jrb363
Mar 28, 10:55 AM
So what are thy going to announce? Is hardware now going to the cloud like software? :rolleyes:
LOL! :D I could totally see Steve doing this. ;)
LOL! :D I could totally see Steve doing this. ;)
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
HecubusPro
Sep 16, 11:24 AM
Slot Load Blu-ray Drive Exists � Sony Sells Blu-ray VAIOs
And I wouldn't be opposed to having a blu-ray drive in my MBP, though I doubt it's going to happen anytime soon what with the blue laser shortages at Sony.
And I wouldn't be opposed to having a blu-ray drive in my MBP, though I doubt it's going to happen anytime soon what with the blue laser shortages at Sony.
LouieSamman
Mar 30, 05:47 PM
Please bring a huge UI overhaul. Lets see something new.
New UI & Grand features is what is to be expected with this update.
We already know that the aqua look is gone. The ios scrollbar shown on Lion is an example of the aqua leaving for good.
I can see lots of the applications such as Safari, Contacts, Calender, mail, ect is going to get a new look.
Very exciting to know that it's coming out this summer!
New UI & Grand features is what is to be expected with this update.
We already know that the aqua look is gone. The ios scrollbar shown on Lion is an example of the aqua leaving for good.
I can see lots of the applications such as Safari, Contacts, Calender, mail, ect is going to get a new look.
Very exciting to know that it's coming out this summer!
nagromme
Apr 25, 09:12 AM
I want a Steve Jobs Magic 8 Ball.
Macman1993
Apr 26, 02:07 PM
Some will be bothered about IOS not being the most dominant. I personally don't care, I just want the best mobile OS.
Eldiablojoe
May 5, 01:51 PM
Thou incessant need for sandwiches tis why thou dost not �get lucky."
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
rowanhall
Nov 26, 10:28 AM
i'm digging this idea! i love macs, home cinema and home automation! the one thing is i feel that the screen should be at least macbook size, although the 8" from previous rumours may be a tad small, although i think i'm already sold...
balamw
Apr 14, 11:17 AM
I want line items on every single thing spent.
This is my favorite visualization of the budget. http://wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
However it sounds like you might just want to read the budget itself. It's only ~200 pages long: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/index.html http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget.pdf
Unless that's not enough detail for you.
B
This is my favorite visualization of the budget. http://wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
However it sounds like you might just want to read the budget itself. It's only ~200 pages long: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/index.html http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget.pdf
Unless that's not enough detail for you.
B
Josias
Sep 16, 02:55 AM
I believe the new macbook pro merom's will be .1-.3 inches thicker, and POSSIBLY incorporate a new blu-ray DVD burner, 160GB HD, ATI X1800 Graphics card, and improved display to 1920X1200 for 17". I believe this to be true based on the information gathered from brenthaven's website, showing the 12/15 pro case that is out of stock is 1/4" thicker in the space needed to hold the macbook. The only reason for this is if they know "something" we don't...such as a thicker machine. Also, they are coming out around the 26th-30th. Maybe? what do you guys think?
Hello
My name is Mr. Burns.
Goodday Mr. Burns, may I ask what your first name is?
...I don't know.
WTF?!!?
The 12/15" Pro cases are designed for the 12/15" PowerBooks which were 2.8 and 3.0 cm thick.
You may be right about the 160 GB HDD option and the X1800.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.
Why would they put Blu-Ray drives in? And where would they get them from? Sony just moved the release of PS3 in Europe to March '07 duo to lack of sufficient Blu Ray readers.
At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)
Hello
My name is Mr. Burns.
Goodday Mr. Burns, may I ask what your first name is?
...I don't know.
WTF?!!?
The 12/15" Pro cases are designed for the 12/15" PowerBooks which were 2.8 and 3.0 cm thick.
You may be right about the 160 GB HDD option and the X1800.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.
Why would they put Blu-Ray drives in? And where would they get them from? Sony just moved the release of PS3 in Europe to March '07 duo to lack of sufficient Blu Ray readers.
At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)
cube
May 6, 06:39 AM
Intel is spending $9 billion to upgrade its fabs to 22nm. Building all of them from scratch would be much more expensive. ARM's current market cap is $7.5 billion.
ARM does not make chips. They license technology and core designs.
ARM does not make chips. They license technology and core designs.
Chupa Chupa
Apr 7, 10:54 AM
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I see the wannabe lawyers are once again shaking their fists in outrage because Apple's muti-billion dollar competitors like BB, HTC, Moto can't match wits with Apple.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
I see the wannabe lawyers are once again shaking their fists in outrage because Apple's muti-billion dollar competitors like BB, HTC, Moto can't match wits with Apple.
gnasher729
Aug 7, 02:54 PM
First of all...it seems to me they should have offered a single dual core processor model...like a single 2.6Ghz model for something like $1599. Second why do you only save $300 when you opt for the 2Ghz model but the 3Ghz model costs $800 more???
The 2.66 GHz machine is a bargain. If you pick a different model, Apple will make a bit more money.
The 2.66 GHz machine is a bargain. If you pick a different model, Apple will make a bit more money.
Multimedia
Sep 16, 07:36 PM
Just wanted to add, for everyone reading a lot into shipping dates etc., I ordered mine on Sep 11 and got the notice of delays, then notice it was shpped out today (was planning on cancelling after this news).
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?You're going to have to be aggressive about returning it. If I were you I would try to refuse accepting delivery and call your credit card company and tell them you don't want it so they will force Apple to accept your refusal to receive it.
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?You're going to have to be aggressive about returning it. If I were you I would try to refuse accepting delivery and call your credit card company and tell them you don't want it so they will force Apple to accept your refusal to receive it.
msb3079
Apr 20, 02:03 PM
That's not "Calendar" summer, it is based on cycles of the sun, precisely, the solstices and equinoxes. ;)
It just so happens that the Fall equinox falls in mid-september while Summer solstice is on the 21st of June.
This is true the world over, it is not a "US thing".
I understand. And while most "go by" what you are saying... IMO, meteorological summer really matters the most. On September 15th... most people don't really think of it as still being summer. What I'm saying is, subconsciously (or maybe not) we tend to think in meteorological seasons as opposed to calendar seasons, even though we technically more follow calendar seasons.
That probably sounds confusing. Sorry.
It just so happens that the Fall equinox falls in mid-september while Summer solstice is on the 21st of June.
This is true the world over, it is not a "US thing".
I understand. And while most "go by" what you are saying... IMO, meteorological summer really matters the most. On September 15th... most people don't really think of it as still being summer. What I'm saying is, subconsciously (or maybe not) we tend to think in meteorological seasons as opposed to calendar seasons, even though we technically more follow calendar seasons.
That probably sounds confusing. Sorry.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:56 PM
Other than confusing everyone with too many options, no.
If you're a teenage girl, your phone has to have a camera on it, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a hiker, maybe you're going to want a phone with GPS, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a huge multitasker, you're going to want PDA-functionality, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
Very few people, I feel, will want a bare-bones phone... meaning most will have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's too complicated for most people to do.
So in short, no, I don't think that'll work. Good idea, though. That way you'd get a phone with the features you want without the crap that you don't want. Unfortunately, as far as a particular model of phone goes, it's either all or nothing... and I don't think Apple will want to release 18 different models of phone, each with different capabilities... that's worse than BTO.
-Clive
I agree with you totally on this one, Clive.
The problem with "the masses" out there (especially in the U.S.) is that they are so uneducated, unsophisticated, unsavvy, and generally lazy, that ANY solution that isn't served up to them, lock stock and barrel, on a silver platter, automatically will wind up excluding probably a bit north of 70% of the population, and that might simply be me being a bit generous.
Heck, in this country, people don't even educate themselves enough to know not to put scorchingly-hot coffee between their legs in a fast-food drive-through. And having had five years' experience as tech support at Sony Electronics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_CISC) I can tell you that most people don't know -- and don't want to know -- anything about the devices they use. They've grown up and been raised to simply hand the keys to their lives over to someone else. Otherwise, if they had to actually use their minds and *think* something through, well, they don't have time for all that.
Sorry to rant here a bit, but it's the truth. Heck, I've dealt with that at every retail company I've ever worked at, at least to some extent.
If you're a teenage girl, your phone has to have a camera on it, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a hiker, maybe you're going to want a phone with GPS, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
If you're a huge multitasker, you're going to want PDA-functionality, meaning you'll have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's complicated.
Very few people, I feel, will want a bare-bones phone... meaning most will have to go to Apple.com to custom-order it. That's too complicated for most people to do.
So in short, no, I don't think that'll work. Good idea, though. That way you'd get a phone with the features you want without the crap that you don't want. Unfortunately, as far as a particular model of phone goes, it's either all or nothing... and I don't think Apple will want to release 18 different models of phone, each with different capabilities... that's worse than BTO.
-Clive
I agree with you totally on this one, Clive.
The problem with "the masses" out there (especially in the U.S.) is that they are so uneducated, unsophisticated, unsavvy, and generally lazy, that ANY solution that isn't served up to them, lock stock and barrel, on a silver platter, automatically will wind up excluding probably a bit north of 70% of the population, and that might simply be me being a bit generous.
Heck, in this country, people don't even educate themselves enough to know not to put scorchingly-hot coffee between their legs in a fast-food drive-through. And having had five years' experience as tech support at Sony Electronics (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sony_CISC) I can tell you that most people don't know -- and don't want to know -- anything about the devices they use. They've grown up and been raised to simply hand the keys to their lives over to someone else. Otherwise, if they had to actually use their minds and *think* something through, well, they don't have time for all that.
Sorry to rant here a bit, but it's the truth. Heck, I've dealt with that at every retail company I've ever worked at, at least to some extent.
Flying Llama
Jul 22, 03:30 PM
awesome...
I'm just sad we'll never truly be able to say the long awaited:
"Ah, the G5 Powerbooks are here!".
All those G5 PB on tuesday jokes, in vain... :(
It would have been awesome if Apple introduced some, just out of principle. :D
/rant
Can't wait for WWDC!!
--flyingllama
I'm just sad we'll never truly be able to say the long awaited:
"Ah, the G5 Powerbooks are here!".
All those G5 PB on tuesday jokes, in vain... :(
It would have been awesome if Apple introduced some, just out of principle. :D
/rant
Can't wait for WWDC!!
--flyingllama
pmz
Apr 25, 10:12 AM
News Flash:
He's a Liar.
He's a Liar.
Transporteur
Apr 27, 03:39 PM
..so at the BOTTOM of the case there is cool air (at least cooler then on top, since hot air rises), that means if the PSU is on the bottom it gets cool air and expells hot hair out the back of the case (NOT inside the case, meaning NO hot air coming out of the PSU back will stay in the case and get things even hotter).
Since the Mac Pro has separate compartments for the processors, extension cards and PSU / optical drives, it doesn't matter where the PSU is whatsoever!
Since the Mac Pro has separate compartments for the processors, extension cards and PSU / optical drives, it doesn't matter where the PSU is whatsoever!
�algiris
May 4, 03:54 PM
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
IT's very logaical. You do realize that Time Machine gives you a choice to restore from a range of backups, so whichever backup was ok you can restore from that one and if you broke something and after that OS was unbootable usually it's enough to restore from a backup few hours older at worst few days.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
IT's very logaical. You do realize that Time Machine gives you a choice to restore from a range of backups, so whichever backup was ok you can restore from that one and if you broke something and after that OS was unbootable usually it's enough to restore from a backup few hours older at worst few days.
Glideslope
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Leave the jailbreak community alone Apple!! What is your ****ing problem??? Can't we just coexist???:mad:
No.
Tim. :apple:
No.
Tim. :apple:
Benjy91
May 4, 04:10 PM
Just preferred?
That only means an Option right? Still going to be DVD/USB Stick?
Because if it was App Store only, what about people with Leopard or earlier?
That only means an Option right? Still going to be DVD/USB Stick?
Because if it was App Store only, what about people with Leopard or earlier?
rtharper
Sep 10, 11:01 PM
This leaves iPods (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060904073025.shtml), a Movie Store (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906185220.shtml) and the possibility of a new streaming Media device (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060904194920.shtml) for the Tuesday event.
It also leaves the MBP. If it is not updated, I will likely be driven into a mad frenzy where I buy some other brand of laptop. Honestly, the things Apple is forcing me to do...
It also leaves the MBP. If it is not updated, I will likely be driven into a mad frenzy where I buy some other brand of laptop. Honestly, the things Apple is forcing me to do...
jaduffy108
Sep 16, 09:12 PM
Dreaming really (note 1920 res. hack for PB thread here has over 100k views, Apple get a clue!), but hopefully the delay has more to do with better upgrades, vid chip (Nvidia GeForce Go 7900 GTX, 512 MB please), a true HD screen (WQUXGA (http://www.videotechnology.com/0904/formats.html) would be even nicer, 4k res, yeah baby, just the ticket for Leopard and the 17in model), etc. ; than limited supply of Merom's...why put them in the iMac 1st when the profit margin is higher on the MBP's- which are in more need of an early upgrade than the iMac?
Dell already has these features in one of it's expensive laptops (though almost twice as thick, which makes it much easier to implement):
http://www.mobilityguru.com/2006/08/28/see_eurocom_emperor_fly_with_nvidia_sli/page2.html
### I hope you're right about a GO 7900 gtx, but it will shock me. Apple has always had limited choices (if any)...lower performance gpu's in their laptops compared to Dell or Alienware. *I* don't want 1920res...1680 is a nice res.
Dell already has these features in one of it's expensive laptops (though almost twice as thick, which makes it much easier to implement):
http://www.mobilityguru.com/2006/08/28/see_eurocom_emperor_fly_with_nvidia_sli/page2.html
### I hope you're right about a GO 7900 gtx, but it will shock me. Apple has always had limited choices (if any)...lower performance gpu's in their laptops compared to Dell or Alienware. *I* don't want 1920res...1680 is a nice res.