bobr1952
Mar 13, 10:41 AM
How can something like this be for "some phones?" Doesn't make much sense to me--seems more likely to be a problem with the carrier--mine did fine figuring out it was now daylight savings time. :confused:
chrmjenkins
Apr 21, 05:24 PM
There's a huge difference between SUPPORTING the a-5 (or retina display) and REQUIRING.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
Any issues I've ever had with streaming have been related to my signal or being in a dense area for tower usage. Adding 4G/LTE capability solves neither of these problems. 3G is sufficient for streaming music files and videos. If you're wanting to stream >= 720p content over the air, you're a bit crazy anyway given that you're going to have data caps staring you in the face on any LTE plan.
Look, I'm not against the A-5. Whatever. Knock yourselves out with it. I'm just saying that when push comes to shove, you're going to wish you had LTE compatability more than an A-5 processor.
All the processing speed in the world can't save you if your phone can't access content fast enough -- and with the move to cloud-based storage on the horizon, anyone carrying a 3G phone is going to have a miserable experience.
Any issues I've ever had with streaming have been related to my signal or being in a dense area for tower usage. Adding 4G/LTE capability solves neither of these problems. 3G is sufficient for streaming music files and videos. If you're wanting to stream >= 720p content over the air, you're a bit crazy anyway given that you're going to have data caps staring you in the face on any LTE plan.
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
powers74
Jun 10, 12:34 PM
That'd be great!
more...
ejfontenot
Mar 7, 03:42 PM
I will head over to Stonebriar about 415. Meeting until 4, then head over after. If they don't have what I want, then Best Buy. Of course still debating on which model to buy, but that's for another thread!
shadowfax0
Sep 24, 01:33 PM
Oh ok, SCREEN SAVER mode, well that makes sense, I can't wait until you do it with the CLI version ::drool::
more...
farmboy
Mar 25, 10:08 AM
Amen. Some people here act like Kodak has no right to sue. Egads! Apple does it all the time also.
Nobody said they had no right to sue. And, unlike Wiid, I don't think it's ridiculous for anyone to defend their patent rights; some parties have more merit to their cases than others but you don't know until you go through the process. Don't know who wins here, but my guess is minor cash and cross-licensing is in the future.
Nobody said they had no right to sue. And, unlike Wiid, I don't think it's ridiculous for anyone to defend their patent rights; some parties have more merit to their cases than others but you don't know until you go through the process. Don't know who wins here, but my guess is minor cash and cross-licensing is in the future.
motox25
Apr 20, 06:56 PM
Ok thanks for the feedback. I would've opted for a better card but I got a good deal on two of the HD2600s. So, should I use two of the HD2600XT cards for each monitor or 1 HD2600XT and 1 Nvidia 7300GT? Would using 2 of the 2600XT cards cause a heat issue?
more...
Rodimus Prime
May 5, 07:55 PM
The iMac 27" is my favorite.. none of the all-in-ones it's compared to are even the same size on that chart. Even if you build a computer with the same equipment it's more:
---------------------------------------------------------
$1100+ for the 27" IPS monitor from Dell (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&sku=224-8284&redirect=1)
$150-250 for the processor (i5 2390(I think)) according to Intel (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211)
$120+ for the graphics card (desktop version, not sure about the mobile) according to Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102940&cm_re=Radeon_6770-_-14-102-940-_-Product)
Anywhere from $100 to $500+ for the tower and necessary equipment ( just depends on what tower, cooling etc. you purchase)
$180 for the Windows license :P according to Newegg Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116716)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1550 at the minimum if you do it yourself, probably more if you buy it from a manufacturer. Slightly more expensive than the $1500 iMac, and not everything comes in a nice looking package. Plus the hours you get to spend putting it together.
I did the math for at least that one Microsoft, stick to making Windows 8 as awesome as Windows 7 instead of making terrible ads like this.
Umm do not use retail cost of the OS. You need to use the OEM cost. That is 100 bucks.
---------------------------------------------------------
$1100+ for the 27" IPS monitor from Dell (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&sku=224-8284&redirect=1)
$150-250 for the processor (i5 2390(I think)) according to Intel (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211)
$120+ for the graphics card (desktop version, not sure about the mobile) according to Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102940&cm_re=Radeon_6770-_-14-102-940-_-Product)
Anywhere from $100 to $500+ for the tower and necessary equipment ( just depends on what tower, cooling etc. you purchase)
$180 for the Windows license :P according to Newegg Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116716)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1550 at the minimum if you do it yourself, probably more if you buy it from a manufacturer. Slightly more expensive than the $1500 iMac, and not everything comes in a nice looking package. Plus the hours you get to spend putting it together.
