milozauckerman
Aug 7, 02:47 PM
For those of you hoping for a mid-range tower, you're looking at it. Take the processor down from dual 2.66Ghz to dual 2.0 and the HD down from 250GB to 160, and you're looking at a $2124 machine.
So if I want a mid-range tower, I can configured it to have less RAM, a smaller HD and a completely useless graphics card, and still come in $200-300 more than a comparable machine from Dell/Gateway/etc.? Why can't Apple sell me a desktop with 2GB RAM stock and a 250GB HD for less than two grand?
Yes, the Apple is a quad instead of a dual - but exactly which apps does that matter on? Is a quad really going to be a vast improvement for Photoshop through Rosetta over, say, a single Xeon or 2.4 Conroe?
All I ask for is a moderately priced OS X desktop that isn't crippled in any way (still paying for 802.11g! $350 to get a usable graphics card!).
If using Windows didn't make my eyes bleed, I'd turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat. (And that, of course, is why fanboy dreams of a retail OS X package for any computer would never happen - you'd have to be a fool to use Apple hardware.)
So if I want a mid-range tower, I can configured it to have less RAM, a smaller HD and a completely useless graphics card, and still come in $200-300 more than a comparable machine from Dell/Gateway/etc.? Why can't Apple sell me a desktop with 2GB RAM stock and a 250GB HD for less than two grand?
Yes, the Apple is a quad instead of a dual - but exactly which apps does that matter on? Is a quad really going to be a vast improvement for Photoshop through Rosetta over, say, a single Xeon or 2.4 Conroe?
All I ask for is a moderately priced OS X desktop that isn't crippled in any way (still paying for 802.11g! $350 to get a usable graphics card!).
If using Windows didn't make my eyes bleed, I'd turn and run from Apple hardware in a heartbeat. (And that, of course, is why fanboy dreams of a retail OS X package for any computer would never happen - you'd have to be a fool to use Apple hardware.)
slu
Mar 27, 08:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Too bad I don't click tech crunch links. Especially since it is two in a row.
Too bad I don't click tech crunch links. Especially since it is two in a row.
lPHONE
May 6, 12:28 AM
This story broke 5 minutes ago and I'm already over it... Who cares if Apple wants to use something they think is new and revolutionary? Your opinion isn't going to stop them. While you're over here thinking "I can't do bootcamp with ARM" Apple is thinking "Bootcamp will be obsolite when we get done here" :apple:
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 10:21 AM
News Flash:
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
He's a Liar.
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
mdriftmeyer
Apr 21, 06:52 PM
I don't see this replacing the Mac Pro Tower. I see it as another solution within the Mac Pro family aimed at the Final Cut Pro Market where the use of several 3U Form Factor Systems would be used for Distributed Compiling/Rendering, etc.
It would be clearly also targeted for Engineering, Medical, Bio-sciences, etc where using OpenCL and GCD in their apps would provide a huge collection of streams/cores to leverage.
It would be clearly also targeted for Engineering, Medical, Bio-sciences, etc where using OpenCL and GCD in their apps would provide a huge collection of streams/cores to leverage.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:34 PM
i am sure apple is finding the world of phone carriers complex and difficult.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
appleguy123
Apr 10, 02:20 AM
Should you distribute first?
48/2(9+3)
2(9+3)=18+6=24
48/24=2
48/2(9+3)
2(9+3)=18+6=24
48/24=2
mr.steevo
Apr 20, 10:07 AM
What justifies European & European colonial sense of entitlement in forums like these?
I can buy an iPhone without contract and I don't live in Europe.
This is a world phone.
I can buy an iPhone without contract and I don't live in Europe.
This is a world phone.
carrako
Mar 30, 06:45 PM
Can this build be installed/updated over the previous Developer Preview 1 install? Or do I have to do a clean install after each new build?
onigami
May 6, 02:00 AM
This story broke 5 minutes ago and I'm already over it... Who cares if Apple wants to use something they think is new and revolutionary? Your opinion isn't going to stop them. While you're over here thinking "I can't do bootcamp with ARM" Apple is thinking "Bootcamp will be obsolite when we get done here" :apple:
You must really love the stuff you write. You must also love the sound your voice makes when it talks. Since clearly what we write will have no impact whatsoever, why bother even having a forum? Hell, why even write a post like that?
Get that iPhone out of your ass, seriously.
You know how long it takes me to create an ARM version of my code on the Mac App Store?
Two minutes.
What do you want, a gold star? A cookie?
Your app is prolly simple enough that you could do that. Consider more complex apps such as games and video-editing that require extensive use of the x86 architecture. That's the real problem.
And in all seriousness, that is the real issue. Switching from x86 to ARM RISC is a really big problem because the benefit of x86 is that so much work has been done on it, porting Windows apps and/or games is simply a software coding issue as opposed to hardware. Even if ARM had comparable processes to x86 to compensate to some degree, that's still another series of steps to go through.
And there's no real reason or benefit for them to switch to ARM. They have an incredibly solid partnership with Intel (they got Thunderbolt first, for Pete's sake), and what devices that could use ARM-like processors are already built in-house. If they really wanted a low-cost processor for laptops (again, no beneficial reason), they could just go for the AMD's Trinity platform with Fusion APUs. They already have Radeon GPUs in their entire lineup, don't see why they can't switch. Or even better, just build x86 chips in-house like they do with the A series.
