prady16
Sep 15, 05:57 PM
Any idea about the pricing of the new MBPs ?
ihaveNFC
May 7, 03:22 PM
Before the nostalgia wore off? You must mean novelty...
Yes, you're right. Novelty, not nostalgia. My brain is a little fried afta writin my dissertation.
Yes, you're right. Novelty, not nostalgia. My brain is a little fried afta writin my dissertation.
Flowbee
Aug 7, 01:49 PM
Excellent. Now it's time to wait for the sub-$2000 "Pro" desktop announcement. There's a suspicious gap in their lineup. Mac Pro Cube (http://macprocube.com), perhaps?
ten-oak-druid
Apr 7, 11:23 AM
Eventually the ipad will only be 0.1%.
0.1% of the number of documented viruses on tablets that is.
0.1% of the number of documented viruses on tablets that is.
Eidorian
Jul 22, 11:04 AM
Nearly the entire line of majot Apple products is in need of an update.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
DakotaGuy
May 6, 12:10 AM
Moving away from Intel in their notebooks and desktops would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion. Intel is the big dog and they have the resources to keep innovating. I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
wclyffe
Jan 24, 02:37 PM
Ok, so for what it's worth here are my thoughts in using the Magellan Car Kit for a few days. I'll cut to the chase by telling you I'm sending it back. My big complaints are the bluetooth speakerphone is terrible with the volume being so low during phone calls that you have to turn it all the way up, but that's still not high enough. Then when you get Nav directions you have to turn it way down. The mic is very poor and I made about 15-20 calls during, and not during, the Nav software running. The 3.5mm input to connect your stereo system also plays the small bluetooth speaker on the kit at the same time....that is ridiculous, as its a tiny speaker and you cannot drive it like you can your car speakers, plus it does not sound great playing music through it. The good things were in my earlier post...the ability to pop your phone in with the case on, rock solid and better detent positions than the TomTom that do not slip, the Nav chip seems to locate very quickly, and the Nav directions through the speaker are loud and clear. I guess I'm back to waiting for someone to do this right!
Blakjack
Mar 27, 07:02 AM
The rumors talking about the iPad 3 are mostly saying it would be a different model than the current iPad. There's multiple Macbook Pros. Don't be surprised if there are multiple iPads, like an iPad pro.
There are already multiple iPads.....18 of them to be exact. Why would u think Apple would want to add to this already rediculous number. This whole idea about a iPad pro line needs to stop. It doesn't make sense. It's only 2011. Want an iPad pro.....get an AIR.
There are already multiple iPads.....18 of them to be exact. Why would u think Apple would want to add to this already rediculous number. This whole idea about a iPad pro line needs to stop. It doesn't make sense. It's only 2011. Want an iPad pro.....get an AIR.
Kilamite
May 4, 02:44 PM
How would one do a "complete fresh reinstall" by this method? Or will we be able to burn to a disc/USB key?
cooltop
Jan 28, 05:39 PM
I purchased the TOMTOM app early on and paid $99 for it. One week later, I found it posted in the App Store for $49.99 and today, a couple of weeks after that, the price is $59.99. I have searched the App Store site, iTunes Store AND the Apple site and do not understand how to find a Customer Service Link to ask about a refund for the difference in price. Does anyone know how to reach Customer Service for the APP Store? Thanks in advance...
Spoony
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
Android phone owners are iPod owners (at least most are)
Apple's not selling it's 9/10M iPods a quarter to iPhone owners.
Apple gets your money anyway. Why not just buy an iphone and combine purchases?
Free phones are great but not when you buy a 200 dollar iPod anyway.
Buy a 200 dollar iphone and call it a day.
Apple's not selling it's 9/10M iPods a quarter to iPhone owners.
Apple gets your money anyway. Why not just buy an iphone and combine purchases?
Free phones are great but not when you buy a 200 dollar iPod anyway.
Buy a 200 dollar iphone and call it a day.
