balamw
Sep 1, 12:55 AM
Please explain to me how a computer company would benefit from aquiring a camera company because I just don't see it.
Canon is far more than just a camera company, even tough that is their core business.
In the consumer area, their scanners and printers are usually quite decent.
However, I too just don't see the synergy.
B
Canon is far more than just a camera company, even tough that is their core business.
In the consumer area, their scanners and printers are usually quite decent.
However, I too just don't see the synergy.
B
Jovian9
Aug 23, 07:21 PM
What I find most interesting is that fact the Creative is joining the Made for iPod program and will be producing its own iPod accessories.
Definitely interesting......now I'll just have to remember to never buy Creative products :) I like Apple not Creative........so why support a company I do not like that sued a company I do like and got $100 million in a lawsuit over a BS patent.
Definitely interesting......now I'll just have to remember to never buy Creative products :) I like Apple not Creative........so why support a company I do not like that sued a company I do like and got $100 million in a lawsuit over a BS patent.
thworple
Oct 27, 09:32 AM
I was there yesterday, and all Greenpeace did was hand out leaflets at the entrance to people entering the Expo at the Olympia. Hardly the actions of a "militant eco-group". I honestly didn't see them do anything else out of the ordinary, especially compared to other stand-holders who also roamed freely around the exhibition giving out leaflets etc.
I saw them in the pub across the road in the afternoon, and they looked they were having a hasty meeting about what had transpired. One would assume that "chucking them out" is only going to have an adverse effect on the publicity Apple receives about its attitude to "green issues" (although in this instance it wasn't Apple themselves that had Greenpeace removed, instead it was the MacExpo organisers).
Its a real shame, as they weren't doing any real harm, I think they have probably been harshly treated in this instance!
I saw them in the pub across the road in the afternoon, and they looked they were having a hasty meeting about what had transpired. One would assume that "chucking them out" is only going to have an adverse effect on the publicity Apple receives about its attitude to "green issues" (although in this instance it wasn't Apple themselves that had Greenpeace removed, instead it was the MacExpo organisers).
Its a real shame, as they weren't doing any real harm, I think they have probably been harshly treated in this instance!
Peace
Aug 31, 05:52 PM
lol... September 12th is a Tuesday worldwide :p
Ok..You got me..
What I meant was Tuesday was Sept. 12th in Cupertino..NOT monday as the poster said.;)
Ok..You got me..
What I meant was Tuesday was Sept. 12th in Cupertino..NOT monday as the poster said.;)
wizard
Sep 9, 01:42 PM
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Yeah it is interesting but in the context of a desktop machine you are not getting a lot for the wait. A new front side bus and a Merom to go with it. AND 64 Bit support which can be very important for some.
I guess what I'[m saying is that if you are willing to wait for this upgrade then you really don't need a new computer even with this rather significant update to the iMac. Maybe that is where our paths diverge as I see this as a significant upgrade. Sure it is a stop gap measure for 64 bit support but it does offer significant performance advantages and should adapt well to Apples move to 64 bit.
You are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
That is what I thought but like I said I don't follow Intel deeply. I do know that with Core 2 Intel has the potential for significant upside on clock rates. It looks like we could see both a core race and a clock rate race again. As to AMD I'm not 100% on their quad either but I think it is a single chip implementation. Maybe a few moths slower in coming but the impression is a solid offering.
What I'm wondering is where the optimal number of cores is for the average desktop user. I know that dual has some pretty amazing results on the desktop so how far do we go for core wise. 4, 8, 12 or more? Especially on i86, it is to bad the PPC guys never got their acts together.
Dave
Yeah it is interesting but in the context of a desktop machine you are not getting a lot for the wait. A new front side bus and a Merom to go with it. AND 64 Bit support which can be very important for some.
I guess what I'[m saying is that if you are willing to wait for this upgrade then you really don't need a new computer even with this rather significant update to the iMac. Maybe that is where our paths diverge as I see this as a significant upgrade. Sure it is a stop gap measure for 64 bit support but it does offer significant performance advantages and should adapt well to Apples move to 64 bit.