You must really love the stuff you write. You must also love the sound your voice makes when it talks. Since clearly what we write will have no impact whatsoever, why bother even having a forum? Hell, why even write a post like that?
Get that iPhone out of your ass, seriously.
You know how long it takes me to create an ARM version of my code on the Mac App Store?
Two minutes.
What do you want, a gold star? A cookie?
Your app is prolly simple enough that you could do that. Consider more complex apps such as games and video-editing that require extensive use of the x86 architecture. That's the real problem.
And in all seriousness, that is the real issue. Switching from x86 to ARM RISC is a really big problem because the benefit of x86 is that so much work has been done on it, porting Windows apps and/or games is simply a software coding issue as opposed to hardware. Even if ARM had comparable processes to x86 to compensate to some degree, that's still another series of steps to go through.
And there's no real reason or benefit for them to switch to ARM. They have an incredibly solid partnership with Intel (they got Thunderbolt first, for Pete's sake), and what devices that could use ARM-like processors are already built in-house. If they really wanted a low-cost processor for laptops (again, no beneficial reason), they could just go for the AMD's Trinity platform with Fusion APUs. They already have Radeon GPUs in their entire lineup, don't see why they can't switch. Or even better, just build x86 chips in-house like they do with the A series.
clientsiman
Mar 29, 01:29 PM
Yeah :( all the meteorologists had no idea an earthquake this big could be triggered by LiPo batteries.
Meteorologist??? I guess you mean the Geologists.
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
Meteorologist??? I guess you mean the Geologists.
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
Machead III
Sep 16, 09:44 AM
If they don't update the MacBooks by the 25th, they've got to drop the price.
whmees
Aug 4, 12:39 AM
right... so what exactly do i have to do for my relatively new MBP to "accidentally" start encountering "problems" and have to have it sent in to get a replacement?
;)
;)
mrsir2009
Apr 21, 02:37 PM
FINALLY some Mac Pro updates!
wildmac
Sep 15, 05:43 PM
Powerbook G5 on tuesday ?
GeekLaw: A) That phrase above shall be banned for a period of at least 2 years, at whence time it shall be deemed cool and retro when used in reference to overdue product announcements. B) The phrase shall only refer to products which have not been refreshed for over 1 year. (Servers excluded).
GeekLaw: A) That phrase above shall be banned for a period of at least 2 years, at whence time it shall be deemed cool and retro when used in reference to overdue product announcements. B) The phrase shall only refer to products which have not been refreshed for over 1 year. (Servers excluded).
kpbpsw
Nov 2, 05:55 PM
There is no reason to put anti-virus software on your Mac!
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
jrtc27
May 6, 02:46 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
Please Apple, don't do this. You are just finishing the transition from PowerPC to Intel by removing Rosetta from Lion and you're already planning on switching architectures again. Are they TRYING to fragment their Macs?
Please Apple, don't do this. You are just finishing the transition from PowerPC to Intel by removing Rosetta from Lion and you're already planning on switching architectures again. Are they TRYING to fragment their Macs?
WildPalms
Sep 10, 11:10 PM
10 hours? Luxury. I dream of being able to download 2GB in 10 hours.
It'll take me over 4 days.
Wow! What kind of slow-ass lines do you people in Australia have to suffer with?
Thats ridiculously slow. :(
It'll take me over 4 days.
Wow! What kind of slow-ass lines do you people in Australia have to suffer with?
Thats ridiculously slow. :(
rickdollar
Mar 26, 11:22 PM
With the increased competition of Android I doubt Apple will be dragging their feet when it comes to moving forward with iOS. The new Web OS will be out this summer, too.
Guess we'll see soon enough.
Guess we'll see soon enough.
JaimeChinook
Dec 9, 12:26 AM
OK, I've had it on my MBP for about 3 weeks and I've noticed the spinning beach ball a lot more than I remember... no crashes though.
I've just taken it off; or at least tried to. I used AppDelete and it took off everything except the icon on my top bar. When I click on the icon, it says there are updates available... dooooh...
I've just taken it off; or at least tried to. I used AppDelete and it took off everything except the icon on my top bar. When I click on the icon, it says there are updates available... dooooh...
maclaptop
May 4, 10:16 PM
Boring
dethmaShine
May 4, 03:17 PM
I'm the one that raised the point in the first place! I think I set the context!
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
Eldiablojoe
May 3, 11:00 PM
I don't know what you guys mean by leaders. We make our decisions individually in the thread, right?
No, I don't understand it that way. I understand that each group (one if we stay together, multiple if we split up) designates a leader. We do ALL of our conversation in the thread. Only the group leaders communicate the wishes of their group to the Game Gods via PM. They may take the consensus of the group, or they may implement decisions unilaterally without regard to group majority.
No, I don't understand it that way. I understand that each group (one if we stay together, multiple if we split up) designates a leader. We do ALL of our conversation in the thread. Only the group leaders communicate the wishes of their group to the Game Gods via PM. They may take the consensus of the group, or they may implement decisions unilaterally without regard to group majority.
BenRoethig
May 6, 07:23 AM
Makes sense in that apple could control their own destiny in chipsets and CPUs, but it just seems like the PowerPC days all over again.