I did the math for at least that one Microsoft, stick to making Windows 8 as awesome as Windows 7 instead of making terrible ads like this.
Umm do not use retail cost of the OS. You need to use the OEM cost. That is 100 bucks.
.jpg "love quotes tagalog part 2")
leomac08
Jun 24, 11:36 PM
wow this makes my $499.99 40GB HDD PS3 look like ________ :o
more...
twoodcc
May 14, 05:30 PM
Here is a good stat to look at, we are #52 at crunching but 58 position. Our outlook is better, but really it is just enough for keeping our spot.
Hopefully the release of GPU3 for macs, a3 bigadv and 12 cores mac pro will help.
yeah all of those will help. especially that new mac pro. but even then, unless we are more active on this forum, people won't join the team
Hopefully the release of GPU3 for macs, a3 bigadv and 12 cores mac pro will help.
yeah all of those will help. especially that new mac pro. but even then, unless we are more active on this forum, people won't join the team
Fraaaa
Apr 21, 02:16 PM
Not enough to justify the non-inclusion of LTE/4G.
Two years from now, you'll be wishing you had faster access to streaming content (the mythical "cloud") than a bit more processing power to play a game that was designed to be playable on the iPhone 4 anyway.
I justified in my post why LTE/4G is not good for the next revision. Make an argument against that statement.
Beside, two years from now I'll be wishing nothing. 3G is good enough for browsing and I get WiFi in my house, at work and university. Two years from now, is two iPhone revisions. Most people don't even use SmartPhones, nor they care and the iPhone has the highest reselling value in hardware. So what should I be wishing for?
Two years from now, you'll be wishing you had faster access to streaming content (the mythical "cloud") than a bit more processing power to play a game that was designed to be playable on the iPhone 4 anyway.
I justified in my post why LTE/4G is not good for the next revision. Make an argument against that statement.
Beside, two years from now I'll be wishing nothing. 3G is good enough for browsing and I get WiFi in my house, at work and university. Two years from now, is two iPhone revisions. Most people don't even use SmartPhones, nor they care and the iPhone has the highest reselling value in hardware. So what should I be wishing for?
more...
normwood
Jun 10, 11:37 AM
T...who?
Seriously...in my area they are like Bubba's Cell Phone Service.
I'm perfectly content with AT&T, but Verizon sure seems like a better business partner with so many current users.
Steve
Seriously...in my area they are like Bubba's Cell Phone Service.
I'm perfectly content with AT&T, but Verizon sure seems like a better business partner with so many current users.
Steve
backdraft
Mar 24, 12:45 PM
I wonder if this has anything to do with Apple's recent hire?
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/15/apple-hires-expert-in-wearable-computing/
For Example:
http://www.ikey.com/ProductsList/?productID=158
http://l3shop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=LSOS
hmmm... PA Semi's previous military contracts might have to do with this as well.
Any conspiracy theories? lol
http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/15/apple-hires-expert-in-wearable-computing/
For Example:
http://www.ikey.com/ProductsList/?productID=158
http://l3shop.com/Merchant2/merchant.mvc?Screen=SFNT&Store_Code=LSOS
hmmm... PA Semi's previous military contracts might have to do with this as well.
Any conspiracy theories? lol
more...
Chip NoVaMac
Feb 24, 11:21 AM
What a colossal waste of Taxpayer money.
How about parents get off their lazy ass and actually parent vs shoving a gadget in their kids hands to baby sit em.
What a joke.
What about regulations to protect the consumer from those that find loop holes to make big bucks....
Parents need to do their part, but government needs to try to protect from the greed that that brought us to the mess we are in today....
How about parents get off their lazy ass and actually parent vs shoving a gadget in their kids hands to baby sit em.
What a joke.
What about regulations to protect the consumer from those that find loop holes to make big bucks....
Parents need to do their part, but government needs to try to protect from the greed that that brought us to the mess we are in today....
bluebomberman
Feb 24, 05:12 PM
it would be great if the "full" version is included. maybe you're forced to purchase additional "packs" via app-store if you want to enhance a "basic" server version, i.e. mail-server etc.
There's no indication on Apple's Lion preview page that they're packaging a gutted server package with additional add-ons to be sold separately.
