Source
Oct 14, 03:49 PM
Again, you've made some good points, Nipsy. But you're so childish in the way you present your replies, with stupid and pointless remarks about things that i haven't addressed and wouldn't care to address, that i'm not about to take you seriously.
You have insulted me and since you are taking my responses so personally, i will respond in like.
"business acumen"? Hahaha. Grow up, kid. You have demonstrated that you know nothing of the computer industry or the position that Apple holds, but merely fabricated what position YOU think Apple holds, "as a shareholder". You haven't admitted when you were wrong and you're just blindly arguing for Apple.
I never said anything about us designing chips for Apple and to even bring that up is moronic. It doesn't add to the argument or make a point, it's just suggesting that i said something that i didn't. If you can't see that, then kindly re-read my posts before replying.
You are not getting kudos for making good points, you are getting kudos for making popular replies. The ones that most Mac users here want to hear - How much Apple owns and how they have a masterplan that, mysteriously, never seems to quite work out for them, now does it.
Well it seems as though Apple has gone with IBM, so part of their "plan" is to improve chip speed, just as i suggested they should.
I never suggested that the only way for Apple to survive is purely chip speed, i suggested that that is a major part of it and to say it isn't is moronic.
In the end, Nispy, we have agreed on many points and if this whole argument had gone a little better, without petty, childish insults on your part, which i'm ashamed to say that i have contributed to in this last post, and complete missunderstandings of my posts, we could have come to some kind of constructive conclusion. Clearly that wasn't your aim.
I just hope you have achieved whatever you intended to with your childish endeavors in this thread.
You have insulted me and since you are taking my responses so personally, i will respond in like.
"business acumen"? Hahaha. Grow up, kid. You have demonstrated that you know nothing of the computer industry or the position that Apple holds, but merely fabricated what position YOU think Apple holds, "as a shareholder". You haven't admitted when you were wrong and you're just blindly arguing for Apple.
I never said anything about us designing chips for Apple and to even bring that up is moronic. It doesn't add to the argument or make a point, it's just suggesting that i said something that i didn't. If you can't see that, then kindly re-read my posts before replying.
You are not getting kudos for making good points, you are getting kudos for making popular replies. The ones that most Mac users here want to hear - How much Apple owns and how they have a masterplan that, mysteriously, never seems to quite work out for them, now does it.
Well it seems as though Apple has gone with IBM, so part of their "plan" is to improve chip speed, just as i suggested they should.
I never suggested that the only way for Apple to survive is purely chip speed, i suggested that that is a major part of it and to say it isn't is moronic.
In the end, Nispy, we have agreed on many points and if this whole argument had gone a little better, without petty, childish insults on your part, which i'm ashamed to say that i have contributed to in this last post, and complete missunderstandings of my posts, we could have come to some kind of constructive conclusion. Clearly that wasn't your aim.
I just hope you have achieved whatever you intended to with your childish endeavors in this thread.
Nipsy
Oct 14, 04:45 PM
Originally posted by Source
Remember something, Nipsy, i'm on your side here. I want Apple to do well just as much as you do. I just happen to believe that Apple needs to do it in a different way than you and I don't know why you needed to take this argument to insults, other than some need to always believe that you are right.
I have a day off, and my baseball game hasn't started yet.
benixau made a rash reply, without reading my posts and believed that i hate Macs, because he was blindly supporting Apple, just as you are.
I'm not blindly supporting Apple, I'm very well informed in many facets of harware and OS decision making. Based on that, I've chosen to promote Apple to my small and mid-size business clients. I have crates of research and papers I've read to come to this conclusion.
"Now, I'd love if you could quote an insult from me."
That wasn't actually directed towards you.
"I'm intelligent enough to know that Apple does not have the market cap to fully control their chip evolution, and you, it seems, are not."
There you go.
Good point. You win. However, I just went back and re-read this whole thread, and while I have made one insult (sorry), you've made a rash of them.
"No, but you suggested that we should rally around some cause (design chips, boycott Apple, etc.) and vocalize. "
Where did i say we should design chips or boycott Apple? Now you're just liying and it's no wonder you have come to your conclusions, considering you fabricate things like this.
You suggsted we rally around some cause. BEGIN PARENTHETICAL EXPRESSION. INSERT CAUSE OTPIONS DISCUSSED IN THIS THREAD. END PARENTHETICAL EXPRESSION.
Originally posted by Source
You guys seem to spend so much time talking, but you take no action!
Originally posted by Source So many Mac users spend hours a day, talking about Apple and what they're doing wrong, but never take any action. If those who care about Apple being the slowest computers on the market are not going to do something about it, then they should shut up about it.
If you'll remember, I suggested some things, and invited suggestions from you.
%IMG_DESC_3%
%IMG_DESC_4%
%IMG_DESC_5%
%IMG_DESC_6%
Remember something, Nipsy, i'm on your side here. I want Apple to do well just as much as you do. I just happen to believe that Apple needs to do it in a different way than you and I don't know why you needed to take this argument to insults, other than some need to always believe that you are right.
I have a day off, and my baseball game hasn't started yet.
benixau made a rash reply, without reading my posts and believed that i hate Macs, because he was blindly supporting Apple, just as you are.
I'm not blindly supporting Apple, I'm very well informed in many facets of harware and OS decision making. Based on that, I've chosen to promote Apple to my small and mid-size business clients. I have crates of research and papers I've read to come to this conclusion.
"Now, I'd love if you could quote an insult from me."
That wasn't actually directed towards you.
"I'm intelligent enough to know that Apple does not have the market cap to fully control their chip evolution, and you, it seems, are not."
There you go.
Good point. You win. However, I just went back and re-read this whole thread, and while I have made one insult (sorry), you've made a rash of them.
"No, but you suggested that we should rally around some cause (design chips, boycott Apple, etc.) and vocalize. "
Where did i say we should design chips or boycott Apple? Now you're just liying and it's no wonder you have come to your conclusions, considering you fabricate things like this.
You suggsted we rally around some cause. BEGIN PARENTHETICAL EXPRESSION. INSERT CAUSE OTPIONS DISCUSSED IN THIS THREAD. END PARENTHETICAL EXPRESSION.
Originally posted by Source
You guys seem to spend so much time talking, but you take no action!
Originally posted by Source So many Mac users spend hours a day, talking about Apple and what they're doing wrong, but never take any action. If those who care about Apple being the slowest computers on the market are not going to do something about it, then they should shut up about it.
If you'll remember, I suggested some things, and invited suggestions from you.
leekohler
Apr 4, 12:29 PM
Do we atheists need our own "Good Book"?
No- how ridiculous. Atheism is not a religion.
No- how ridiculous. Atheism is not a religion.
Compile 'em all
Nov 11, 10:26 PM
wont miss him I think the Facebook app could be much better
Do you actually know anything about him? He is a high profile developer that worked on the original Firefox and the firebug extension. If he quits, it means something is VERY wrong with the Apple approval process.
I have a strong feeling Apple gave him a hard time with an update to the app so he was like **** that, it is not worth it.
Do you actually know anything about him? He is a high profile developer that worked on the original Firefox and the firebug extension. If he quits, it means something is VERY wrong with the Apple approval process.
I have a strong feeling Apple gave him a hard time with an update to the app so he was like **** that, it is not worth it.
simon-says
Aug 24, 02:24 PM
It seems as if though Apple has changed the serial numbers that are effected.
Uh oh there is a 15" macbook pro exchange too
https://support.apple.com/macbookpro15/batteryexchange/
Uh oh there is a 15" macbook pro exchange too
https://support.apple.com/macbookpro15/batteryexchange/
JAT
May 5, 03:38 PM
Here's my guess as to how it will work based on how simple Apple likes to make things for the end user:
%IMG_DESC_7%
%IMG_DESC_8%
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
rdowns
Mar 11, 02:02 PM
To all those cutting military by huge percentages, what are your plans to deal with the millions of unemployed that would produce?
sphereboy
Sep 12, 05:14 PM
For those that have been asking... the browser and equalizer aren't gone, they're just both under the View menu now.
Whew, I was a little worried there for a second.
What's the point of removing the Button on the lower right for the EQ and Visualizer? It's not like there is not enought space. Some times i wonder what they are smoking over there.
Whew, I was a little worried there for a second.
