gorjan
Mar 31, 02:49 PM
I have 2 friends with android, one with an HTC and one with Samsung Galaxy S.
They have different OS versions since they aren't able to update it, they get crap bugs and error in almost every software they use. I say to one of them to update to lastest version, he told me he can't because he need to do it from "root"... i don't know, but at least i was able to install WhatsApp on their phones, the only thing i care :-P Naturally they are using their device at minimum, few software and one of them neither have 3G connection. When we are at pub, they all use my iPhone for browsing and gaming (sigh) as always has been.
This is exactly why I sold my Samsung Galaxy S the other day and purchased an iPhone. The Samsung crashed all the time and it was slow to the unbearable!
They have different OS versions since they aren't able to update it, they get crap bugs and error in almost every software they use. I say to one of them to update to lastest version, he told me he can't because he need to do it from "root"... i don't know, but at least i was able to install WhatsApp on their phones, the only thing i care :-P Naturally they are using their device at minimum, few software and one of them neither have 3G connection. When we are at pub, they all use my iPhone for browsing and gaming (sigh) as always has been.
This is exactly why I sold my Samsung Galaxy S the other day and purchased an iPhone. The Samsung crashed all the time and it was slow to the unbearable!
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 10:51 AM
You know, Sony and Nintendo are just *SO* behind the curve with next gen gaming systems.
Microsoft has had it's XBox 360 out for MONTHS, while Sony and Nintendo gamers are lagging behind, barely able to function on their PS2s and GameCubes.
If Sony and Nintendo don't release the PS3 and Wii, respectively, in the next week, they'll be the laughing stocks of the industry. There's no excuse for them to release their next gen gaming systems a year after their competitor.
I'm going to hold my breath until I turn blue if I don't get what I want, because I'm childish like that.
Microsoft has had it's XBox 360 out for MONTHS, while Sony and Nintendo gamers are lagging behind, barely able to function on their PS2s and GameCubes.
If Sony and Nintendo don't release the PS3 and Wii, respectively, in the next week, they'll be the laughing stocks of the industry. There's no excuse for them to release their next gen gaming systems a year after their competitor.
I'm going to hold my breath until I turn blue if I don't get what I want, because I'm childish like that.
MacsRgr8
Aug 5, 04:02 PM
Me excited too! :)
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 02:11 PM
Of course, had the case been deemed totally unfounded by Apple Legal and their bunch of advisors, it wouldn't have been brought to court at all.
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
At the same time, if there is any chance that the case has some merit, a company will sue for sure, if points 1 and 2 above are not considered to do more damage than good.
There is probably some merit to some of the claims, so are probably more ambitious and some are probably completely sure to get thrown out. The thing is, the more claims they throw in there the better they have a footing for eventual settlement negotiations.
Just like you never open with your lowest price, you never open with only the claims you are 100% sure are going to win. ;)
AngryCorgi
Apr 6, 04:16 PM
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I'll give you some insight into their potential. The desktop i7-2600k has been benchmarked to be roughly equivalent to a 9400m in performance (assuming similar CPU).
i7-2600k GPU clock = 850/1350 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2410m (13" Mac Pro base) GPU clock = 650/1200 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2620m (13" Mac Pro upg) GPU clock = 650/1300 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i5-2537m (theorized 11/13 MBA) GPU clock = 350/900 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
i7-2649m (theorized 13 MBA upg) GPU clock = 500/1100 (normal/turbo)(MHz)
As you can see, none of the mobile GPUs run quite as fast as the desktop, but the 13" 2.7GHz upg cpu's comes fairly close. Now, the 2.13 GHz MBA + 320m combo matched or beat out the i7-2620m in 75% of the tests (and only narrowly was defeated in 25%). There is going to be some random inconcistancy regardless, due to driver variances in different apps. The issue here is (and this can be shown in core2 vs. i5/i7 testing on the alienware m11x) the core2 duo really very rarely gets beat by the i5/i7 in gaming/video playback. This is because not many games are single-threaded anymore, and if using 2+ threads, the i5/i7 ULV won't jump the clock speed any. Further, the 2.13GHz was keeping up with and beating a 2.7GHz (27% higher clock!) in that test, because graphics are the bottleneck, not the CPU. Take into account that NONE of the ULV core-i options match the MBP 13" 2.7GHz upg GPU speed and its pretty clear that for graphics-intensive apps, the older 320m would be the way to go. Now for most everything else, the i7-2649m would overtake the core2 2.13GHz. This includes a lot of non-accelerated video playback (high-CPU-overhead).