You are correct it is a rushed quad core. At least we get more cores out a little faster. Though it's not the best implementation.
That is what I thought but like I said I don't follow Intel deeply. I do know that with Core 2 Intel has the potential for significant upside on clock rates. It looks like we could see both a core race and a clock rate race again. As to AMD I'm not 100% on their quad either but I think it is a single chip implementation. Maybe a few moths slower in coming but the impression is a solid offering.
What I'm wondering is where the optimal number of cores is for the average desktop user. I know that dual has some pretty amazing results on the desktop so how far do we go for core wise. 4, 8, 12 or more? Especially on i86, it is to bad the PPC guys never got their acts together.
Dave
brepublican
Sep 19, 03:39 PM
This is a great start for Apple and should help sway studios that are still on the fence. Doesnt mean I'm biting though, only thing that'll get me to seriously think of buying a movie would be nothing less than a 720 x 480 reso. I might get impulsive if there are more offerings. Maybe.
I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)
I think Apple should seriously consider offering rentals too. Its dumb not to try it out :)
ryanw
Mar 30, 11:26 AM
By that argument, aren't windows and office generic terms???
Surely
Apr 20, 10:22 AM
Section 4b: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
That section states that by turning off Location Services, the data won't be tracked/collected. I think that these guys are saying that the data still is being collected, regardless of what your Location settings are.
It also appears from the granularity of the data that it isn't reliant on Core Location being active on the phone. In other words, the phone isn't logging your location only when you call up a GPS-enabled app and when the little compass needle warning icon appears in the top bar -- if it were, you'd expect most people's data to be mostly blank, with brief entries when they use Maps or another location aware feature. In our testing, however, Victor can see log entries every few minutes, all day, every day -- going back nine months. Meanwhile, Kelly H cannot see anything on her CDMA (i.e. Verizon) iPhone -- it's possible the data is only logged on GSM models. 3G iPads appear to log the info as well.
from: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/20/your-iphone-is-silently-and-constantly-logging-your-location/
That section states that by turning off Location Services, the data won't be tracked/collected. I think that these guys are saying that the data still is being collected, regardless of what your Location settings are.
It also appears from the granularity of the data that it isn't reliant on Core Location being active on the phone. In other words, the phone isn't logging your location only when you call up a GPS-enabled app and when the little compass needle warning icon appears in the top bar -- if it were, you'd expect most people's data to be mostly blank, with brief entries when they use Maps or another location aware feature. In our testing, however, Victor can see log entries every few minutes, all day, every day -- going back nine months. Meanwhile, Kelly H cannot see anything on her CDMA (i.e. Verizon) iPhone -- it's possible the data is only logged on GSM models. 3G iPads appear to log the info as well.
from: http://www.tuaw.com/2011/04/20/your-iphone-is-silently-and-constantly-logging-your-location/
JobsRules
Oct 27, 10:04 AM
If you actually look at Greenpeace's spoof Apple site, it's actually quite friendly to the corporation like, 'You're a great stylish brand but you could do better'.
Among 'activist types' Mac usage is far, far higher than amoung the general population. Greenpeace members are probably avid Mac users.
Among 'activist types' Mac usage is far, far higher than amoung the general population. Greenpeace members are probably avid Mac users.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
jp102235
Mar 29, 12:23 PM
Apple still doesn't have upload to a cloud or wireless syncing, and Windows Phone does. 25 GB free sky drive, as well as a beautiful hub where you choose what to access at a glance.
mobile me does this, and I suspect, it will become free soon (or at least parts of it).
mobile me does this, and I suspect, it will become free soon (or at least parts of it).
ZipZap
Apr 19, 10:16 AM
Will be settled out of court with no disclosure of terms. Fees/royaltys will be paid....life goes on.
These are business actions and have little to do with what's right and wrong.
These are business actions and have little to do with what's right and wrong.
OllyW
Apr 20, 10:28 AM
Has to have some back and forth that could be tracked.
So most Sat Navs are safe because they don't transmit back.
