lilo777
Apr 5, 02:20 PM
It's: "Do not buy iPhone. Go with Android." That's how I see it. Companies like Toyota will have no choice but to double their efforts in serving Android users.
toddybody
Apr 21, 06:37 PM
Totally awesome...now enable windows based (6970) graphics cards and were in business!
LionsKiss
Sep 16, 02:36 PM
Current MBP specs 12" would be perfect for me, fast, portable. Of course if a 12" MBP comes then a C2D comes.
Zadillo
Sep 11, 01:18 AM
I won't buy a Yonah MBP. I would rather have a more future proof computer of a different brand. I use *nix for almost all of my work, I'll just try and buy an open source friendly machine and put windows on a partition just to run WoW and have the other run FreeBSD.
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
OK, honestly, I just don't get this. I don't see how a Core 2 Duo laptop right now is going to be so much more 'future proof' than a Core Duo laptop. Are you anticipating some time in the near future where everyone with Core Duo laptops is going to find that no-one is making *nix for 32-bit processors or something?
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
OK, honestly, I just don't get this. I don't see how a Core 2 Duo laptop right now is going to be so much more 'future proof' than a Core Duo laptop. Are you anticipating some time in the near future where everyone with Core Duo laptops is going to find that no-one is making *nix for 32-bit processors or something?
I mean, really now. What are you doing in *nix that a Core Duo based laptop is going to be so much less future proof than a Core 2 Duo laptop?
I don't see why you wouldn't just go ahead and order a Core 2 Duo PC laptop then now and get one soon. The only reason to get a MBP is if you specifically need to run OS X, but if the lack of Core 2 Duo is enough to make you just as happy to get a PC laptop and run Windows and FreeBSD on it, why in the world are you waiting for a MBP? It can't be that important to you if the Core Duo vs. Core 2 Duo issue is the "dealbreaker".
vwsoul
Sep 16, 12:20 PM
I do the ordering for Macs for my company, i ordered a 17" MBP for our new art director early sept and it arrived about a less than a week later. I ordered a new 15" MBP yesterday and the shipping date was Sept 20.
However, i just read this forum and cancelled the order thinking perhaps i rather not take the risk and wait for the new macbooks, hopefully they do come out on the 19th or 25th.
However, i just read this forum and cancelled the order thinking perhaps i rather not take the risk and wait for the new macbooks, hopefully they do come out on the 19th or 25th.
MikeTheC
Nov 26, 10:31 AM
There are already GNU/Linux based cellphones. And what about the iPhone implies that it would be open in a way that, say, an average Nokia isn't? I appreciate they ported GNU/Linux to the iPod, but for the most part the reason similar things haven't happened on more regular cellphones has been an issue of the amount of work involved, with it being somewhat harder to write a GSM stack from scratch and port a kernel than it is to simply port an off-the-shelf kernel. (And I guess there's the additional issue that there are six zillion cellphones using about one quillion completely incompatible hardware platforms, whereas there are only a handful of MP3 players and only one that's achieved marketshare heaven.)
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
Oh, sure. But GNU/Linux could slowly introduce a standardized set of cell phone hardware platforms to build from, just like Intel and AMD and ATI (now a part of AMD, of course) and NVidia produce reference platform hardware that then anyone can make a compatible motherboard/daughter card from, what needs to happen is to have one particularly successful and particularly popular cell phone interface, and then (potentially) everyone would be clamoring to sell it to their customers.
Now, the difference between cell phones and computers is in the history. Cell phones achieved popularity and mass market penetration before a unifying hardware platform or OS platform came into being; whereas computers didn't achieve that kind of success until afterward. So really the dynamic and all the sequencing here is different.
freebooter
Sep 16, 08:18 AM
MBP at Photokina? Yes.
cav23j
Mar 26, 10:49 PM
In the keynote, didn't Jobs say 2011 was the year of the iPad 2? I thought that pretty much smashed the rumors of an iPad 3 this year.
means nothing
people are reading too much into that slide
means nothing
people are reading too much into that slide
henrikrox
Apr 18, 05:23 PM
So disappointed in how mac rumors is turning out. There is just good stuff about apple. Nothing about the 7% down in stock the last 16 days.
Bah. Macrumors have gotten so terrible and flooded with people with anger problems and not enough mods to filter stuff.
Bah. Macrumors have gotten so terrible and flooded with people with anger problems and not enough mods to filter stuff.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 4, 10:31 AM
Personally I hope to see with the Intel change for Apple to update each line every 6 months.
aafuss1
Aug 7, 09:01 PM
macpro.pdf is the service manual for those who have GSX and Service Source access (eg. AASP's do). Can't find public info on how to add/remove user installable part yets.
BRLawyer
Aug 4, 03:10 PM
1. If you check Apple's knowledge database or the manual that come with MBP, it actually says not to put this laptop on top of your lap, or it'll cause discomfort and potentially a burn with prolonged use. Now that's a new thing for a Powerbook or iBook user. Almost all the reviews of MBP state one con throughout, and thats the heat it dissipates. I own a MBP 2.16 Ghz and let me tell you it is very uncomforting to keep this on lap even through the clothing. Forget about using it in shorts unless you are in Alaska.
2. Less than three hours is not outstanding when you compare MBP to its predecessor and not PC notebooks.
3. The 17" MBP is as thin as 15.4". Why does it have faster D/L SD ??
series Vampire Academy.
Richelle Mead#39;s Vampire
Cast: Topher Grace, Anna Faris
Vampire Academy Adrian
Vampire Academy Adrian
Movie bosses are bringing back
New moon Movie Trailer long Version with parts of the official Trailer. Jun 8, 2009 6:47 AM. Unlimited Full movie Download at @ www.moviedownload.kitz4u.com
2. Less than three hours is not outstanding when you compare MBP to its predecessor and not PC notebooks.
3. The 17" MBP is as thin as 15.4". Why does it have faster D/L SD ??
sonicboom
Sep 10, 11:57 PM
I seriously doubt laptop revisions will be announced. This event will focus on a specific message: we're in the movie download business now. They will also tie-in new products to take advantage of the movie service: new iPods and a Video Airport express.
The folks on the Tivo forum are speculating that Apple might invite Tivo to the party:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=315123
It is rumored that Tivo is releasing the new Series 3 machine on the same day (their HD Digital Media Recorder for cable and OTA). As the tie-in rumor goes, Apple would supply the content, and Tivo the platform to play it on.
Personally, I'd be surprised if Apple's venture into the movie distribution business isn't an immediate flop. The $10/$15 price-points are way too high when compared to what you can buy the physical disk for. Plus, services like Netflix offer a much better value.
The folks on the Tivo forum are speculating that Apple might invite Tivo to the party:
http://www.tivocommunity.com/tivo-vb/showthread.php?t=315123
It is rumored that Tivo is releasing the new Series 3 machine on the same day (their HD Digital Media Recorder for cable and OTA). As the tie-in rumor goes, Apple would supply the content, and Tivo the platform to play it on.
Personally, I'd be surprised if Apple's venture into the movie distribution business isn't an immediate flop. The $10/$15 price-points are way too high when compared to what you can buy the physical disk for. Plus, services like Netflix offer a much better value.
hynke
May 6, 06:49 AM
Of course they will move to ARM, everyone will. Google is allready running their data centres on ARM based servers, Windows 8 will run on ARM as well, Apple is investing huge amount of money into their A4, A5 chips. The main problem of computers nowadays is power efficiency and not computing power, because most of the computers allready are overpowerd for what their users usually do with them.
Vegasman
Apr 24, 10:08 AM
All very nice and I'm fully supportive of more high resolution graphics as soon as possible. It's a shame they don't believe in supporting the millions of Blu-ray discs being sold though, and trying to convince people that 720p iTunes content is good enough for TVs that are bigger than any of the displays they've ever sold, whilst planning for smaller but higher resolution screens that they must apparently believe makes a difference.
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
combatcolin
Aug 7, 04:30 PM
Just got home from work and went on line as fast as my slow PC would boot.
Lots of power, loads of expansion and 2 optical drive slots! (:p )
But still way way too expensive.
Still going to build a Core Duo 2 2.13Ghz PC, and still wishing Apple would create a computer that i want to buy.
Lots of power, loads of expansion and 2 optical drive slots! (:p )
But still way way too expensive.
Still going to build a Core Duo 2 2.13Ghz PC, and still wishing Apple would create a computer that i want to buy.
iGary
Sep 11, 08:02 AM
I told Rob about the event yesterday...
"Great, all we need is another iPod." :rolleyes:
"Great, all we need is another iPod." :rolleyes:
osxtasy
Apr 5, 01:38 PM
"Toyota had agreed to do so to "maintain their good relationship with Apple," "
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Toyota has a relationship with Apple, good or bad? Why? I don't see the connection.
Well, to be honest, BOTH of there "Quality Assurance" (or rather lack thereof) has gone severly downhill in the last couple years. Oh yea, I say this as an owner of BOTH companies products....sadly:(:(
Now "HOW YA LIKE THEM APPLES STEVE JOBS??"
Tsunami911
Apr 5, 02:31 PM
Well you're among a shrinking crowd statistically.
Actually that's an ignorant and factually incorrect statement.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
Actually that's an ignorant and factually incorrect statement.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
Don't panic
May 6, 11:03 AM
i suggested rosius because there is some value in protectjng him from potential hp loss, but it can be anyone.
if no one wants to do it i can peel off myself and someone else can lead the big group
if no one wants to do it i can peel off myself and someone else can lead the big group
twoodcc
Aug 3, 07:19 AM
Wow, measuring battery life by cities. Sounds amazingly scientific. I'm gonna say "You're wrong" just because you cited such a field report. That's disgraceful... :o
i second that
i second that
peharri
Nov 25, 09:06 PM
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
The only mobile carriers in a position to do this are the cdmaOne/CDMA2000 ones (Verizon, Sprint PCS, etc.) If Apple makes a GSM or UMTS phone, the carrier has little or no say in whether you use it. T-Mobile and Cingular will, by next year, be running both types of network in the US, and both already run GSM.
The real influence the cellphone companies (at least, the ones not stuck in the 1980s as far as their network infrastructure goes) have on phone purchasing is the ability to subsidize phones that fit their model. This, in practice, usually means rebranding. Cingular is pretty good on that score and rarely insists on more than some ugly logos printed on the phone (unfortunately their network is not the greatest GSM implementation in the world.) T-Mobile, in my experience, is somewhat worse, though not always for bad reasons. For example, they'd probably insist on "My Faves", a proprietary five person phonebook, being grafted on to whatever UI an "iPhone" has, in return for any substantial subsidy.
The fact Apple can't expect carriers to subsidize their phones is one issue they have to deal with. I'm more concerned though with Apple becoming a minority player, with its phone tied to a music store whose success was, in major part, to do with the giant marketshare it had, and thus Jobs's ability to force the labels to compromise on prices.
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
Apple would need not merely infrastructure but spectrum to actually start a carrier. They have neither.
Purchasing a carrier is an interesting pipe dream and would terrify the crap out of most shareholders. Mobile telephony is a long term thing, with very little return on investment yet for most people who've invested in it. It's not even a good time to get involved, most companies are rolling out 3G networks and 4G, in the shape of WiMAX, is already being released in some areas.
Were they to do the carrier thing, the best they could hope for would be to be an MVNO. This would be a major change of business model. It has so many ramifications I don't know where to begin.
andy845
Mar 29, 09:08 AM
There is over a 120 million android devices in use? I don't mean models....
Yes there are, android are the market leaders(by volume) ~33%, Apple are third after Nokia with ~16% market share.
See http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/Android-Ships-33M-Smartphones-to-Lead-World-Canalys-162803/
first hit in google for android market share
Yes there are, android are the market leaders(by volume) ~33%, Apple are third after Nokia with ~16% market share.
See http://www.eweek.com/c/a/Mobile-and-Wireless/Android-Ships-33M-Smartphones-to-Lead-World-Canalys-162803/
first hit in google for android market share