Easy Setup
Lion Server guides you through configuring your Mac as a server. And it provides local and remote administration — for users and groups, push notifications, file sharing, calendaring, mail, contacts, chat, Time Machine, VPN, web, and wiki services — all in one place.
It's all speculation at this point, but a description like that makes it sound like ALL of Lion Server is included in each copy of Lion.
There's no indication on Apple's Lion preview page that they're packaging a gutted server package with additional add-ons to be sold separately.
Easy Setup
Lion Server guides you through configuring your Mac as a server. And it provides local and remote administration — for users and groups, push notifications, file sharing, calendaring, mail, contacts, chat, Time Machine, VPN, web, and wiki services — all in one place.
It's all speculation at this point, but a description like that makes it sound like ALL of Lion Server is included in each copy of Lion.
more...
Adidas Addict
Apr 19, 10:25 AM
I totally agree. Why anyone would hold out for that color and why Apple spent so much time trying to get that white paint to work properly is beyond me.
It won't be beyond you once you see how fast it sells. ;)
It won't be beyond you once you see how fast it sells. ;)
MacRumors
Mar 23, 01:05 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/23/apple-seeking-to-license-airplay-for-video-streaming/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/140318-airplay_tangled.jpg
love quotes pictures tagalog
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/23/140318-airplay_tangled.jpg
SuperCachetes
Apr 10, 01:18 PM
New bumper sticker: "It's Not A Choice, It's A Consequence"
LOLed at that. Thanks. ;)
LOLed at that. Thanks. ;)
blacktape242
Feb 18, 04:58 PM
Or how about the lack of pictures? This had photo op written all over it, but we the taxpayer only get one picture? I think the number of pictures were limited due to Steve Jobs current condition.
i like that quote "but we the taxpayer only get one"? :p
us tax payers are ALWAYS getting screwed! lol
i like that quote "but we the taxpayer only get one"? :p
us tax payers are ALWAYS getting screwed! lol
jbourassa
Oct 31, 02:49 PM
Hello. I'm not sure if I'm in the right forum, but I'll post anyway.. ;)
When I read a CD, I hear "tick tick tick tick..." instead of the song. Same thing when I import the songs and read them. It also does the same thing when I read the imported songs from my desktop pc in my Laptop (both PCs btw, im too poor to switch yet. maybe next year). But I can read and import the songs from the CD when I'm on my laptop. Also, I can listen to the songs allright if I import them from my laptopn then send it on my desktop PC.
Any clue? please help me!
(ps : my laptop has 4.6 and my desktop pc has 4.7... And yes i tried to re-install!)
When I read a CD, I hear "tick tick tick tick..." instead of the song. Same thing when I import the songs and read them. It also does the same thing when I read the imported songs from my desktop pc in my Laptop (both PCs btw, im too poor to switch yet. maybe next year). But I can read and import the songs from the CD when I'm on my laptop. Also, I can listen to the songs allright if I import them from my laptopn then send it on my desktop PC.
Any clue? please help me!
(ps : my laptop has 4.6 and my desktop pc has 4.7... And yes i tried to re-install!)
jadam
Sep 15, 07:30 PM
Originally posted by MacManiac1224
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
dumb ass, no theres no P5, P5 wont come out for a LOOOONG Time, PIV is expected to Scale up to 10ghz, this is just an upgraded PIV f00
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
dumb ass, no theres no P5, P5 wont come out for a LOOOONG Time, PIV is expected to Scale up to 10ghz, this is just an upgraded PIV f00
simsaladimbamba
Dec 12, 06:02 AM
That seams like a great idea! But how can I use the mask and wand tool? Can anyone please teach me?
Either use the toolbar or the shortcuts to activate the MASK or WAND tool.
"M" for rectangular or circular masks, "L" for the Lasso tool and "W" for the Wand.
Or do you mean something else entirely? Have you checked the PSD I attached? Have you checked the plethora of tutorials out there on how to use PS? Have you checked the HELP of PS?
Example: http://psd.tutsplus.com/
BTW, "seam" is not the same as "seem".
Either use the toolbar or the shortcuts to activate the MASK or WAND tool.
"M" for rectangular or circular masks, "L" for the Lasso tool and "W" for the Wand.
Or do you mean something else entirely? Have you checked the PSD I attached? Have you checked the plethora of tutorials out there on how to use PS? Have you checked the HELP of PS?
Example: http://psd.tutsplus.com/
BTW, "seam" is not the same as "seem".
mdntcallr
Sep 19, 04:30 PM
yay, interested in buying mac pro now. could be a nice computer for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment