roach
Nov 27, 04:16 PM
Wrong. Tablets will never exist on their own as slate devices. Again as I stated previously slate devices are vertical market devices only. Convertibles on the other hand take the best of both worlds and contain both a touchscreen AND a keyboard. As for use. Think back to college. How many drawings did you do in class? In the traditional model notebook its difficult at best to do this. Or how about business meetings? I've done more scribbling then I can count as we work out network topology designs.
HP's TC1100, a tablet PC I had for about 2 years is a slate with a removable keyboard that also acts a convertible. I think it is the best design of both worlds. I use it for art and just love it in slate mode. My main gripe is the lack of fat buttons on the side for hot keys. I think this tablet (in slate mode) is the best looking portable anywhere...PC or Macs. But I would pick (big buttons) function over looks.
Again I've used Microsoft's implementation of a tablet PC. To be blunt its a Bill G's pet project. That is all. Its XP with a few tweaked apps designed to work better on a tablet. No one has come because MS hasn't put ANY real resources into the project. Hell they let a memory leak languish in the tablet PC for over 6 months even though they were fully aware of it. That had TPC users screeching like mad.
People will come if someone does it right and with the patents that Apple has made over the last 2 years that do pertain to a tablet interface I believe that Apple is on the right track. Much more so then Microsoft who is tied up in Vista development.
MS heavily implemented tablet function into Vista. From login, explorer, writing, etc. I upgraded my HD to 7200rpm and installed Vista RC2 and it ran better than when it had XP. For long docs, I heavily relied on a keyboard, but with Vista, it's very easy to write long docs. Before, I wouldn't recommend tablet to anybody doing long docs, but Vista change my mind.
Why, it don't sell well? There's a lot of good reasons. Power, weak video card, and onother reason is I feel Tablet pc weren't displayed correctly. I would go to an Electronic store and they would have them displayed like normal laptops with weak spec and heavy price. One has to look very carefully to realize they're looking at a tablet...very easily to by pass. I think UMPC is also going through the same problem. I can't find one, how can I buy one?
HP's TC1100, a tablet PC I had for about 2 years is a slate with a removable keyboard that also acts a convertible. I think it is the best design of both worlds. I use it for art and just love it in slate mode. My main gripe is the lack of fat buttons on the side for hot keys. I think this tablet (in slate mode) is the best looking portable anywhere...PC or Macs. But I would pick (big buttons) function over looks.
Again I've used Microsoft's implementation of a tablet PC. To be blunt its a Bill G's pet project. That is all. Its XP with a few tweaked apps designed to work better on a tablet. No one has come because MS hasn't put ANY real resources into the project. Hell they let a memory leak languish in the tablet PC for over 6 months even though they were fully aware of it. That had TPC users screeching like mad.
People will come if someone does it right and with the patents that Apple has made over the last 2 years that do pertain to a tablet interface I believe that Apple is on the right track. Much more so then Microsoft who is tied up in Vista development.
MS heavily implemented tablet function into Vista. From login, explorer, writing, etc. I upgraded my HD to 7200rpm and installed Vista RC2 and it ran better than when it had XP. For long docs, I heavily relied on a keyboard, but with Vista, it's very easy to write long docs. Before, I wouldn't recommend tablet to anybody doing long docs, but Vista change my mind.
Why, it don't sell well? There's a lot of good reasons. Power, weak video card, and onother reason is I feel Tablet pc weren't displayed correctly. I would go to an Electronic store and they would have them displayed like normal laptops with weak spec and heavy price. One has to look very carefully to realize they're looking at a tablet...very easily to by pass. I think UMPC is also going through the same problem. I can't find one, how can I buy one?
Mac Rules
Aug 4, 05:23 PM
New iMacs next Tuesday. I'll take one if it comes with a Conroe, Apple, thank you. But of course, if that's too hot, a Merom would do fine, too. Unless it will still use that dull 667MHz FSB, of course. At least put in an X1800 in it. Oh, and 1GB of RAM. And, while you're at it, throw in a 24" display too. And get rid of the lower bevel of the 'display design'. All that, and I'm buying straight away. If it will come pre-loaded with Leopard and will have a universal BlueRay/HD DVD-burner built-in, that is.
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
We can all hope! ;)
Cheers
:rolleyes:
But seriously, I'm soooo ready for a new iMac. This 800MHz G4 iMac is getting old. It works like a charm, still, and is plenty fast for most stuff, but it just doesn't feel right anymore. Also, I never had quite the relationship with it as with my old 233MHz G3 iMac. I WANT A NEW iMAC! AND I WANT IT NOW!
We can all hope! ;)
Cheers
petsounds
Apr 18, 04:19 PM
Suing for patent infringement is one thing, and Apple certainly holds some patents regarding the features of the iPhone and iPad. However, you cannot sue for look & feel. Apple should know this better than anyone after losing its protracted lawsuit in the 80s against Microsoft, which was based on Windows taking GUI elements of the Mac OS.
toughboy
Nov 26, 04:46 PM
Well whatever Apple puts inside that 'tablet' thing, I want it to be named as 'Newton'.. That is the name the product deserves, something with respect to Apple's own history..
We should be done with the cheap code-names like iTV and etc.. Newton is 'Apple-ish' enough...
For the spec side, all I want is a machine running a croped version of Mac OSX that can be used as a GSM cellphone and can surf internet via WiFi.. We already got iPod for music, so we dont need tens of gigabytes of storage.. 4-8gb is fair enough for a device like this..
We should be done with the cheap code-names like iTV and etc.. Newton is 'Apple-ish' enough...
For the spec side, all I want is a machine running a croped version of Mac OSX that can be used as a GSM cellphone and can surf internet via WiFi.. We already got iPod for music, so we dont need tens of gigabytes of storage.. 4-8gb is fair enough for a device like this..
thetexan
Mar 29, 02:54 PM
Yo! check out this key clause to Amazon's Terms Of Use >
5.2.Our Right to Access Your Files.
You give us the right to access, retain, use and disclose your account information and Your Files: to provide you with technical support and address technical issues; to investigate compliance with the terms of this Agreement, enforce the terms of this Agreement and protect the Service and its users from fraud or security threats; or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service or comply with applicable law.
WTF ???!!!
Access to Your Account and Content
You acknowledge and agree that Apple may access, use, preserve and/or disclose your account information and Content if legally required to do so or if we have a good faith belief that such access, use, disclosure, or preservation is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process or request; (b) enforce these TOS, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect, prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property or safety of Apple, its users or the public as required or pemitted by law.
http://www.apple.com/legal/mobileme/en/terms.html
Apple and Amazon have similar statement in their TOS when it comes to cloud storage. In fact they're so similar I wouldn't be surprised if they both used the same legal team to write their TOS.
There goes Amazon copying Apple again!
5.2.Our Right to Access Your Files.
You give us the right to access, retain, use and disclose your account information and Your Files: to provide you with technical support and address technical issues; to investigate compliance with the terms of this Agreement, enforce the terms of this Agreement and protect the Service and its users from fraud or security threats; or as we determine is necessary to provide the Service or comply with applicable law.
WTF ???!!!
Access to Your Account and Content
You acknowledge and agree that Apple may access, use, preserve and/or disclose your account information and Content if legally required to do so or if we have a good faith belief that such access, use, disclosure, or preservation is reasonably necessary to: (a) comply with legal process or request; (b) enforce these TOS, including investigation of any potential violation thereof; (c) detect, prevent or otherwise address security, fraud or technical issues; or (d) protect the rights, property or safety of Apple, its users or the public as required or pemitted by law.
http://www.apple.com/legal/mobileme/en/terms.html
Apple and Amazon have similar statement in their TOS when it comes to cloud storage. In fact they're so similar I wouldn't be surprised if they both used the same legal team to write their TOS.
There goes Amazon copying Apple again!
Satori
Apr 7, 09:35 AM
So, what is Apple doing with a bunch of 7" touch screens, since Jobs said "7 inch tablets are dead on arrival"?
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
This is about production capacity rather than specific sizes of screen.