So most Sat Navs are safe because they don't transmit back.
aloshka
Apr 4, 12:03 PM
I don't think the "deserve" to be shot but if they get shot and killed while doing it, they should have known better. What if someone broke into your house and mentally harmed your family? They only deserve to be locked up for a couple of months, right?
- Joe
A better example, what if they broke into the house and shot at you multiple times. So unless they successfully kill you, they should just see a few years prison and when they are out they are free to come out and try again, over and over again until they finally do hit your sorry ass?
- Joe
A better example, what if they broke into the house and shot at you multiple times. So unless they successfully kill you, they should just see a few years prison and when they are out they are free to come out and try again, over and over again until they finally do hit your sorry ass?
twoodcc
Sep 5, 01:45 PM
wow. well this confirms it then. man this is gonna be a long week of waiting
duervo
Mar 23, 06:12 PM
I wonder how many who posted here in favor of removing these apps, are also supporters of wikileaks? i'm sure it's a significant number. how ironic.
How about you duervo, you a wikileaks fan? hmm?
The true irony here is your blatant assumption that is based on nothing more than a "gut feeling".
How about you duervo, you a wikileaks fan? hmm?
The true irony here is your blatant assumption that is based on nothing more than a "gut feeling".
8Phoenix
Sep 14, 12:41 AM
With due respect. The design looks good but I think it is lacking a few things.
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
I am not even sure if iPhone will be out for a while. Because assume the patient drawings on appleinsider is true, then it is likely that Apple might install iSight in the iPhone. (camera feature of the phone)
I am most expecting the iPhone to be a pda, rather than a mobile phone. Most likely a 3G phone. iChat, iCal, Address Book, and lite version of Mail and safari is what i would expect to see. Even iTunes and Quicktime. Lite version of course. (most essential would be ical, addressbook, mail)
I think more revolutionary of the design is that if you open iCal, Mail, safari etc you would have to turn the mobile horizitional for wide screen reading, and the wheel is most likely to be a touch screen.
Can I also add, I think it is extremely unlikely apple would do the slide down for the numpad. Because teh slider would impair your touch on the pad and make it uncomfortable, especially for long txt.
Because of all this, we will have to wait a bit, until Apple are able to pack all this into a small phone which I don't think they want to be maximum 1.5 size larger than Ipod Nano (and probably will be thicker but too thick)
mohaukachi
Sep 14, 01:29 AM
so who else thinks this looks just like the chocolate?
http://www.dagadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/lg_kg800.jpg
http://www.dagadgets.com/wp-content/uploads/2006/03/lg_kg800.jpg
dmula
Mar 30, 12:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
So what about Apple store?
'app store' means simply 'store at which apps are offered for sale,'
So what about Apple store?
bshort
Sep 14, 10:00 AM
New version of Aperture!.. Saweeet
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
sinsin07
Mar 23, 06:21 PM
I'd rather have an app that shows police officers donut runs.
geox
Apr 23, 02:18 PM
backlit keyboard on it and i am in. Perfect form factor and feature set for what i do all day every day. And less weight in my bag
currently have the 13 mbp and would love to get a mba to lighten my load.
+1111
currently have the 13 mbp and would love to get a mba to lighten my load.
+1111
Lefteous
Mar 22, 04:17 PM
Anti-glare anyone?
Would give a boost in companies and on my desk.
Would give a boost in companies and on my desk.
jiggie2g
Jul 14, 10:14 AM
Yeah, otherwise it's FSB antics.
Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18
That freakin' Tuniq Tower 120 is an abosolute Beast , I may have to look into purchasing one if my Artic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 isn't up to the task. I am hoping for atleast 3.6ghz from an E6600. Can't wait till Aug.
Not that the locked chips aren't that bad either.
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2795&p=18
That freakin' Tuniq Tower 120 is an abosolute Beast , I may have to look into purchasing one if my Artic Cooling Freezer Pro 7 isn't up to the task. I am hoping for atleast 3.6ghz from an E6600. Can't wait till Aug.
No comments:
Post a Comment