What's the point of removing the Button on the lower right for the EQ and Visualizer? It's not like there is not enought space. Some times i wonder what they are smoking over there.
Balli
Sep 13, 07:35 AM
All iMac G5s have USB 2.0 - you're either mistaken or quoting your machine incorrectly.
You guys are right. I do have USB 2. It's just because system profiler didn't specify, it kind of confused me.
You guys are right. I do have USB 2. It's just because system profiler didn't specify, it kind of confused me.
Lesser Evets
Jun 25, 07:47 AM
Not if the stand allowed the iMac to be parallel to the desk surface as well as perpendicular.
That is what people aren't understanding. They see something and imagine it being the same design despite function changing. If they do touchscreen, it won't be long (if not instant) before they redo how it sits on the table.
A design that allows the screen to go relatively flat and vertical is necessary. This design should have been done already 3 years ago.
That is what people aren't understanding. They see something and imagine it being the same design despite function changing. If they do touchscreen, it won't be long (if not instant) before they redo how it sits on the table.
A design that allows the screen to go relatively flat and vertical is necessary. This design should have been done already 3 years ago.
mdgolom
Nov 8, 08:46 AM
Wow...I didn't expect this announcement to be so early in the month. So what is left for the MacWorld?
My money is on Apple announcing the iTV and Leopard earlier than expected.
My money is on Apple announcing the iTV and Leopard earlier than expected.
yudilks
Nov 8, 06:24 AM
OMG, the anticipation is killing me.. I'm pressing F5 every 30 seconds... :P
treysmay
Jul 23, 12:18 AM
this document reading feature just coincides with the wireless rumors. If the Ipod can load web pages. why wouldn't it be able to translate Word, PDF and other popular formats. I would by one, but this sounds as if it would be more delicate than the 5g that I own, the 5g is definitely on the breakable side. could you imagine how much more screen you have to crack, and more pixels to go dead?
jessica.
Oct 25, 10:27 PM
Here is my hackintosh set up.
[IMG]http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj208/murtaza911/5bafc82c.jpg[/tIMG]
I then have a macbook beside my bed, but don't have any pictures of that.
Wow nice! That's a slick screen clock you have. What's it called?
[IMG]http://i273.photobucket.com/albums/jj208/murtaza911/5bafc82c.jpg[/tIMG]
I then have a macbook beside my bed, but don't have any pictures of that.
Wow nice! That's a slick screen clock you have. What's it called?
Lollypop
Aug 29, 03:10 AM
I'm well aware that the majority of people are going to get Vista when they buy new machines next year or so, but which of these versions are they going to get?
Very likely home platinum, possibly professional if they are buying a expensive high end machine.
MS has spread their lineup to thin, $500 for the ultimate every 5-10 years, I would rather got the apple route, $130 for the entire thing every few years and at least I feel continues advances than one big bang.
Very likely home platinum, possibly professional if they are buying a expensive high end machine.
MS has spread their lineup to thin, $500 for the ultimate every 5-10 years, I would rather got the apple route, $130 for the entire thing every few years and at least I feel continues advances than one big bang.
Solver
Aug 8, 02:46 PM
Did you notice that their were two cameras attached to the Mac screen?
Is this be the beginning of 3D iChat, photos and movies?
Is this be the beginning of 3D iChat, photos and movies?
diegozuniga
Sep 12, 03:02 PM
I was actually hoping to get Merom chips into the Macbook today, so i have been waiting for today to purchase my new Macbook. But i do not see the old Ipod nano's there and i suppose the new ones don't fall into the deal. Is this correct??? Also, why don't these have the EDU discount. Thanks in advance!!!!
smileyborg
Mar 28, 08:24 PM
I bet tickets are being scalped alongside iPad 2s now :p
NoExpectations
May 5, 07:05 AM
This would absolutely stink over Verizon.