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
This is about production capacity rather than specific sizes of screen.
eenu
Aug 12, 03:13 PM
After ordering a MBP when they were announced and then returning 4 defective units before demanding my money back, I'm going to do the same stupid thing and buy the first Merom MBP I can...
Glutton for punishment? *sigh*
I wasn't the only one to have 4 defective ones then :p
Glutton for punishment? *sigh*
I wasn't the only one to have 4 defective ones then :p
tny
Nov 26, 11:54 AM
i don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple tablet. I mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
But while the UMPC concept has promise, today�s hardware cannot deliver on it. In Gartner's view, success will require:
* Technology advances that are at least two years away (including an eight-hour battery and a sub-$400 price)
* Low-cost, compelling content bundles (Intel and Microsoft are working on partnerships in this area)
* A better Microsoft shell/interface running on top of Vista
* Text entry options beyond �thumb-typing�
* "Dock and go" synchronization, requiring minimal user interaction
* Sustained market momentum from Microsoft and Intel
Today, we believe it isn't possible to produce compelling UMPC products � just "proofs of concept." The low battery life, high price and non-Vista operating system will likely hurt the UMPC's market acceptance in this first go-round, and the negative backlash could damage its future chances.
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
I don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an Apple MP3 player. I mean, the existing ones aren't great sellers.
See the problem here? The reason the iPod took off was because it wasn't like the existing MP3 players.
Take a look at a group of current products:
1. The UMPC. Seems like a good idea, but not successful so far. Why not? Here's Gartner:
But while the UMPC concept has promise, today�s hardware cannot deliver on it. In Gartner's view, success will require:
* Technology advances that are at least two years away (including an eight-hour battery and a sub-$400 price)
* Low-cost, compelling content bundles (Intel and Microsoft are working on partnerships in this area)
* A better Microsoft shell/interface running on top of Vista
* Text entry options beyond �thumb-typing�
* "Dock and go" synchronization, requiring minimal user interaction
* Sustained market momentum from Microsoft and Intel
Today, we believe it isn't possible to produce compelling UMPC products � just "proofs of concept." The low battery life, high price and non-Vista operating system will likely hurt the UMPC's market acceptance in this first go-round, and the negative backlash could damage its future chances.
An Apple tablet would beat content bundles problem, the shell/interface problem, and the synchronization problem. Inkwell and a bluetooth keyboard option would help; and built-in WiFi will certainly help. If Apple can do something about the battery problem . . . I also think the form factor needs work.
2. The PDA. Right now the PDA market is growing, not shrinking - mostly thanks to the Blackberry and the PocketPC and at the expense of Palm. The magic combination seems to be email + cell wireless: if you can get your email anywhere you can use your cellphone, a PDA becomes a more compelling device. This ties in closely with
3. The cell phone. Everyone is in agreement that the cell phone is a target area for Apple; the question is who Apple's carrier will be. A GSM-based device that does EDGE could be used with many different networks.
4. The eBook reader, like the Sony Reader. The good side of the Sony Reader is low battery consumption and a very readable screen. The bad side is that it has to have a pretty low-consumption, low-use processor, no color, and the screen update speed is abysmal. The underlying tech of eInk isn't going to help with an Apple tablet, but the form factor might be a very good choice for a UMPC/Blackberry killer.
5. The tablet computer. The reason the tablet computer has been a failure is because the writing interface isn't very good yet, and because the damned things are the same size and weight as a notebook, so there's little point in dumping the notebook for a tablet. A smaller form factor with the same power, but one that it a little more usable and compelling than the UMPC might be very successful.
6. Video device, like the iPod with video or its competitors. A lot of folks complain that it's too small a screen, and the battery power isn't so hot. If you could have a larger screen that is not much heavier, and just a little more battery power . . .
7. Web pad / web appliance (Nokia 770, Audrey, Pepper Pad, etc.) The problems with these so far have been form factor and OS quality. Most web appliances have run either PocketPC/Windows CE or customized Linux distributions. The Linux distributions that have been used haven't had a good enough UI for a general computing, general audience environment - the needs of a web appliance are too complex to be handled the same way embedded interfaces (like TiVo's) have been handled. Windows CE isn't designed for a general computing environment, either, and makes too many compromises. I also think the Nokia 770 is too small, the PepperPad is overwhelmed by its case, and the Audrey isn't flexible enough.
A successor to the Newton that was a true OS X device, in a form factor similar to the Sony Reader, with .Mac synchronization, Airport Extreme and Bluetooth, a FireWire 400 and two USB 2 connectors, a mini-HMDI socket (with HDMI and DVI converters), a dock connector, an iSight, and an optical-capable audio plug, with some of the on-screen navigation tech we've seen in Apple patents, would be fantastic.
But I'd be surprised if the tech is there yet: the processors aren't small enough and cool enough, the flash memory (you'd want flash and not a hard disk drive) doesn't have enough capacity yet, and the batteries don't have a long enough life. I'll bet there is a prototype device like this in the Apple labs, but it might have mediocre stats: say
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
SMM
Nov 26, 03:39 PM
Simple...it's NOT gonna happen anytime soon.
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
You seem to speak from a position of personal knowledge. Is this because you actual know these facts, or is it just the conviction of your analysis?
I happen to know one of your statements is false. My company needs it and wants it. So do many people in the construction industry. In many respects, we are blind to the activities where we make our money. So, we are forced to often depend on a management layer to provide a communication stream between our administrative resources and our jobsites. However, in many cases, we manage in reactionary mode because of the inadequacies of our communication pathway.
When I was hired seven years ago, one of my assigned goals was to automate our field operations. I am going to condense many years of study and experimentation into a single statement. Tablet PC's have the right combination of footprint and technology to 'close the loop' for what we need.
My company has incorporated many advanced technologies. We have hosted numerous 'show and tell' sessions for others in the industry. A by-product of this has been the development of a large peer group of other construction IT professionals. We all see the need to manage field operations through technology, not through untimely reports, telephone calls and/or faxes, weekly meetings, etc.
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
You seem to speak from a position of personal knowledge. Is this because you actual know these facts, or is it just the conviction of your analysis?
I happen to know one of your statements is false. My company needs it and wants it. So do many people in the construction industry. In many respects, we are blind to the activities where we make our money. So, we are forced to often depend on a management layer to provide a communication stream between our administrative resources and our jobsites. However, in many cases, we manage in reactionary mode because of the inadequacies of our communication pathway.
When I was hired seven years ago, one of my assigned goals was to automate our field operations. I am going to condense many years of study and experimentation into a single statement. Tablet PC's have the right combination of footprint and technology to 'close the loop' for what we need.
My company has incorporated many advanced technologies. We have hosted numerous 'show and tell' sessions for others in the industry. A by-product of this has been the development of a large peer group of other construction IT professionals. We all see the need to manage field operations through technology, not through untimely reports, telephone calls and/or faxes, weekly meetings, etc.
koruki
Apr 18, 03:42 PM
You are funny. Do you know that Samsung spends 10 times more than Apple on R&D?
Well isn't that just embarassing? lol 10 times the money and they can't find SHI*T :mad:
Well isn't that just embarassing? lol 10 times the money and they can't find SHI*T :mad:
starflyer
Mar 27, 12:52 PM
My thoughts exactly. Our school district (ISD 482) just bought 1,465 iPads for its students, and I can see us getting really mad if Apple were to release a new iPad 6 mos. later.
If the iPad 2 wasn't what you needed, why not wait?
If the iPad 2 wasn't what you needed, why not wait?
DeaconGraves
May 4, 03:24 PM
My opposition to this isn't because I think Digital Distribution is bad (the copy of Windows 7 I'm writing this on was downloaded, legally I might add, from Microsoft), it's because of how Apple is offering it.
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
number9
May 7, 10:36 AM
I would welcome this. I enjoyed the features during the free trial period, but couldn't justify $99 per year for it. Since then they've added Back to My Mac, the Find my iPhone feature, and improved its reliability, so I would love to have access to it again, minus the cost. On top of what I pay for cellular service, another 9 bucks a month just seemed inconvenient.