Chupa Chupa
May 4, 02:52 PM
I think I still prefer a hard copy. If I download then I still have to burn a DVD for backup and emergency boot. I'd rather have a professionally burned copy that is going to be reliable long term.
Also I don't have a big pipe to quickly download a 3GB package. I'm living in the slow lane here w/ 2mbps DSL.
Also I don't have a big pipe to quickly download a 3GB package. I'm living in the slow lane here w/ 2mbps DSL.
Apple Corps
Jul 21, 02:20 PM
I posted this very early on:
World Wrestling Entertainment
Mexican legend Sin Cara has an
Wwe+wrestler+sin+cara
sin cara wrestler no mask.
John Cena and Sin Cara
when sin cara wrestling
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.
ariza910
Aug 11, 12:43 PM
Yes, actualy all the worlds puppies will die
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
powers74
May 6, 08:12 AM
So they can customize/design their own chips. I've been predicting this for years now.
bendejo
Aug 4, 12:30 PM
I'm waiting for the Core 2 processors to come out as well. I'm finally replacing my 664MHz P-III (you read that right) that I surf the web with at home. Got my better half to agree to an upgrade, and almost pulled the trigger about 3 weeks ago, but thought I'd wait for the Core 2 Duo iMac to be introduced. That should mean cheaper Core Duo iMacs for me...
I'm in the same boat (but upgrading from a 867MHz TiBook). I figure if there's no iMac introduced, I pull the trigger on getting a refurb iMac core duo. Same thing if there's a new iMac with minor improvements. I'm thinking that for my home office work that I am going to be using this for (heavy on managing large PDFs and Word files and needing Windows for some VPN stuff with an office database that won't work on Mac, but no graphic design stuff) a Merom core 2 duo would be nice but not necessarily worth the extra money. I figure I might as well wait though because (a) if there's a new iMac then the refurb price on the core duo will probably drop a little; and (b) though the chances are small, there may be a revamping of the entire Mac line, including the iMac, that would make me smack myself on the forehead for not waiting a week or 2.
I'm in the same boat (but upgrading from a 867MHz TiBook). I figure if there's no iMac introduced, I pull the trigger on getting a refurb iMac core duo. Same thing if there's a new iMac with minor improvements. I'm thinking that for my home office work that I am going to be using this for (heavy on managing large PDFs and Word files and needing Windows for some VPN stuff with an office database that won't work on Mac, but no graphic design stuff) a Merom core 2 duo would be nice but not necessarily worth the extra money. I figure I might as well wait though because (a) if there's a new iMac then the refurb price on the core duo will probably drop a little; and (b) though the chances are small, there may be a revamping of the entire Mac line, including the iMac, that would make me smack myself on the forehead for not waiting a week or 2.
Whozown
Apr 5, 04:55 PM
2010 - Apple Loses #1 Mobile OS spot to Android OS
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
finalcut
Apr 20, 05:58 AM
if the faster processor is the only upgrade, then I wont change my iphone 4 to 5 just like I did from 3G to 3GS. My wife will just wait more on my iphone 4 hehe
Piggie
Apr 25, 04:43 AM
This is for a development in the future and the cost may not go up.
Apple usually outwaits developments until the cost fall into their range.
BTW: I do find it funny that you want to fault Apple for "gaming" a field that they clearly did not want to be in.
BTW2: The iMac for the masses is a clever space saving design. Their sales success shows it!
The Pro type tower boxes with separate monitor are just big clunky boxes.
They take up desk space or are usually hidden under the desk.
Also, in any good design Form follows Function. Apple follows that principle well and then some.
The secret of excellent design is actually what is not there:-)
Well, we will have to disagree there :)
I think Apple puts form/Style above function, and will make a device that does not work very well, or is comfortable/practical for a human to use, simply so that it looks cool and people want to buy it.
Apple usually outwaits developments until the cost fall into their range.
BTW: I do find it funny that you want to fault Apple for "gaming" a field that they clearly did not want to be in.
BTW2: The iMac for the masses is a clever space saving design. Their sales success shows it!
The Pro type tower boxes with separate monitor are just big clunky boxes.
