Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:38 PM
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
laidbackliam
Aug 7, 10:39 AM
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
-Squire
yes, but i see the price point being under the iMac still. but again, this is just something i'd LIKE to see, and don't expect. and i know some people would pay a premium. but i'm not some people.
hexor
Mar 26, 08:03 AM
There is no way this is a GM. The "reporter" is obviously confused. If it was a GM version that means they would be sending it off for duplication soon. Since WWDC is months away this makes no sense.
glassbathroom
Aug 17, 09:11 AM
Aren't there 2 chips though?
Doh! Yes, I new there was something wrong. Not planning on doing this anyway.
Doh! Yes, I new there was something wrong. Not planning on doing this anyway.
Lord Blackadder
Mar 23, 05:50 PM
Here we have an article laying out the case for non intervention (http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/03/2011322135442593945.html) by a Princeton law professor (emeritus) published by Al Jazeera. A worthy read, and here are two exerpts I've commented on.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
In effect, overall historical trends vindicate trust in the dynamics of self-determination, even if short-term disasters may and do occur, and similarly underscores the problematic character of intervention, even given the purest of motivations, which rarely, if ever, exists in world politics.
I find it hard to disagree with this, but watching Gaddafi strongarm his way back into authority is a very bitter pill to swallow - plus, historical trends also suggest that other nations rarely resist the temptation to intervene when they feel they have something to gain by intervention (be it increased political influence, territorial gains, economic interests etc). The current structure of the UN is unable to prevent this. Also, even without direct intervention, the process of self-determination does not exist in a total vaccum. I wonder how the author regards more passive measures such as official censure, economic sanctions, asset-freezing etc etc? Do he consider those to be intereferences to self-determination?
The Charter in Article 2(7) accepts the limitation on UN authority to intervene in matters "essentially within the domestic jurisdiction" of member states unless there is a genuine issue of international peace and security present, which there was not, even in the claim, which was supposedly motivated solely to protect the civilian population of Libya.
But such a claim was patently misleading and disingenuous as the obvious goals, as manifest from the scale and character of military actions taken, were minimally to protect the armed rebels from being defeated, and possibly destroyed, and maximally, to achieve a regime change resulting in a new governing leadership that was friendly to the West, including buying fully into its liberal economic geopolitical policy compass.
Using a slightly altered language, the UN Charter embedded a social contract with its membership that privileged the politics of self-determination and was heavily weighted against the politics of intervention.
Neither position is absolute, but what seems to have happened with respect to Libya is that intervention was privileged and self-determination cast aside.
It is an instance of normatively dubious practise trumping the legal/moral ethos of containing geopolitical discretion with binding rules governing the use of force and the duty of non-intervention.
We do not know yet what will happen in Libya, but we do know enough to oppose such a precedent that exhibits so many unfortunate characteristics.
It is time to restore the global social contract between territorial sovereign states and the organised international community, which not only corresponds with the outlawry of aggressive war but also reflect the movement of history in support of the soft power struggles of the non-Western peoples of the world.
I do agree with him that it would be foolish not to recognize that the ultimate goal here is - yet again - regime change regardless of what the official statements and resolutions state.
But while the author adheres to a legal argument, reality is more expansive in my mind. Isn't the UN, by it's very nature, interventionalist on some level? Also, at what point does outside influence affect "self-determination" to the point that it is no longer that? Surely there will always be outside influence - but when does it interfere with self-determination?
Of course, all of these considerations are irrelevant if you are against the concept of the UN or even foreign alliances, as a vocal minority of conservatives are in the US. I imagine they'd prefer to let the "free market" somehow decide what happens.
conradzoo
Aug 11, 05:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
UmaThurman
Sep 18, 11:09 PM
Y'all just wait a bit longer. it'll come soon.
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
jonnysods
Apr 6, 10:44 AM
Sign me up for this please!!!
pyramid6
Apr 6, 03:44 PM
I think it's great that some people like the Xoom, but for me it's a nonstarter.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
As a developer, 100,000 units is not even worth considering developing for. I know I'm not the only one. I really don't like the walled garden of the Apple App store, but it is where the tablets are at the moment.
freakonguitar
Aug 26, 03:55 PM
well...then maybe we will see a new macbook pro and possibly some other things in the next few weeks to come. :) but from some of the rumors, mermon has worse battery life and more heat than yonah :( ....which is too bad, cause we could use a cpu that gives at least just as good performance but less heat!
Full of Win
Mar 25, 10:56 PM
Just one step closer to 10.7.3, the first release I would ever think to use.
peharri
Jul 14, 03:36 PM
I think most of your proposed reasons aren't really as practical or useful as people think in practice (that is, most people would never do it, or otherwise gain an advantage); however:
And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
This one I can believe. Room for a future HD optical disk format reader. Makes sense. I was envisaging the Mac Pro coming with two drives, but it makes sense it would come with one and have a slot for a new one for a later date. I suspect a standalone BR or HDDVD drive would cost less than one that also has to replace the functionality of a Superdrive.
If this is Apple's reasoning, it also suggests they're being more pragmatic than analysts keep suggesting on the whole DVDng war. Which makes sense. I have a gut feeling that HDDVD and Bluray are to DVD what SACD and DVD-Audio are to CDs.
And bluray drives will be INCREDIBLY expensive when these machines ship, not to mention who knows how well they will burn cd's and dvd's (assuming that all bluray drives will be burners, none of them readers only). Many people will want to wait and add a bluray or hd-dvd later, especially since nobody knows which will be the winning format.
This one I can believe. Room for a future HD optical disk format reader. Makes sense. I was envisaging the Mac Pro coming with two drives, but it makes sense it would come with one and have a slot for a new one for a later date. I suspect a standalone BR or HDDVD drive would cost less than one that also has to replace the functionality of a Superdrive.
If this is Apple's reasoning, it also suggests they're being more pragmatic than analysts keep suggesting on the whole DVDng war. Which makes sense. I have a gut feeling that HDDVD and Bluray are to DVD what SACD and DVD-Audio are to CDs.
glassbathroom
Aug 17, 08:13 AM
Edit: Please ignore this post, I can't count!!!
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are £570. Apple are charging £530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around £300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
Forgive the £ for those that think in $.
If you buy a Xeon 5160 (3.0GHz) at the moment they are £570. Apple are charging £530 to upgrade from Xeon 5150 (2.66GHz) to the Xeon 5160. Bearing in mind that you can probably sell the original 2.66Gz chip for around £300, it would be cheaper to buy the lower spec Mac Pro and upgrade yourself.
Forgive the £ for those that think in $.
marksman
Mar 31, 04:37 PM
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
samcraig
Apr 27, 10:08 AM
revelated, beware! Apple is closing in on you with their black helicopters and vans to take you prisoner for mind control experiments.
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right own. LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
And maybe purging or limiting this DB won't slow location service based apps/etc either.
It goes both ways.
In fact - if purging this data WAS going to cause a performance issue - do you really think Apple would do it? They aren't exactly the type to sacrifice quality, are they?
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right own. LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
And maybe purging or limiting this DB won't slow location service based apps/etc either.
It goes both ways.
In fact - if purging this data WAS going to cause a performance issue - do you really think Apple would do it? They aren't exactly the type to sacrifice quality, are they?
LC475
Apr 11, 06:49 PM
There's nothing to fear about Apple making FCP less than professional.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
The thing to understand is that NLEs never change their basic structure of how editing works, i.e moving clips in the timeline, trimming, etc. Look at Avid - it hasn't changed much at all since the 90s because they know if they did, they would lose their base of users. Avid came in the early 90s, and FCP came in the late 90s. FCP is an improvement to the Avid idea of NLE editing, and it's a good improvement. That's one reason why it became popular. Sure, the GUI might change but the basic way of working will not. After Effects is a good example. The GUI looks totally different than it did on version 5, but you can still work basically the same.
I don't understand what people mean by FCP lagging behind Avid and Adobe. In the last couple years, FCP has been making strong gains in Hollywood. WB, 20th Fox, Paramount have all used FCP on major movies. I worked as an AE on one of them. Professionals like FCP, many movie editors I know like FCP, major post houses use it, and I'm sure after tomorrow we will like it even more.
If anything, FCP has become less of a consumer app and more of a professional one. Hollywood wouldn't have thought of using FCP in 1999 on version 1, but they're using it now. It's become more professional over the last ten years.
With the new technology of thunderbolt, 64bit support, and multithreading support, in addition to iPad support, we should see an awesome upgrade tomorrow.
LagunaSol
Apr 19, 10:43 PM
For that matter, people say that Apple ripped off their bookshelf from Delicious Library. Which itself took it from who knows where.
Probably from an actual bookshelf. ;)
I totally forgot about that! What a joke. Apple has become the king of hypocrites. And they copied the Apple logo from the Beatle's Apple Records.
Have you actually seen the Apple Records logo? Apparently not.
Probably from an actual bookshelf. ;)
I totally forgot about that! What a joke. Apple has become the king of hypocrites. And they copied the Apple logo from the Beatle's Apple Records.
Have you actually seen the Apple Records logo? Apparently not.
Macnoviz
Jul 22, 03:03 AM
So I read in this thread that Kentsfield and Clovertown ARE compatible with Conroe and Woodcrest sockets (respectively) (Cloverton or Clovertown?)
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
Hope for upgrading an iMac to Quad Core is kindled! At least if Apple releases Conroe iMacs.
BTW, In my opinion, one thing a person should never, ever say is some computer has too much power, and that it will never be needed. So when 128 core CPUs come out in ~10 years time, will we still be considering dual core CPUs as fast enough for our use?
I seem to remember that when the original DOS operating system was created, its RAM was limited. I can't remember exactly to how much, but it was decided that people would never use more than a few kilobytes of memory. Now we are arguing that Mac should provide no less than a gigabyte! Now we are moving to 64 bit processing, with its capability to address a few exobytes, or millions of Terabytes of storage, it seems impossible that we will ever need 128bit computing. But, no doubt, one day we will.
When we will be able to download our entire lives, and even conciousness into a computer, as is said to happen in about 40 years (very much looking forward to), I dare say it will take a lot of memory to do, and even more processing power to manage effectively, especially if we wanted to "live" inside computers, as we will no doubt want to do someday.
So as a conclusion to my most recent rant, Please, never tell me a computer is too powerfu, has too many cores, or has too much storage capacity. If it is there to be used, it will be used. It always is.
I agree with your point on never saying a computer is too powerful, although living in computers is probably not going to happen. Sounds a bit too Matrix-like for me.
croooow
Apr 8, 08:17 AM
what you(Best Buy) did was take $100 from the customer and lock them in from buying anywere else!
Yeah, Best Buy took that $100 alright...they held a gun to each customer's head and told them flat out - "we have no more in stock so you better pay us $100 or else"
If you believe this was actually some sort of BB ruse, and still paid your money, then you deserve what you get. Start taking responsibility for your own actions for a change.
I don't think anyone is saying that Bestbuy did anything illegal. But it is not good customer service to take advantage of people in this way. People are led to believe that $100 will get them closer to the iPad they want.
Yeah, Best Buy took that $100 alright...they held a gun to each customer's head and told them flat out - "we have no more in stock so you better pay us $100 or else"
If you believe this was actually some sort of BB ruse, and still paid your money, then you deserve what you get. Start taking responsibility for your own actions for a change.
I don't think anyone is saying that Bestbuy did anything illegal. But it is not good customer service to take advantage of people in this way. People are led to believe that $100 will get them closer to the iPad they want.
milo
Jul 28, 09:37 AM
Apple had better step its game up compared to the prices/specs rumored last week.
That list was probably something some random guy threw together, it didn't come from a real source and AI only posted it because it's been floating around (saying they didn't believe it).
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
But it would make way more sense to lose the "slot" and go with a standard tray loading drive. It's very impractical to give users the ability to add an optical drive...but require it to be a laptop model.
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
You don't think there's a significant difference between different models of CPU? :eek:
How about Mac Midi?
I've thought about Mac Mid, but just doesn't seem quite right. Mac Midi is funny, but would confuse music guys (unless it actually had midi ports).
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
Current macs can handle 4 gigs of ram, if you get the expensive 2 gig chips. 32 bit limits you to 4 gig, doubt iMacs will handle more than that for a while.
That list was probably something some random guy threw together, it didn't come from a real source and AI only posted it because it's been floating around (saying they didn't believe it).
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
But it would make way more sense to lose the "slot" and go with a standard tray loading drive. It's very impractical to give users the ability to add an optical drive...but require it to be a laptop model.
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
You don't think there's a significant difference between different models of CPU? :eek:
How about Mac Midi?
I've thought about Mac Mid, but just doesn't seem quite right. Mac Midi is funny, but would confuse music guys (unless it actually had midi ports).
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
Current macs can handle 4 gigs of ram, if you get the expensive 2 gig chips. 32 bit limits you to 4 gig, doubt iMacs will handle more than that for a while.
brownpaw
Jun 11, 03:50 PM
I used to work at radioshack too and the resources there suck. Activation will take longer than usual and they can mess up your account/credit. I hated activating phones cause it was a hassle since we were not connected directly with carriers.
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
Now for Radioshack. Brother-in-Law goes and his credit gets run twice by child who works at Radioshack and signs him up to expensive plan. So they have to call their 3rd party service provider and the manager there and employee make a big mess of his ATT account and turns out the phone they had was from a customer return, not even brand new. He ends up just getting bad credit after 4 hrs in the stuffy dusty shack. We go to apple next week, now he has to put deposit cause his credit was messed up but guess what? thats right apple waived it as they saw the mistake and he gets a brand new phone. :) Radioshack = worse place to get any phone Apple = smart well trained employees
I just talked about these cases closest to me but I'll tell you those Radioshack employees are the worst to buy any cellphone from. you take a risk with your credit, used phone possibly, long activations, and bad locale.
Just wanted to say that generally when people have these types of experiences, they are at RadioShack franchises and not company-run (corporate) stores. I have worked at both in the past, and though it's been about 6 years, I can say that things were definitely very different.
Franchise stores, at the time, did indeed work through 3rd party processors for cell phones so it was easier to mess things up. However, it was all through a web interface so more often than not the problems stemmed from the interface crashing or it not being up to date with the latest promotions, etc, than actual user error.
Corporate stores also ran through a web interface but it was directly through the carrier so it was much more reliable.
The bigger problem with cell phones at RadioShack was consistency. The sales flyers would always talk about this deal or that deal, and oftentimes that deal wasn't even offered to franchise stores.
I think a bit of this has been resolved, and I wouldn't mind getting a phone through RadioShack nowadays if there was a good promotion.
However, as someone else said, RadioShack prices on most other things are ridiculously high. I felt terrible when I saw a guy at our store sell this old man a 30-ft HDMI cable for $300. Not kidding at all. I don't know how they stay in business, their prices on most things are not competitive at all.
sw
rfahey
Apr 8, 03:11 AM
Wow. I bought mine at Best Buy on opening day and they sold out of them. Why in anybody's right mind would best buy not sell what they have?
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
You only "think" they sold out. If this is what they were practicing all along they probably had like 3 weeks rations.
RMDI
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
