, 01:44 PM
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
DStaal
Sep 13, 09:12 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
Many Mac programs which can benifit from mutiple threads already use this, and will automatically get boosts from 8 cores depending on the amount of cocurrency they support.
On the other hand, not everything is suitable for cocurrent execution. Photoshop editing an image would love to have a core per pixel. BBEdit couldn't care less, most likely. It all depends on what you are doing.
Plenty of Mac software would use the extra cores, if they were avalible.
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Mac OS X distributes threads and processes across cores/CPUs to optimize performance already. (Subject to some limitations, as noted already.)
Many Mac programs which can benifit from mutiple threads already use this, and will automatically get boosts from 8 cores depending on the amount of cocurrency they support.
On the other hand, not everything is suitable for cocurrent execution. Photoshop editing an image would love to have a core per pixel. BBEdit couldn't care less, most likely. It all depends on what you are doing.
Plenty of Mac software would use the extra cores, if they were avalible.
(Note: I keep specifying 'Mac' here. There is a reason. Windows isn't as good at multithreading/processing yet...)
Digital Skunk
Apr 12, 03:54 PM
Here's what I am hearing:
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-final-cut-pro.html
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
http://applecritictv.blogspot.com/2011/04/new-final-cut-pro.html
The truly sad part about this is going to be when Apple doesn't deliver on our rumored promises.
I REALLY HOPE that Apple does what that article says, and does it WELL, with no bugs or issues that render the entire system useless, within a price point that's reasonable ($1500 --> $2500 for what's described).
Otherwise, it's going to make whatever update we do get for FCP moot.
moochermaulucci
Apr 8, 12:50 AM
How does that create demand? Instead of actually getting the sale, you deny a sale and hope it "creates demand" so that they'll come back and buy it in fear? Especially considering that they could have just purchased it in the first place and avoided the whole issue. Actually selling out the product and then having no more available in stock would create demand AND generate revenue. Doing what they did would generate SOME revenue and likely cause customers to look elsewhere for iPads.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
Now, now, we'll have none of that common sense in these here forums.:D
Well said, btw.
Edit: This isn't to say that I don't recognize the concept of reaching quotas for the day and saving products for the next day's quota. That's a different argument. What I'm referring to is that this is likely not about demand but about selfishly wanting to meet quotas and turning away customers in the process. Not creating demand. It's immoral, but business/retail and morality don't always work so well together.
Now, now, we'll have none of that common sense in these here forums.:D
Well said, btw.
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 03:35 PM
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
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.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
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.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
yoak
Apr 12, 02:24 AM
:confused: so FPC should create content?
They do. FCP regularly uses more than 100% CPU during render. Not saying it can't be improved though.
"Insufficient content"
Is an error message that pops up at random. Very frustrating.
But Compressor don't. At least not if you send something from FC directly. You have to create a QuickTime file first, then open that in Compressor, then it will use all your cores.
BUT only if you have manage to set up Qmaster correctly first. It took me 5 days online to figure this out and make it work properly. I still come to post houses where they haven't figured this out.
It shouldn't have to be this complicated
They do. FCP regularly uses more than 100% CPU during render. Not saying it can't be improved though.
"Insufficient content"
Is an error message that pops up at random. Very frustrating.
But Compressor don't. At least not if you send something from FC directly. You have to create a QuickTime file first, then open that in Compressor, then it will use all your cores.
BUT only if you have manage to set up Qmaster correctly first. It took me 5 days online to figure this out and make it work properly. I still come to post houses where they haven't figured this out.
It shouldn't have to be this complicated
macfan881
Sep 6, 10:31 PM
Seems like best buy is getting Playable Demos of the game I played it at mine I'm not a big racing sim fan but wow day 1 purchase for me awesome demo.
tundrabuggy
Mar 31, 03:11 PM
You could say the same thing about Apple though. The Apple fad will go away and the extremely closed ecosystem which seems to not be really developing much in terms of UI or having an actual roadmap could end iOS.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
This is a short-sighted statement if I've ever seen one. The Apple "Fad" will go away?? Apple is paving the way for all the me-too products to rip-off, oh, I forget, in its proper term, its labeled "competition". First iPhone and iPad are created as explosively successful products, then all the copy-cats come, as Jobs predicted they would. Not an ounce of creativeness from the others, now, linguists and Lawyers are being hired to copy the name "App store" as well, they need to have it to compete. If Apple went away, innovation in this market would stifle for 5 years at least.
I don't understand why people can't just see the pros and cons of both and accept both are great platforms. Its always a WAR with Apple fans. Apple against EVERYONE!
This is a short-sighted statement if I've ever seen one. The Apple "Fad" will go away?? Apple is paving the way for all the me-too products to rip-off, oh, I forget, in its proper term, its labeled "competition". First iPhone and iPad are created as explosively successful products, then all the copy-cats come, as Jobs predicted they would. Not an ounce of creativeness from the others, now, linguists and Lawyers are being hired to copy the name "App store" as well, they need to have it to compete. If Apple went away, innovation in this market would stifle for 5 years at least.
mattpol
Nov 28, 10:04 PM
Where are the recording studios in this future? Nowhere. Artists might still need them for promotions, music videos etc... but that is all bells and whistles. You don't even need the studios for a good music video, just look at how famous this (http://youtube.com/watch?v=okZwbxi7p0A) video has become, its even on MTV. It all comes down to the music, and if its good, people will buy it. Artists provide the content, iTMS the distribution. Record labels' presence will be greatly diminished. They are scared to death.
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.
Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."
sgibson
Mar 31, 02:38 PM
You keep using that word� (http://cl.ly/0X032o272d2a3G1T1K3D)
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues because if you are using facebook/twitter and whatever else you are using to broadcasting your information. If you don't want advertisers to use your information, stop using social networking sites and search engines and stop being connected.
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
shawnce
Nov 28, 06:52 PM
Many years ago a media levy was passed in the United States that applies a "tax" to "consumer digital audio" media (CD-R blanks, DAT, etc.) with the proceeds going to music industry/artists. The justification was to offset losses due to illegal copying of music in digital form (generational loseless copies). This to date hasn't been expanded to include devices like the iPod (at least I don't recall that taking place).
This appears to be an attempt to expand that levy...
Note in Canada they have a similar levy that "taxes" all digital media that could store audio (not just "consumer digital audio" media) but IIRC it fell short of being applied to the iPod as well. Also many many other countries have similar laws.
In my opinion these types of levies should never have been enacted into law... they presume customers will engage in criminal activity and punish them before hand. :(
To bad the wrong precedent was set...
This appears to be an attempt to expand that levy...
Note in Canada they have a similar levy that "taxes" all digital media that could store audio (not just "consumer digital audio" media) but IIRC it fell short of being applied to the iPod as well. Also many many other countries have similar laws.
In my opinion these types of levies should never have been enacted into law... they presume customers will engage in criminal activity and punish them before hand. :(
To bad the wrong precedent was set...
No comments:
Post a Comment