Something you guys need to be wary of is the 1333MHz memory topic. Likely, Apple will choose to run it down at 1066MHz to conserve battery life. Memory speed hikes = gratuitous battery drain.
I for one am happy Apple is growing with the modern tech, but I hold no illusions as to the benefits/drawbacks of either system.
I WAS the one
Mar 23, 06:44 AM
Let's the game begin.... Nothing will be greater than the iPad unless they make an iOS based Tablet.
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:57 AM
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
Woah! That's a scrary thought. ;)
Woah! That's a scrary thought. ;)
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 07:50 PM
Puggles,
Exactly my plan.
Exactly my plan.
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 06:29 PM
Alright, I was originally going to take Apple's side on this, since I could clearly see it looks a lot like iOS, but having looked at Samsung's F700, I don' think Apple has any right to sue..
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
Although the Samsung F700 has very simple icons, Apple clearly has the same placement of icons, even looking at the bottom you find the four dock like icons..
http://img263.imageshack.us/img263/9559/samsungf700cellular.jpg
I'd say that Apple copied Samsung :P.. Honestly I'm not one to take sides just because I like Apple Products, I just think its wrong to sue since Samsung clearly had this type of UI first.. Apple has no right to sue..
Which launched 6 months after the original iPhone...and was displayed in February of 2007 with an entirely different interface.
jne381
Aug 7, 05:27 PM
I think the improvements to OSX are all well and good, I do think Time Machine will be valued in my home, but it is hard to get excited because 10.4 still seems so new to me. I'm sure I don't even know a lot of the cool things it does.
I was hoping for more in the way of hardware. The MacPro seem fine, even though no new case. WHat is he deal with no new displays, but they did drop the prices a little. I think the iPod is long overdue at this point for a makeover. I guess I'm just a victim of my own unfulfilled expectations.
I was hoping for more in the way of hardware. The MacPro seem fine, even though no new case. WHat is he deal with no new displays, but they did drop the prices a little. I think the iPod is long overdue at this point for a makeover. I guess I'm just a victim of my own unfulfilled expectations.
addicted44
Mar 31, 02:31 PM
Doesn't mean he's not right on this one.
He's moved to the Anger stage, after entering the Denial stage on the Honeycomb fiasco.
He's moved to the Anger stage, after entering the Denial stage on the Honeycomb fiasco.
The Beatles
Apr 12, 02:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
asphalt-proof
Aug 11, 02:45 PM
I really want Apple to make an iPhone and have it available by Christmas. I am so ready to dump my Treo. My question is, will it be MS exchange compatible (this is assuming its a PDA phone.) The work-world is addicted to Exchange and it would make sense to have it compatible. Oh well, if wishes were fishes....
tortoise
Aug 7, 06:14 PM
Why not just improve the Backup program that comes with .Mac or include it for free? Do we really need another interface? To me it looks like form over function.
You are out of your mind. A true versioning file system is insanely useful, and has been a Holy Grail file system feature that has not existed largely because it requires some significant unused disk space and disk performance to use it -- it is not a cheap feature to implement. Once you have it and applications start to use its functionality it will be like the internet: you will wonder how you got on in the computer world without it.
I do not care how they presented it, if it works as advertised then it is a "killer app" that will cause many people to part with their hard-earned money (myself included).
You are out of your mind. A true versioning file system is insanely useful, and has been a Holy Grail file system feature that has not existed largely because it requires some significant unused disk space and disk performance to use it -- it is not a cheap feature to implement. Once you have it and applications start to use its functionality it will be like the internet: you will wonder how you got on in the computer world without it.
I do not care how they presented it, if it works as advertised then it is a "killer app" that will cause many people to part with their hard-earned money (myself included).
Kilamite
Apr 12, 03:09 PM
What's the UK time?
3am.
3am.
swingerofbirch
Aug 7, 07:07 PM
I have two questions.
Do you think that one of the top secret features they didn't show was a unified interface? Because the UIs they showed looked just as hodge-podged as Tiger, ie iCal and Finder still brushed metal and Mail is still plastic. They talk about Microsoft copying Aqua, but I can't think of one app that is aqua anymore! What does Aqua look like?
Second, did the developers get a beta of Leopard? If so, won't we be hearing about whatever top secret features they didn't show? Surely one of the 4200 is a snitch!
Do you think that one of the top secret features they didn't show was a unified interface? Because the UIs they showed looked just as hodge-podged as Tiger, ie iCal and Finder still brushed metal and Mail is still plastic. They talk about Microsoft copying Aqua, but I can't think of one app that is aqua anymore! What does Aqua look like?
Second, did the developers get a beta of Leopard? If so, won't we be hearing about whatever top secret features they didn't show? Surely one of the 4200 is a snitch!
BlizzardBomb
Aug 27, 09:49 AM
Well for one thing, Apple doesn't pay street prices. iMacs will only have 2 cores until Kentsfield. So I think it's fair to expct aggressive Conroe speed in the iMac due to the 2 core limitation. iMacs need to be about the same speed as Mac Pros because they only have 2 cores.
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
All pricing of chips are quoted in bulks of 1000s. And does it matter whether its street pricing or not because Apple still has to fork out an extra 30% for the CPU (+ logic board redesign costs).
princealfie
Nov 29, 08:58 AM
Time for Apple to change the paradigm again. I think it's time for Apple to start putting together a music production house. Offer musicians the ability to go direct to iTunes with all the marketing necessary to promote their catalogs. I'm not very familiar with the music industry, but I "think" Apple is quite prepared to create their own studios, handle their own promotion/marketing and already have a HIGHLY efficient distribution system in place. Granted, they are not supposed to be creating music according to their Apple Music agreement, but if they just bought Apple Music outright it would make a great fit, eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
B
Perhaps we need to have a iTube website eh?
JGowan
Aug 6, 07:25 PM
It won't be a live video stream. In the afternoon Apple will begin streaming a compressed HD recording of it. I guess you'll have to go to a terrestrial café system. Have you complained to your Satellite provider?
I know it won't be live, but that's ok -- I just hate missing a Steve keynote -- I've watching them for several years now...
It's the streams I can't get w/the satellite internet. What exactly is a terrestrial café system? (And I haven't complained... this Apple stream thing is the only thing I've not been able to view... everything else works fine so I don't know what the deal is.
I know it won't be live, but that's ok -- I just hate missing a Steve keynote -- I've watching them for several years now...
It's the streams I can't get w/the satellite internet. What exactly is a terrestrial café system? (And I haven't complained... this Apple stream thing is the only thing I've not been able to view... everything else works fine so I don't know what the deal is.
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
DeBeere
Nov 28, 06:26 PM
And I don't understand why they should...Can somebody explain it?
SC68Cal
Sep 19, 12:49 AM
im glad i bought just the other day, itll be within the 14 day return period. i know some people have said they are able to get the restocking fee waived. any tips on this?
I'm almost tempted if they come out with a Merom update. I purchased mine yesterday so I might be in the 14 day period. But, do I really feel like setting up all my stuff all over again? for a 10% increase in speed?
I'm almost tempted if they come out with a Merom update. I purchased mine yesterday so I might be in the 14 day period. But, do I really feel like setting up all my stuff all over again? for a 10% increase in speed?
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 05:21 PM
The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware.
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 04:13 AM
You can condemn me to Hell if you want to, I'm still gonna bump uglies with my girlfriend.
On another note, please join us in the 21st century. Why is it so important to you what other people do? Wouldn't it be very crowded in Heaven if everyone did as you said?
I have no right to condemn anyone to hell.
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
On another note, please join us in the 21st century. Why is it so important to you what other people do? Wouldn't it be very crowded in Heaven if everyone did as you said?
I have no right to condemn anyone to hell.
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
0 comments:
Post a Comment