They take up desk space or are usually hidden under the desk.
Also, in any good design Form follows Function. Apple follows that principle well and then some.
The secret of excellent design is actually what is not there:-)
Well, we will have to disagree there :)
I think Apple puts form/Style above function, and will make a device that does not work very well, or is comfortable/practical for a human to use, simply so that it looks cool and people want to buy it.
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 10:26 AM
I'd rather have Apple ( or ANY company for that matter ) compete rather than having it throttle its competition.
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple has competition, Apple. When your products have reached market saturation, your only sales are people upgrading to the newest model. Apple must make the 2012 iPad better than the or they will stagnate and die. RIM, Google and Microsoft are not factors. (If Apple ever fails to compete to the level RIM or Microsoft are factors, they will have bigger problems.)
Do you really want Apple to have no competition? Oh, I wouldn't be surprised if this starts affecting a lot of Apple's competitors, for a prolonged period of time - various countries would start to look at Apple regarding its competition laws.
Apple has competition, Apple. When your products have reached market saturation, your only sales are people upgrading to the newest model. Apple must make the 2012 iPad better than the or they will stagnate and die. RIM, Google and Microsoft are not factors. (If Apple ever fails to compete to the level RIM or Microsoft are factors, they will have bigger problems.)
hulugu
Apr 18, 02:50 AM
Hello all, I just wanted to make another point about capital gains. Capital gains are applied to the "profits" from sale of something you bought. As I mentioned earlier about inflation, the government could choose to create money rather than impose an income tax. Everyone would keep the money the government would have taken, but that money simply won't go as far because the difference in purchasing power will appear in inflation. So, what does this have to do with capital gains? Well, if I buy a gold coin for $1000 and then sell it for $1500 a couple years later, I would be subject to a capital gains tax. But I didn't really gain anything. As gold critics often say, gold just sits there and doesn't produce anything. What has changed is the value of the dollar, which has fallen because the government has diluted the money supply. This is the reason the stock market is going up, not because the economy is improving.
If you bought an apple on Monday (your cost basis) and, before you bite into it on Wednesday (the point at which you realize gain), the price of apples go up, should you have to pay a tax on the difference?
This tells us that capital gains might be flawed, but it still a way to account for a kind of income. I do freelance work and thus I get paid sometimes months after the initial work. I don't get to charge more if the dollar has fallen, or less if the dollar has gained. Why should my investments be accounted for differently than my freelance work?
If you bought an apple on Monday (your cost basis) and, before you bite into it on Wednesday (the point at which you realize gain), the price of apples go up, should you have to pay a tax on the difference?
This tells us that capital gains might be flawed, but it still a way to account for a kind of income. I do freelance work and thus I get paid sometimes months after the initial work. I don't get to charge more if the dollar has fallen, or less if the dollar has gained. Why should my investments be accounted for differently than my freelance work?
gnasher729
Apr 7, 11:55 AM
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
prominence
Nov 12, 08:48 AM
So now BTL says that the shipment is coming in on 12-2. What happend to 11-11? How do you all feel about this? I personally am not sure if I should cancel or not.
You know, I was a lil mad at first when I saw that, but the facts are that Apple wasn't going to ship theirs until Nov 25th with a Dec 2nd estimated arrival date, and for saving $40.00 I'm willing to wait a few extra days.
And at this point.. like the previous poster said.. $87.00 is worth it for me when regular mounts without anything are around $40, so $87 is decent for bluetooth, GPS chip and cool look/setup.. however $120 ($130 when adding in tax) just isn't worth it in my opinion.
You know, I was a lil mad at first when I saw that, but the facts are that Apple wasn't going to ship theirs until Nov 25th with a Dec 2nd estimated arrival date, and for saving $40.00 I'm willing to wait a few extra days.
And at this point.. like the previous poster said.. $87.00 is worth it for me when regular mounts without anything are around $40, so $87 is decent for bluetooth, GPS chip and cool look/setup.. however $120 ($130 when adding in tax) just isn't worth it in my opinion.