Eraserhead
Apr 22, 12:18 PM
You just overlooked an elephant. Why would you want to discourage consumer spending? In today's economy, the government and markets are working hard to get people interested in buying again. A VAT tax would only discourage that. A VAT and no income tax would only encourage people to save more than to spend. We need people to spend or no jobs will be created.
Saving money does allow for investment - which also creates jobs ;).
Saving money does allow for investment - which also creates jobs ;).
centauratlas
Mar 29, 02:48 PM
I agree. Given the last Ford we purchased leaked and after 6 months of trying to fix it, the Ford dealer said "well, everything leaks" and said they'd give a good deal on it to trade it in if we wanted. And the last GM we had stalled every morning when you were pulling out on to the road and the dealer said that it was "just the way the car was made," and could never fix it I wouldn't buy an American made car unless they started getting good reports both for quality upfront (they just sound cheap compared to a Honda, Mercedes, Lexus, Porsche, or Toyota) and for quality over 5-6+ years of ownership. And the previous American made cars we had were of similar low quality.
So for the last 11 years, I've been buying non-American. It is too bad, but the quality is not there. I even looked at one with a friend in November and it was the same deal.
An iPhone made in the US would be double the price due to high taxes and regulation. Quality, who knows, but the cost would be prohibitive compared to everyone else. It would be the fastest way for Apple to kill itself. If Apple *could* do it, they would, but it is impossible.
It is competition - if you can't compete on quality or price, you are out of luck. Unless you can get a handout.
Quality would probably go down.
So for the last 11 years, I've been buying non-American. It is too bad, but the quality is not there. I even looked at one with a friend in November and it was the same deal.
An iPhone made in the US would be double the price due to high taxes and regulation. Quality, who knows, but the cost would be prohibitive compared to everyone else. It would be the fastest way for Apple to kill itself. If Apple *could* do it, they would, but it is impossible.
It is competition - if you can't compete on quality or price, you are out of luck. Unless you can get a handout.
Quality would probably go down.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 02:03 PM
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
Pretty sure again that the limitation is purely a "spec sheet" limitation given that is the max current LCDs do. My GF's miniDVI Macbook has a maximum "spec sheet" resolution of 1920x1200 yet she's plugged into a Dell SP2343W with a native resolution 2048x1156 with no problem. That resolution doesn't even show up on the "spec sheet" but it works fine in practice.
If the hardware really can't push more than 2560x1600 per connection, than since it can handle up to 6 displays of that resolution, I'm pretty sure it's just a firmware update away from enabling higher resolutions over DP 1.2. Again, maybe just something AMD overlooked because of the lack of such displays on the market.
Time will tell, but all the components available today can do it. We're at the point where we are ready to break beyond the 2560x1600 wall for a single monitor.
Now Thunderbolt is indeed a wild card here. Why would Apple limit DP like that though ? I'm betting that in DP mode, if they do implement DP 1.2, you would be able to use the full 21.6 Mbps. Otherwise, it makes no sense...
Pretty sure again that the limitation is purely a "spec sheet" limitation given that is the max current LCDs do. My GF's miniDVI Macbook has a maximum "spec sheet" resolution of 1920x1200 yet she's plugged into a Dell SP2343W with a native resolution 2048x1156 with no problem. That resolution doesn't even show up on the "spec sheet" but it works fine in practice.
If the hardware really can't push more than 2560x1600 per connection, than since it can handle up to 6 displays of that resolution, I'm pretty sure it's just a firmware update away from enabling higher resolutions over DP 1.2. Again, maybe just something AMD overlooked because of the lack of such displays on the market.
Time will tell, but all the components available today can do it. We're at the point where we are ready to break beyond the 2560x1600 wall for a single monitor.
Now Thunderbolt is indeed a wild card here. Why would Apple limit DP like that though ? I'm betting that in DP mode, if they do implement DP 1.2, you would be able to use the full 21.6 Mbps. Otherwise, it makes no sense...
Christina1971
May 7, 10:27 AM
Huh? If they aren't making any money for it now (with relatively few people paying for the service) how would it make sense to give it away for free (with many many more people not paying for it?)
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
I for one use it ALL the time. When you have more than one device (multiple macs, iphone), it's SO nice to have them sync wirelessly, immediately, and without having to login every time, on the native apps. iCal, Contacts, Safari links: I am a very frequent user of the mobileme syncing on all of these.
Maybe as marketing? Like you said, it works well and seamlessly if you have several Apple devices. People might be thinking of buying more than one Apple product, but wondering how they can keep everything synced.
Apple could promote Mobile Me as a "value add" and perhaps get more buyers of other devices that way?
cirus
Apr 24, 01:54 PM
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
Thanks, a 'duh' moment for me.
However, ati does list the 6990 as having a maximum display resolution of 2650 x 1600 per display though it can handle up to 6 displays. There will have to be a change somewhere. (Though you could probably write a program that would allow this resolution). That is still going to max out thunderbolt so you would not be able to drive one of those displays at native with a macbook pro.
Simiber
Apr 26, 02:22 PM
So one manufacturer Vs the rest, I think there would be something wrong with apple having more dominance than every other (notable) smartphone maker put together..!
Plus, like many have already said, competition is good..!
Now please let iOS five be good..! I get tingly thinking about it..!:D
Plus, like many have already said, competition is good..!
Now please let iOS five be good..! I get tingly thinking about it..!:D
reiggin
May 6, 12:21 AM
This is the most ridiculous thing to appear on the MacRumors front page in quite some time.
M-O
May 6, 06:44 AM
wow! so much anger!?
I saw this coming since Apple announced the A4. If there is one thing Apple likes, it's control. That is exactly what they get with the A4/A5 processors.
I saw this coming since Apple announced the A4. If there is one thing Apple likes, it's control. That is exactly what they get with the A4/A5 processors.
skinned66
Apr 24, 12:55 PM
Note that the 3200x2000 wallpaper is form factor 16/10 and not 16/9!
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
I agree completely. 16:9 is fine, but I find that 16:10 is a much better ratio for apps and multitasking personally. It's amazes me how much the difference that little makes. Given a choice I will always go with 16:10 on a computer. Good eye.
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
I agree completely. 16:9 is fine, but I find that 16:10 is a much better ratio for apps and multitasking personally. It's amazes me how much the difference that little makes. Given a choice I will always go with 16:10 on a computer. Good eye.
adztaylor
Apr 25, 11:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Absolutely 100% in agreement.
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Absolutely 100% in agreement.
Wolfpup
Jan 12, 10:56 AM
It's not ignorant at all.
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
That's true, but it's true of Windows too. If you're sensible, you probably won't get infected. But given these things have no real overhead, and there is a real risk, it's just sensible to use it.
There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
It still prompts if something's trying to use your admin/root privileges, right?
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact.
Of course it does. A quick Google finds multiple Mac hackers saying that actually OS X is easier to hack. Market value of doing so or effort required to hit a much smaller target are the reasons cited for generally not bothering.
You already know Apple's software has exploits too, if you've ever run any Apple software and not disabled updates.
This is just the reality of the modern world-our computers are connected. Our software is insanely complex. Put the two together, and you end up with all sorts of issues being discovered.
Yes, a handful do, and they can be easily avoided with a reasonable dose of common sense.
That's true, but it's true of Windows too. If you're sensible, you probably won't get infected. But given these things have no real overhead, and there is a real risk, it's just sensible to use it.
There is no problem running on an admin account, if you're even moderately aware of what you're doing.
It still prompts if something's trying to use your admin/root privileges, right?
The market share myth is ridiculous and has no basis in fact.
Of course it does. A quick Google finds multiple Mac hackers saying that actually OS X is easier to hack. Market value of doing so or effort required to hit a much smaller target are the reasons cited for generally not bothering.
You already know Apple's software has exploits too, if you've ever run any Apple software and not disabled updates.
This is just the reality of the modern world-our computers are connected. Our software is insanely complex. Put the two together, and you end up with all sorts of issues being discovered.