asdf542
Apr 22, 12:44 PM
If you make the MBP thinner, it will just be a big MBA.
The right way is to make bigger MBAs, not to make thinner MBPs.
A more powerful competitor to 15" Zacate netbooks.
Uhh, no, it won't. As long as the logic board is at the thickest point then they will be able to house the same power components as the current Pro.
Making the Pro thinner and removing the optical drive does not make a big MBA. Not in the slightest.
The right way is to make bigger MBAs, not to make thinner MBPs.
A more powerful competitor to 15" Zacate netbooks.
Uhh, no, it won't. As long as the logic board is at the thickest point then they will be able to house the same power components as the current Pro.
Making the Pro thinner and removing the optical drive does not make a big MBA. Not in the slightest.
kdarling
Apr 20, 10:56 AM
I was just about to post the same thing; the application says that it couldn't find the consolidated.db file. I even tried syncing my iPhone once more and it still didn't help. An interesting note though - I own a Verizon iPhone. I wonder if that has anything to do with it.
You're right, they say that the Verizon CDMA phone doesn't keep the log.
Okay, then it's a log of GSM cells that the phone sees and/or connects to.
The question is, where does it get the location data from? Either the phone has a complete cell id database internally, or it's using GPS, or it has to go out on the network and ask Apple's cell id servers for the location.
The researchers claim neither GPS nor network data is being used, so there would have to be an internal database, which I've never heard of. Something is missing.
You're right, they say that the Verizon CDMA phone doesn't keep the log.
Okay, then it's a log of GSM cells that the phone sees and/or connects to.
The question is, where does it get the location data from? Either the phone has a complete cell id database internally, or it's using GPS, or it has to go out on the network and ask Apple's cell id servers for the location.
The researchers claim neither GPS nor network data is being used, so there would have to be an internal database, which I've never heard of. Something is missing.
Cameront9
Aug 24, 12:35 AM
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
cube
Apr 24, 07:00 AM
AMD E-350's CPU is noticeably worse than the C2Ds in MBAs. It is better than Atom but can't fight against Intel's premium CPUs, especially if we take Sandy Bridge into consideration. The IGP is wonderful though.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
But one must not overhype Llano because it still uses a Stars+ core. Bulldozer Fusion is not coming until next year.
So, we'll see.
Llano will hopefully change this since Zacate is meant for netbook and other cheap laptops. Llano will hopefully bring low-voltage chips meant for ultraportables like MBA. So far there are no news though.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4023/the-brazos-performance-preview-amd-e350-benchmarked
But one must not overhype Llano because it still uses a Stars+ core. Bulldozer Fusion is not coming until next year.
So, we'll see.
7on
Sep 8, 09:12 AM
Ok so in other words you DON'T need a Core 2 Duo to run Leopard, right?
Right.
Leopard will at the very least run on 2004 era macs and most likely all the way back to 2001.
Right.
Leopard will at the very least run on 2004 era macs and most likely all the way back to 2001.
meb91
Mar 22, 03:05 PM
Please bring back the 24"! 21" - too small. 27" - too big. 24" - just right!
I'm sticking with my 24" Core2Duo until a new 24" model is released.
I use a 24" Dell monitor alongside my 27" iMac, and physically the 27" is hardly any bigger. The main difference is that the 27" is much higher resolution, but that's a useful for fitting more on the screen.
I'm sticking with my 24" Core2Duo until a new 24" model is released.
I use a 24" Dell monitor alongside my 27" iMac, and physically the 27" is hardly any bigger. The main difference is that the 27" is much higher resolution, but that's a useful for fitting more on the screen.
Kaibelf
Apr 19, 10:42 AM
So what? They're already getting sued by Apple, so what's another lawsuit? Point is, contract breach or not, Samsung could cripple Apple's whole ecosystem within days by halting all processor shipments. Apple makes the vast majority on iDevices and this would kill Apple's whole economic model. And this doesn't even account for Samsungs components that go into their Macs. As a result, Apple would have no hardware to sell. They would dip into their treasure chest. It could be devastating to Apple.
And then Apple would ruin Samsung, cratering them with winning lawsuits. Also, Samsung would lose their reputation in the supply chain as well as their credibility, and it would likely damage the Korean economy as a whole, and South Korea politically as well. You're talking about one company causing problems for tens of millions of consumers, and a mountain of negative news. If Samsung wanted to be bankrupted within a decade, this would be a way, for sure.
And then Apple would ruin Samsung, cratering them with winning lawsuits. Also, Samsung would lose their reputation in the supply chain as well as their credibility, and it would likely damage the Korean economy as a whole, and South Korea politically as well. You're talking about one company causing problems for tens of millions of consumers, and a mountain of negative news. If Samsung wanted to be bankrupted within a decade, this would be a way, for sure.
PlaceofDis
Oct 12, 02:44 PM
kinda looks like a Target iPod Nano, no? :p
Popeye206
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I fall into the "who cares" category.
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
Piggie
Apr 15, 02:40 PM
You have to admit this thread is really funny.
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
How many times have we heard Apple lovers say it's not all about "specs" and the general public are not interested in "specs" and rubbish others when they say how much better spec their PC might be.
And yet, now that Apple has the high specs, all of a sudden THIS IS the most important thing.
No average consumer is ever going to notice the difference between USB3 and Thunderbolt, in fact USB3 will be better for the general user experience as it's backwards compatible.
But now, sod the typical consumer, the only thing that matters now is specs.
Oh, you have to laugh don't you :D
thadgarrison
Sep 19, 03:30 PM
I think this is a result of people testing out the service. You can't possibly quantify how successful this will be until it's been around long enough for the "newness" to wear off and for real-world usage to begin.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
125,000 downloads really isn't that big of a number. Especially considering the mass media coverage of the announcement and the vast number of people using iTunes.
The jury is still way out.
aristobrat
Sep 5, 11:38 AM
Hopefully it's not the Extreme that gets the update because my cable modem is nowhere near my TV. ;)
adamfilip
Sep 14, 07:56 AM
just saw this on the register
not sure if its been posted before
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/09/14/apple_iphone_at_large/
not sure if its been posted before
http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/09/14/apple_iphone_at_large/
swingerofbirch
Aug 31, 08:28 PM
These days there aren't a whole lot of morale boosters for living in the United States. You can give us this one.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 12:56 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Windows are generic. More so than app store. Just took at your browser and see where it says open a new window. This is not specific to only windows OS.
I am old enough to remember the complaints of Microsoft calling there OS windows when they were not the first to create the concept.
But "Windows" are not operating systems. The "App Store" is an app store.
Windows are generic. More so than app store. Just took at your browser and see where it says open a new window. This is not specific to only windows OS.
I am old enough to remember the complaints of Microsoft calling there OS windows when they were not the first to create the concept.
But "Windows" are not operating systems. The "App Store" is an app store.
wkhahn
Sep 5, 10:16 PM
I haven't read every post of this thread, so forgive me if its already been mentioned, but let's assume for a minute that the elusive Airport Express A/V is finally here. Do you think that it would just be a self contained white box with ports? I think it may be something more.
What if they just took the guts of a current AE, and stuffed them inside the universal iPod dock? It would have to be a little bigger than current designs, but same dock connection. It could be shown with the new iPod, and then the "One more thing" would be its added funtionallity. The ipod could handle the menu/frontrow display. Considering the bandwidth ncessary for video streaming, you could sync your iPod without actually connecting to your computer. Market it as an iPod accessory to a built in audience of 50 or so million.
What if they just took the guts of a current AE, and stuffed them inside the universal iPod dock? It would have to be a little bigger than current designs, but same dock connection. It could be shown with the new iPod, and then the "One more thing" would be its added funtionallity. The ipod could handle the menu/frontrow display. Considering the bandwidth ncessary for video streaming, you could sync your iPod without actually connecting to your computer. Market it as an iPod accessory to a built in audience of 50 or so million.
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 05:04 PM
There shouldn't even be checkpoints in the first place because they violate the 4th Amendment. Every person sitting in line at that checkpoint is accused of being drunk without reasonable doubt.
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
Agree 100%.
There's a pretty good read here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli27.html
while I don't necessarily agree with all of his points/correlations, some really do make sense.
One of the most glaring problems with the drunk-driving laws in this country is that they clearly discriminate against and ruthlessly penalize only one class of dangerous drivers. Drunk drivers are subject to arrest, thousands of dollars of fines, lengthy jail or prison sentences, loss of driving "privileges," alcohol abuse counseling, probation, et cetera. Other dangerous drivers are not subject to these draconian penalties. If Grandma gets pulled over by the police for careening in and out of the median, for example, she will not be wrenched from her Cadillac, handcuffed, incarcerated, counseled, or fined into bankruptcy. At worst, so long as she has not hurt anyone, she will be escorted home and possibly lose her "privilege" to drive on government roads in the future (she will not lose the "privilege" of paying for government roads, however). Similarly, a man who chooses not to wear his DMV-mandated glasses or contact lenses while driving does not have to worry about getting stopped at "corrective lens checkpoints" manned by nightstick-wielding troopers searching for un-bespectacled drivers to humiliate, arrest, fine, and send to jail. On the contrary, this type of dangerous driver is merely instructed to wear his glasses if he is stopped by the police, and he is issued a perfunctory (and revenue-generating) citation. He certainly does not have to worry about the possibility of going to state prison for several years when he decides to drive without his glasses � unless he actually hurts someone.
The Fourth Amendment (Amendment IV) to the United States Constitution is the part of the Bill of Rights which guards against unreasonable searches and seizures, along with requiring any warrant to be judicially sanctioned and supported by probable cause.
Agree 100%.
There's a pretty good read here: http://www.lewrockwell.com/crovelli/crovelli27.html
while I don't necessarily agree with all of his points/correlations, some really do make sense.
One of the most glaring problems with the drunk-driving laws in this country is that they clearly discriminate against and ruthlessly penalize only one class of dangerous drivers. Drunk drivers are subject to arrest, thousands of dollars of fines, lengthy jail or prison sentences, loss of driving "privileges," alcohol abuse counseling, probation, et cetera. Other dangerous drivers are not subject to these draconian penalties. If Grandma gets pulled over by the police for careening in and out of the median, for example, she will not be wrenched from her Cadillac, handcuffed, incarcerated, counseled, or fined into bankruptcy. At worst, so long as she has not hurt anyone, she will be escorted home and possibly lose her "privilege" to drive on government roads in the future (she will not lose the "privilege" of paying for government roads, however). Similarly, a man who chooses not to wear his DMV-mandated glasses or contact lenses while driving does not have to worry about getting stopped at "corrective lens checkpoints" manned by nightstick-wielding troopers searching for un-bespectacled drivers to humiliate, arrest, fine, and send to jail. On the contrary, this type of dangerous driver is merely instructed to wear his glasses if he is stopped by the police, and he is issued a perfunctory (and revenue-generating) citation. He certainly does not have to worry about the possibility of going to state prison for several years when he decides to drive without his glasses � unless he actually hurts someone.
Flowbee
Oct 12, 01:11 PM
there is no such thing as charity in america, it always comes through commerce.
Well duh. How do you think people and companies earn the money that they donate? If you're suggesting that nobody donates money without some sort of commercial incentive, then you're just flat-out wrong.
It's ironic that a rumor about Apple donating 5% of red iPod sales to charity is answered with a comment that there is no such thing as charity in America. :rolleyes:
Well duh. How do you think people and companies earn the money that they donate? If you're suggesting that nobody donates money without some sort of commercial incentive, then you're just flat-out wrong.
It's ironic that a rumor about Apple donating 5% of red iPod sales to charity is answered with a comment that there is no such thing as charity in America. :rolleyes:
flopticalcube
Apr 16, 10:34 PM
Paying higher taxes in Canada is well worth the benefits here IMO. There are still those groups who take advantage, but it seems to a lesser extent here. Aside from wait times everyone seems content with paying taxes for what they receive. There are some things I disagree with where the government oversteps their bounds (and others where they don't step in enough, cell phone companies/Internet suck up here due to no competition)., but the election system is also much better IMO. I don't know 100% how the system for election works here but it seems the government was challenged a couple months ago and they are already voting for pm. No year long campaign.
Vote of non-confidence. Yeah, short campaigns are the best and the cell/Internet situation sucks balls but there are a few ways around it with some restrictions. No waiting lists outside big cities. Good to see you are settling in, ZA.
Vote of non-confidence. Yeah, short campaigns are the best and the cell/Internet situation sucks balls but there are a few ways around it with some restrictions. No waiting lists outside big cities. Good to see you are settling in, ZA.
taxiapple
Apr 4, 12:08 PM
It is not like a mall rent a cop went up and shot the suspect in the head.
Two of them were armed and 40 shots were exchanged.
one bad guy is dead and two were captured.
Two of them were armed and 40 shots were exchanged.
one bad guy is dead and two were captured.
Buschmaster
Oct 28, 09:04 AM
It isn't like I "hate the world" or anything, even though reading through this thread some people might thing so just by my saying this...
If I payed all that money to get into that expo (it is as expensive as the ones in the States, right?) and someone was being annoying? I'd want them gone, as well. We just got rid of all solicitation on my floor at college, and it isn't like every candidate who stopped by I hated, but they were sure hoping they could make it that way. And the vegans... man do they not give up. I wanted to start heating hot dogs in the microwave just so they'd get out!!
If I'm enjoying myself at the time they come in, they can change some of that. And I don't know the whole story, but if people were complaining about them, then they should be kicked out.
Maybe they're still just searching for Elaine Bennis...? They never leave a message undelivered, I hear.
If I payed all that money to get into that expo (it is as expensive as the ones in the States, right?) and someone was being annoying? I'd want them gone, as well. We just got rid of all solicitation on my floor at college, and it isn't like every candidate who stopped by I hated, but they were sure hoping they could make it that way. And the vegans... man do they not give up. I wanted to start heating hot dogs in the microwave just so they'd get out!!
If I'm enjoying myself at the time they come in, they can change some of that. And I don't know the whole story, but if people were complaining about them, then they should be kicked out.
Maybe they're still just searching for Elaine Bennis...? They never leave a message undelivered, I hear.
MrMac'n'Cheese
Apr 4, 12:19 PM
Maybe a shot to the head was a bit much, but that's an occupational hazard for thiefs, no sympathy here.
The guard deserves a medal for protecting one of Steve's altars.
The guard deserves a medal for protecting one of Steve's altars.
THX1139
Jul 15, 03:48 AM
Does anyone think we should be hitting 4ghz about now?
I mean weve been stuck on 2.x for ages. Whats the deal? A 4ghz quad would be frickin awesome. :confused:
They have given up on speed and are focussing on multiple processors instead. You will see speed increases but not as often. In the next few years you might see dozens of processors all with Quad or Octo cores instead of just dual core today. IMHO, I prefer additional processors over sheer GHZ anyday. Your 4ghz wish isn't going to mean anything against a Kenstfield in 2007. However, a Quad 4ghz would be sweet... but damn hot.
I mean weve been stuck on 2.x for ages. Whats the deal? A 4ghz quad would be frickin awesome. :confused:
They have given up on speed and are focussing on multiple processors instead. You will see speed increases but not as often. In the next few years you might see dozens of processors all with Quad or Octo cores instead of just dual core today. IMHO, I prefer additional processors over sheer GHZ anyday. Your 4ghz wish isn't going to mean anything against a Kenstfield in 2007. However, a Quad 4ghz would be sweet... but damn hot.
bpfesq
Mar 30, 12:39 PM
It goes to show you what our legal system really is like. Kind of goes to show you that much of our legal system is nothing more than expensive babies fighting. Also goes to show you why our government is such a mess because guess what most of our political leaders are........ You guessed it LAWYERS. This is pretty much a world wide thing.
Yeah, blame it on the lawyers. :rolleyes:
Lawyers solve problems. Here, we have a dispute amongst the 2 businesses. The lawyers are just arguing the positions of their respective clients. Not sure why the lawyers deserve much, if any, of the blame.
People act like every lawyer is a ambulance chasing scumbag. Well, that is until they're wronged in some way and call their lawyer to help.
Yeah, blame it on the lawyers. :rolleyes:
Lawyers solve problems. Here, we have a dispute amongst the 2 businesses. The lawyers are just arguing the positions of their respective clients. Not sure why the lawyers deserve much, if any, of the blame.
People act like every lawyer is a ambulance chasing scumbag. Well, that is until they're wronged in some way and call their lawyer to help.