vincenz
Apr 9, 11:34 PM
I can't drive stick, but I really want to learn one day. They look like fun when not in traffic.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 16, 09:26 PM
Just wait and see. I bet the only new thing we'll see is iPod Nano's getting more storage. As for the replacment of the iPod Video. Just a bigger screen.
Sounds pretty likely to happen, like a large percentage of the people here I am waiting for the next updates of the iPods before I buy.
Sounds pretty likely to happen, like a large percentage of the people here I am waiting for the next updates of the iPods before I buy.
vaderhater245
Mar 18, 03:41 AM
just started back up on team MR with my GTX 260 equipped PC(play) running 24/7. Don't trust my i5 iMac(work) enough to run it 24/7.
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
edit: seems that im getting about 8k ppd between a E6750 OC @ 3.4 and GTX 260 Core 216. Normal or not?
Already at 481st place too, this team needs a comeback!
Eduardo1971
Mar 24, 01:26 PM
"iMac! iMac! iMac!"
Yup-I want to buy my first iMac! Can't wait for the upcoming refresh.
Yup-I want to buy my first iMac! Can't wait for the upcoming refresh.
bigandy
Jul 14, 03:10 AM
a BTO option would be great.
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
i'd pop one in if i could afford it- it would be damn useful considering the amount of data i need to archive making films... :rolleyes:
MacinDoc
Oct 23, 08:30 PM
hmmm - lots of stuff (santa rosa MacBook Pros of course :p ).
I#39;ve Go Bieber Fever
i have ieber fever wallpaper.
justin ieber fever wallpaper.
Bieberin pictures ieber on
+ieber+silicone+racelets
ieber fever wallpaper.
+justin+ieber+racelets
ieber fever wallpaper.
set justin ieber bracelets
were Bieber+fever+pictures
Turquoise rubber racelet
know Purple+justin+ieber+
peapody
Nov 28, 09:20 AM
Well that MBA didn't last too long. How come you're bailing on it?
I didn't even open the MBA to be honest. Bailing because it was $1500 haha. And I just couldn't bring myself to have a second computer that is that price with those specs. And I have a feeling in my bones that the resale value will suck on the first gen 11.6".
I didn't even open the MBA to be honest. Bailing because it was $1500 haha. And I just couldn't bring myself to have a second computer that is that price with those specs. And I have a feeling in my bones that the resale value will suck on the first gen 11.6".
skiltrip
Oct 10, 03:50 PM
I disagree. After all, its in the USA and shipping times are slashed. I bought a couple iPhone cases and whenever I've had issues with the case, they always solved it. I can't say the same about sellers from Hong Kong that just don't care.
For the record, I've had a couple Hong Kong cases I wasn't happy with and I was issued pretty prompt refunds for them with no need to return it.
For the record, I've had a couple Hong Kong cases I wasn't happy with and I was issued pretty prompt refunds for them with no need to return it.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:46 AM
The way CR seems to approach it (and I might have to reread their article that they keep changing and updating and reaffirming and I lost interest a while ago) is as if they approached a computer review like this:
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
rdowns
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
At my base they picket outside of the entrance gates every thursday. And all military members are to take a different entrance to avoid getting hurt. They have signs saying horrible comments and they attack you and your vehicle. Yes they get arrested if they attack anything, but at least 1 gets hurt a week. As for funerals somehow they find out where they are and play music, throw a party, cause a nascence basically to ruin the moment of memory and putting someone to rest.
How about a link?
Busted. The IT company owner who happens to serve in the military at the same time. Busy life.
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
So two questions (I will try to write out as best as I can, hopefully it's understandable).
1: Is it possible that while I am on a business trip with my laptop that if I needed to access my network at work that I can remotely access it to view computers on the network with abilities to grab files from a computer, check things / alter things, and maintain. If so how?
2: If someone is on my network is it possible to see what traffic they are bringing in or out of my network without installing a file on their pc / mac to know the site they entered, file download, etc.
Thanks team.
How about a link?
Busted. The IT company owner who happens to serve in the military at the same time. Busy life.
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
So two questions (I will try to write out as best as I can, hopefully it's understandable).
1: Is it possible that while I am on a business trip with my laptop that if I needed to access my network at work that I can remotely access it to view computers on the network with abilities to grab files from a computer, check things / alter things, and maintain. If so how?
2: If someone is on my network is it possible to see what traffic they are bringing in or out of my network without installing a file on their pc / mac to know the site they entered, file download, etc.
Thanks team.
Macula
Jan 11, 10:28 PM
In colloquial modern Greek, "air" is metaphorically a price premium one pays for hype.