1. SLOW network
2. If a voice call comes in, I lose my data session and I have to start over!
1. SLOW network
2. If a voice call comes in, I lose my data session and I have to start over!
stefmesman
Apr 13, 03:43 PM
I hope they brighten the interface a bit. I find it too dark. Also i hope some of the buttons become drop down buttons. It looks way more cluttered then FCP7.
all the improvements i have seen are major approvements. Even though this is an early demo. bravo, apple.
edit: or give us the advanced and regular version UI ;) all buttons that have shortcuts i dont see need for in the UI for an everyday user like me.
all the improvements i have seen are major approvements. Even though this is an early demo. bravo, apple.
edit: or give us the advanced and regular version UI ;) all buttons that have shortcuts i dont see need for in the UI for an everyday user like me.
skunk
Apr 8, 01:41 AM
I could type up a bunch of stuff, but this website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/triunity.html) does a good job of covering all the bases regarding our difference of opinion on this matter. Here's two quick excerpts:.The link you give contains:
The Hebrew word translated "God" is the word El or Elohim. Elohim is the plural form of El. The plural form is used 2607 of the 2845 times the word "God" is used in the Old Testament. Not only is the word for God usually used in the plural form, but several verses refer to God as "Us":
• Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Genesis 1:26)
• Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- (Genesis 3:22)
• "Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." (Genesis 11:7)
• Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me!" (Isaiah 6:8)
An example of how the Hebrew word Elohim is used in the plural is that it is translated "gods" (referring to idols) 235 times in the Old Testament. It is exactly the same word that is translated "God," referring to the Almighty. An example is given below:
"I am the LORD your God [Elohim], who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. "You shall have no other gods [Elohim] before Me. (Exodus 20:2-3)This seems far more likely to be referring to a literal plurality of gods than some revisionist gestalt. Occam's Razor would come down on the side of plain old-fashioned polytheism every single time.
As for this:
Finally, there are a number of verses in the Old Testament in which the triunity of God is directly expressed:
• Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His Son's name? Surely you know! (Proverbs 30:4)Yes, we do know his son's name: it was Baal. Every Canaanite knew that.
The Hebrew word translated "God" is the word El or Elohim. Elohim is the plural form of El. The plural form is used 2607 of the 2845 times the word "God" is used in the Old Testament. Not only is the word for God usually used in the plural form, but several verses refer to God as "Us":
• Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." (Genesis 1:26)
• Then the LORD God said, "Behold, the man has become like one of Us, knowing good and evil; and now, lest he stretch out his hand, and take also from the tree of life, and eat, and live forever"-- (Genesis 3:22)
• "Come, let Us go down and there confuse their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." (Genesis 11:7)
• Then I heard the voice of the Lord, saying, "Whom shall I send, and who will go for Us?" Then I said, "Here am I. Send me!" (Isaiah 6:8)
An example of how the Hebrew word Elohim is used in the plural is that it is translated "gods" (referring to idols) 235 times in the Old Testament. It is exactly the same word that is translated "God," referring to the Almighty. An example is given below:
"I am the LORD your God [Elohim], who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery. "You shall have no other gods [Elohim] before Me. (Exodus 20:2-3)This seems far more likely to be referring to a literal plurality of gods than some revisionist gestalt. Occam's Razor would come down on the side of plain old-fashioned polytheism every single time.
As for this:
Finally, there are a number of verses in the Old Testament in which the triunity of God is directly expressed:
• Who has ascended into heaven and descended? Who has gathered the wind in His fists? Who has wrapped the waters in His garment? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is His name or His Son's name? Surely you know! (Proverbs 30:4)Yes, we do know his son's name: it was Baal. Every Canaanite knew that.
Yvan256
Nov 7, 09:09 AM
Apple will never make a laptop that is that size because it would mean that they would have to take out the optical drive and make the computer ultimately worthless without a docking station. Apple will never make a computer that isn't fully capable from the start.
First of all we're in 2006. Optical-less laptops don't require a "docking station". We have FireWire and USB external drives now, nothing special is required.
Second, Apple already has a very successful product on the market that also requires a "docking station". It's called an iPod. Without a computer an iPod is useless. You can't rip things directly to it.
And third, as mentionned, we're in 2006. Honestly, the only times I use the combo drive of my Mac mini is when I play Starcraft, Diablo II, rip music CDs with iTunes or encode my DVDs to H.264/AAC with HandBrake. That's all.
I would sell my 12" Powerbook in an instant if Apple ever made a light sub-laptop. Even a 13" Macbook is too big IMO. The laptop being my second, portable computer, I want it more portable than a "desktop replacement".
That's how I see it anyway.
As for the new specs of the Macbook, if the rumors are true, then I hope we can expect the Mac mini to be updated with the exact same specs in about a month or so.
As for heat problems with such a small laptop, well, no one is forcing Apple to run the processor(s) at their full speed. An Intel Core 2 Duo that's about 25% slower would still be about 50% faster than a G4 I guess (if we take Apple's marketing numbers) but could require half as much power (better battery life, lower heat dissipation).
First of all we're in 2006. Optical-less laptops don't require a "docking station". We have FireWire and USB external drives now, nothing special is required.
Second, Apple already has a very successful product on the market that also requires a "docking station". It's called an iPod. Without a computer an iPod is useless. You can't rip things directly to it.
And third, as mentionned, we're in 2006. Honestly, the only times I use the combo drive of my Mac mini is when I play Starcraft, Diablo II, rip music CDs with iTunes or encode my DVDs to H.264/AAC with HandBrake. That's all.
I would sell my 12" Powerbook in an instant if Apple ever made a light sub-laptop. Even a 13" Macbook is too big IMO. The laptop being my second, portable computer, I want it more portable than a "desktop replacement".
That's how I see it anyway.
As for the new specs of the Macbook, if the rumors are true, then I hope we can expect the Mac mini to be updated with the exact same specs in about a month or so.
As for heat problems with such a small laptop, well, no one is forcing Apple to run the processor(s) at their full speed. An Intel Core 2 Duo that's about 25% slower would still be about 50% faster than a G4 I guess (if we take Apple's marketing numbers) but could require half as much power (better battery life, lower heat dissipation).
drakino
Mar 29, 12:24 AM
It'll be $129 — the same as ALL of the past upgrades except for Snow Leopard which was Leopard but just a slimmed-down, rewriting of the OS. Apple felt that without a lot of core new features being added, they would give the public a break and just charge a nominal fee for Snow Leopard, rather than the typical $129.
Don't listen to anyone who says differently. It will be $129.
I doubt it. The $129 upgrades were back in the era before the iOS platform took off. The iPhone, and iPad are really accelerating Apple's income and profits, so they don't need to price OS upgrades that high. Snow Leopard brought a bunch of new tech to the table for developers to play with, and $29 was the easy way to ensure most people had that tech. Apple is likely much more interested in moving the platform forward then they are with $100 extra from each person. The more people stay current, the more developers can actually use the latest toys. Also consider that for Intel 10.4 users, the "$29 upgrade" worked fine, even though Apple could have blocked that and forced it to be a Leopard only upgrade.
Notice how Apple moved away from paid iOS upgrades for iPod Touch users. They saw enough people hold back that it was going to be an issue with the apps in the App Store. Now iPod users get their updates for free.
I'm going to predict $29 for Lion, with an option to even just grab it from the App Store like how they distributed it to developers. Possibly even a little cheaper off the App Store, and $29 for the in store disc based copy.
Don't listen to anyone who says differently. It will be $129.
I doubt it. The $129 upgrades were back in the era before the iOS platform took off. The iPhone, and iPad are really accelerating Apple's income and profits, so they don't need to price OS upgrades that high. Snow Leopard brought a bunch of new tech to the table for developers to play with, and $29 was the easy way to ensure most people had that tech. Apple is likely much more interested in moving the platform forward then they are with $100 extra from each person. The more people stay current, the more developers can actually use the latest toys. Also consider that for Intel 10.4 users, the "$29 upgrade" worked fine, even though Apple could have blocked that and forced it to be a Leopard only upgrade.
Notice how Apple moved away from paid iOS upgrades for iPod Touch users. They saw enough people hold back that it was going to be an issue with the apps in the App Store. Now iPod users get their updates for free.
I'm going to predict $29 for Lion, with an option to even just grab it from the App Store like how they distributed it to developers. Possibly even a little cheaper off the App Store, and $29 for the in store disc based copy.
MrMoore
Nov 24, 09:47 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/8C148a Safari/6533.18.5)
The Beatles are now in iTunes?!?
I did not know that!!
;)
Not bad for a group that broke up 40 years ago.
The Beatles are now in iTunes?!?
I did not know that!!
;)
Not bad for a group that broke up 40 years ago.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar