Hellhammer
Apr 10, 02:05 AM
I'd wait for Haswell or maybe even Rockwell which will be the 16nm shrink of Haswell.
Rockwell doesn't exist anymore, it's Broadwell now ;) After that it will be Sky Lake (16nm) and Skymont (11nm).
Rockwell doesn't exist anymore, it's Broadwell now ;) After that it will be Sky Lake (16nm) and Skymont (11nm).
e-coli
Mar 26, 01:08 PM
Am I the only person not particularly thrilled with Lion?
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
Airdrop is nice, other than that it seems a bit awkward.
barkomatic
Mar 31, 03:38 PM
Keep in mind that Google tightening up Android and forcing handset makers to adhere to certain guidelines is primarily a problem for the *handset makers* and carriers--but not consumers.
I couldn't care less what problems Verizon and Motorola have if the end result is a beautiful and functional device. If not, I'll buy something else.
I couldn't care less what problems Verizon and Motorola have if the end result is a beautiful and functional device. If not, I'll buy something else.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 02:15 PM
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
But with only 2 RAM slots in most current Macs (apart from obviously the Power Mac G5 which has 64-bit processor anyway), getting past 4GB is basically impossible/ ridiculously expensive at the moment.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
But with only 2 RAM slots in most current Macs (apart from obviously the Power Mac G5 which has 64-bit processor anyway), getting past 4GB is basically impossible/ ridiculously expensive at the moment.
MacinDoc
Jul 30, 06:23 PM
Vista ships early 2007 and way preceeds the Core 3 launch. :rolleyes:
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
That is, Bill Gates has stated that there is an 80% chance that Vista will ship in early which, when multiplied by the 80% probability that his estimate is something smelly that comes out of the backside of a bull (and only 20% chance that it is actually true), gives a 16% chance that Vista will REALLY ship in early 2007. ;)
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 04:00 PM
I'm eligible for a new phone in just five days. As of right now I'm going to get the Chocolate because I like the style. Couldn't really care less about listening to music on my phone, that's what my iPod's for. ;)
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
You might want to read some reviews on the Chocolate before buying it. I've seen a handful of reviews that were less than favorable.
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
But...but...if Apple does release a phone and I've already bought the Chocolate then I'll be kicking myself to no end. But on the other hand, how likely is it that the iPhone will even work on Verizon?
Bah! I need a new phone! :(
You might want to read some reviews on the Chocolate before buying it. I've seen a handful of reviews that were less than favorable.
A good resource is Phonescoop.com. They usually have a decent amount of user reviews upon which you can base your purchasing decisions.
littleman23408
Dec 1, 02:25 PM
after trying out the nascar challenges: :confused:... honestly they should have rather spent their money on getting more recent street cars ... thanks for having 10+ premium nascar cars :rolleyes:
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
I wish they would have done without the nascar, but it's not to bad playing around with those kinds of races. Those cars are heavy and you sure can feel it when you race them!
aswitcher
Aug 6, 12:26 PM
Another sad person who is worried about their machines not being top of the line :-\
Clearly you are not a Geek!
Clearly you are not a Geek!
dicklacara
Apr 19, 02:56 PM
One of the three basics that must be proven in order to win a trade dress case, is the likelihood of confusion.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
Yes! Some people will think they are buying a Samsung iPhone.
In other words, would someone think they're buying one thing but really getting another, such as might happen with shoes or pills or whatever.
Does anyone think that a normal person would actually confuse a Samsung Galaxy (especially with that huge "Samsung" on it) with an Apple iPhone when they're buying it?
I mean, is Apple going to claim that they're losing sales because the Galaxy is so close to the iPhone that people can't tell the difference? If so, that sure doesn't say much for the iPhone. Or it says a lot for the Galaxy.
Yes! Some people will think they are buying a Samsung iPhone.
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:38 PM
More speculation than rumour, but for Leopard I'd bet on:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
Probably, But I think Christmass season would be better for sales. maybe they will launch end of October to take advantage of that.
I just hope it's true, I am so tired of my Verizon service and their crap phones.
I think europe might be the best place to introduce, considering europe is slightly ahead (at least in comparison to US) when it comes to cellphones. Moreover, I have gotten the impression that people over here change phones much more often than in US. Mot people I know get a phone at least once a year. A standard contract over here is for 12 months, but many people arent tied up by contracts.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
I wouldnt be surprised if the iPhone will be the one-more-thing at the Paris expo. In fact, I actually expect it considering the competion getting harder. mp3 cellphones at 4Gb and the upcoming MS iTMS/player should force Apple to act sooner than later.
I just hope it's true, I am so tired of my Verizon service and their crap phones.
I think europe might be the best place to introduce, considering europe is slightly ahead (at least in comparison to US) when it comes to cellphones. Moreover, I have gotten the impression that people over here change phones much more often than in US. Mot people I know get a phone at least once a year. A standard contract over here is for 12 months, but many people arent tied up by contracts.
Agreed. I can't imagine anyone getting "all excited" about a product that's a year or more off.
I wouldnt be surprised if the iPhone will be the one-more-thing at the Paris expo. In fact, I actually expect it considering the competion getting harder. mp3 cellphones at 4Gb and the upcoming MS iTMS/player should force Apple to act sooner than later.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 03:14 PM
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
Interesting, don't I remember you as the guy always trashing on Apple on Digg? (I gave up on Digg a couple of years ago, but I remember your shtick.)
I love Apple products,
Whoa, epic conversion!!! :)
It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
Google seems to have done a pretty good job of it with you. See, fanboyism is a two-way street.
Interesting, don't I remember you as the guy always trashing on Apple on Digg? (I gave up on Digg a couple of years ago, but I remember your shtick.)
I love Apple products,
Whoa, epic conversion!!! :)
It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
Google seems to have done a pretty good job of it with you. See, fanboyism is a two-way street.
shamino
Jul 20, 05:50 PM
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
...
and ECC memory
and dual GigE network ports
and serial-port management capability
and Mac OS X server preloaded
and no bundled video hardware
The processor and hard drive can be identical to a G5 or Mac Pro, and neither will cut into the other's business. An Xserve makes for a lousy desktop, and a G5 tower is overpriced and not as good when used as a cluster node.
...
and ECC memory
and dual GigE network ports
and serial-port management capability
and Mac OS X server preloaded
and no bundled video hardware
The processor and hard drive can be identical to a G5 or Mac Pro, and neither will cut into the other's business. An Xserve makes for a lousy desktop, and a G5 tower is overpriced and not as good when used as a cluster node.
Taustin Powers
Aug 12, 04:41 AM
Multi-quote madness!!! :eek:
Kelmon
Aug 27, 05:11 AM
Arrgh! The anticipation! While I'd like to be able to hold off on a new laptop until Santa Rosa and a supporting MacBook Pro hits the market I can't. My old Ti PowerBook is way too slow these days and it will be replaced by the first 17" Merom-based MacBook Pro that Apple releases. While there's a few things that I'd like to see updated in the new models beyond the processor, I think my #1 will be 4GB RAM limit (2GB is fine for one OS but I want to be running OS X and Windows side-by-side at work) and #2 will be an updated GPU.
It will certainly be interesting to see what happens next week (personally, I'm not expecting an announcement, but hey, I'm happy to be wrong) and it will nicely coincide with the finances becoming available for the muther of all portable Macs. As long as the new one doesn't have any QA or design issues, I'll be as happy as a pig in ****...
It will certainly be interesting to see what happens next week (personally, I'm not expecting an announcement, but hey, I'm happy to be wrong) and it will nicely coincide with the finances becoming available for the muther of all portable Macs. As long as the new one doesn't have any QA or design issues, I'll be as happy as a pig in ****...
Machead III
Sep 19, 03:50 AM
It would be fantastic for the MacBook to have the Core 2 Duo, (MacBookPro is a given), the fact is, Apple needs to do this update to stay in the same ballpark as the pc notebook makers.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
The fact that we all want dedicated graphics and it's a no-brainer to add it, means that it won't happen.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
The fact that we all want dedicated graphics and it's a no-brainer to add it, means that it won't happen.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:38 PM
I own both the iPad and the Xoom - both do some things very well, and both do some things horribly.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
mlrproducts
Nov 29, 10:34 AM
I think it is a Great idea!!!
Apple will give Universal $1 from every iPod sold, since the iPod is used to store stolen Universal tracks.
In turn, Universal will give Apple $5 from every overpriced CD sold because they're only buying that CD so they can rip it into iTunes/iPod ecosystem.
Apple will give Universal $1 from every iPod sold, since the iPod is used to store stolen Universal tracks.
In turn, Universal will give Apple $5 from every overpriced CD sold because they're only buying that CD so they can rip it into iTunes/iPod ecosystem.
rdowns
Mar 24, 12:52 PM
Where does race come into this? I don't ask rhetorically. I may have missed it.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
I believe a lot of the anti-Obama crap spewed by the Tea Party and Republicans is based more on his race than his party.
darkplanets
Mar 31, 06:01 PM
"We have no idea if it will even work on phones."
Um, so rather than find out, let's just not release it so we never know. That's an awesome decision. Way to take a chance there Google.
On the same note, I'm not sure if I can run the trail by my house in under 10 minutes, so I'm not even going to try.
I bet they tried, but it didn't work well. They're just feigning ignorance. As they themselves said, they cut corners. I read this as they didn't optimize the software-- it's probably very processor and RAM intensive. Just speculation though.
Um, so rather than find out, let's just not release it so we never know. That's an awesome decision. Way to take a chance there Google.
On the same note, I'm not sure if I can run the trail by my house in under 10 minutes, so I'm not even going to try.
I bet they tried, but it didn't work well. They're just feigning ignorance. As they themselves said, they cut corners. I read this as they didn't optimize the software-- it's probably very processor and RAM intensive. Just speculation though.
NY Guitarist
Apr 5, 08:50 PM
I agree I for see FCP needing Mac OS X Lion
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
I'm just guessing but it's possible that Apple will announce the new FCS and ship it when Lion ships, perhaps around the June WWDC.
thisisahughes
Apr 27, 09:04 AM
There's a nuclear disaster in Japan and treacherous weather throughout, people are jobless and homeless and the dollar's in the sh***er and our Supreme Court ruled that companies can give unlimited financial aid to any politician putting business interests in our government and people are worried about Apple possibly tracking them on their iDevice?
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
one of the best posts I have ever read.
Let 'em, my life is BORING, they wouldn't be interested :p
one of the best posts I have ever read.
umichfan
Jun 12, 02:09 PM
So if Im getting this right....I bring my 3GS to Radio Shack on the 15th to preorder the iphone 4 and then I have to turn in my old phone in order to get the buy back gift card? But then I would be without a phone for over a week? My local Radio Shack said I could get $256 for my 3gs. But if I read right that price could go down the closer it gets to the ip4 launch?
Thanks
Thanks
No comments:
Post a Comment