Sinister.
Sinister.
Xavier
Nov 27, 02:40 PM
I wouldn't mind this happening! I have been stuck with a 15 inch (not even wide screen) for a long time, but being low budget, haven't been able to afford the models I wanted. I hope that Apple produces this
Fiveos22
Aug 6, 09:52 PM
Nothing they haven't done before. Like the "Redmond, start your photocopiers" thing for Tiger. And Redmond did exactly that, it seems. ;)
--Eric
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
http://www.preshaa.com/archive/work/ninja.jpg
/ninja'd!
//sorry, I had to
--Eric
They did at WWDC '04 (when Tiger was introduced) with slogans like "Redmond, Start Your Photocopiers" and the word "Longhorn" in the Spotlight search field. ;)
http://www.preshaa.com/archive/work/ninja.jpg
/ninja'd!
//sorry, I had to
Caris
Feb 20, 03:36 PM
Mila Kunis.
MacMan86
Apr 24, 01:22 PM
Here is a thought ... suppose when the police pull you over and figure they can wrap up a case by using the info they download from your phone and the make of car you are driving.
Defense lawyers are not cheap :cool:
And then what? The police know where you've been driving - what's the big deal? If it proves you weren't near the scene of a crime, well then that's definitely good. It if proves you were, then all it proves is you were nearby - not that you actually did anything.
Here in the UK, we often hear about drivers who've had car accidents, the police have dug up the person's phone records and discovered they were sending a text message just before the accident occurred. Seems to me to be a great way to catch people who aren't paying attention to the road and punishing them. What's the big difference here if the police know where you've been?
Defense lawyers are not cheap :cool:
And then what? The police know where you've been driving - what's the big deal? If it proves you weren't near the scene of a crime, well then that's definitely good. It if proves you were, then all it proves is you were nearby - not that you actually did anything.
Here in the UK, we often hear about drivers who've had car accidents, the police have dug up the person's phone records and discovered they were sending a text message just before the accident occurred. Seems to me to be a great way to catch people who aren't paying attention to the road and punishing them. What's the big difference here if the police know where you've been?
JGowan
May 2, 04:55 PM
I'm afraid this might be confusing for some users - Launch Pad and iOS like behavior for MAS applications and 'old' way of doing things for none MAS applications ... doesn't sound very consistent - I hope they clean that inconsistency up for the final version.MAS? The Muslim American Society? The Municipal Art Society of NY? Malaysia Airlines? Monetary Authority of Singapore?
Confused :confused::confused::confused:
Confused :confused::confused::confused:
adamjay
Apr 8, 11:18 PM
Fact is Pcs are running away from Mac and when a 500 dollar machine kicks a new $2000 Imac .
yea show me a PC Box with a 17" to 20" LCD, and comparable spec's as the imac that costs $500 total? and don't even spit some BS about framerates in Halo.
you have to be smart to be a smart-ass.
yea show me a PC Box with a 17" to 20" LCD, and comparable spec's as the imac that costs $500 total? and don't even spit some BS about framerates in Halo.
you have to be smart to be a smart-ass.
Earendil
Nov 27, 06:02 PM
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
justin ieber fever wallpaper.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
BC2009
Oct 24, 01:24 AM
Ditto for me. I can't believe I waffled between 3GS, HTC Incredible, and iPhone 4. With 3GS 30% of my calls were dropped, with iPhone 4, 0%. Had it since July 5.
And remarkably Consumer Reports recommended the 3GS. Which drops more calls just like other smart phones drop calls. What CR did was take advantage of the media hysteria and jumped on the bandwagon with a review that would put them in the spotlight. I would respect them much more if they did not recommend previous model iPhones that got worse reception.
But their biased unprofessional review with the reviewer's little demonstration with the masking tape showed their bias and intent. They were simply out to take advantage of an opportunity to take wall street's favorite child down in order to get the spotlight.
Where was the "non-recommendation" on the first review that rated the iPhone-4 as the best phone ever? That was when it was popular in the media to praise apple - before antenna-gate. CR came off on this one like a politician wavering with public opinion. I always expected CR to uncover issues with products, not simply ride the media public opinion wave or worse to publish fiction to sell their subscriptions.
And remarkably Consumer Reports recommended the 3GS. Which drops more calls just like other smart phones drop calls. What CR did was take advantage of the media hysteria and jumped on the bandwagon with a review that would put them in the spotlight. I would respect them much more if they did not recommend previous model iPhones that got worse reception.
But their biased unprofessional review with the reviewer's little demonstration with the masking tape showed their bias and intent. They were simply out to take advantage of an opportunity to take wall street's favorite child down in order to get the spotlight.
Where was the "non-recommendation" on the first review that rated the iPhone-4 as the best phone ever? That was when it was popular in the media to praise apple - before antenna-gate. CR came off on this one like a politician wavering with public opinion. I always expected CR to uncover issues with products, not simply ride the media public opinion wave or worse to publish fiction to sell their subscriptions.
danielwsmithee
Nov 29, 03:32 PM
Yes, support for more formats and codecs than iTunes currently plays friendly with would be welcome.You know I originally thought that, but I kind of like the way it works now. I would much rather have a few codecs that work very well. Then play everything under the sun just not very well.
milo
Aug 29, 12:31 PM
ALL desktop machines......
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
Apple posted their 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml
That was before the Pro shipped, it's a safe bet since it's released desktop numbers have gone up. And that's just one quarter, I doubt desktop numbers have been on the decline for the last twelve months.
shawnce
Nov 16, 10:57 AM
Zune is dead, Windows is dead...face it.
*rolls eyes*
*rolls eyes*
nagromme
Sep 14, 11:57 AM
Consumer Reports is making five mistakes:
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
1. Not doing full-scale testing of the kind antenna engineers have called them out on. They’ve done informal testing—quick and easy, but not the full useful facts their readers deserve. Yes, that kind of testing would need some really expensive facilities and lots of time. So they should at least point out that their tests are very limited and may be misleading.
2. Not publishing stats on how many users actually lose calls over this. They do surveys all the time—how about one comparing the iPhone 4 to other phones in actual use? (Most of the iPhone 4 antenna complaints seem to come from people who don’t own one!)
3. Criticizing only the iPhone, not other phones, for losing signal when gripped wrong. (Which all phones clearly do. Some more, some less. Many of them tell you right in the manual not to “hold it that way!")
4. Exaggerating the problem. Putting a very rare and minor issue, that affects so few, ahead of so many positives that affect everyone: benefits no other phone can touch. How are their flaws (which no case can fix) vs. the iPhone acceptable? And does CR clearly state that they DO recommend the iPhone for case users—which is a huge (maybe the largest) group of phone users?
5. Standing on their ego (or worrying misguidedly about their reputation) and not refining their position when that is clearly called for. Black-and-white controversial simplicity sells mindshare and magazines. But it doesn’t reflect reality, and CR readers deserve better. CR should be willing to back down when they’ve gone too far. Example: “The iPhone 4’s antenna flaws are rarely an issue and it’s the best smartphone we reviewed. But because we don’t know what each buyer will experience, we are only able to fully recommend the iPhone 4 if you also use a case. Luckily, Apple will continue to supply one free of charge on request, so this antenna issue need not affect your calls nor your wallet."
I only trust CR’s large-scale survey data (they seem to be good at that) not their editorial content. They’ve consitently failed to note Apple’s legitimate strengths over the years (ever see an article helping the everyday buyer choose between OS X and Windows?) but never fail to make something out the negatives. That’s not helping an uninformed reader become informed. And it really does seem like an anti-Apple bias sometimes.
That is precisely what auto manufacturers do. They send a letter to every owner, and fix the problem, whether or not the owner has reported it.
And that kind of preventive mass action makes sense for a product that holds peoples’ lives in its hands every moment of use.
It’s absurd to suggest that Apple should “fix” a problem as though it were widespread, when it’s not. Fixing it when it IS a problem is all that is necessary. And then let the non-iPhone users continue to moan about how bad Apple is treating us contented iPhone users :D They believe a blog wildfire over actual user experience—or at least they enjoy fanning the wildfire?
Eidorian
Aug 25, 12:09 PM
CPU temp is a result of how efficient the heat dissipation is relative to the heat generated by the CPU... so without knowing how the heat dissipation capabilities varied between the two systems you cannot make much of a judgement on the CPU itself.
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
The first generation iMac G5 had worse heat dissipating capabilities then later revisions of the iMac G5.Oh I can be sure that a Conroe placed in an iMac will run into the volume constraints and effective heat dissipation of the heat sink when compared to a full blown BTX tower.
The original G5 and the Rev. B (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/IMacG5guts.png) stuck with the wonderful heat channel. The 17" models ran a lot hotter then the 20" due to the internal design and volume.
The Rev. C (http://www.xlr8yourmac.com/systems/imac_isight_internals/imac_g5_isight_inside.html) and Intel use similar internal layouts with the CPU and power supply toward the top of the machine.
Here (http://www.flickr.com/photos/inju/88928219/) is a good comparison.
No comments:
Post a Comment