Palad1
May 6, 04:50 AM
Windows 8 being available on ARM platforms would make this move, albeit a bold one, pretty viable.
Core Trio
Jul 21, 02:04 PM
Noooo....must...resist urges to buy...new MBP's
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
mwatha
Mar 30, 06:03 PM
Looks like OS X Server has been removed from Mac OS X Lion Developer Preview 2 as it is now available as a separate download "Mac OS X Lion Server Developer Preview 2"
geiger167
Sep 11, 02:51 PM
Not really sure if any of the rumoured devices interest me tommorow, as living in the UK we probably will be denied any kind of movie download service (still waiting for tv show downloads to start) The media streaming device might be a cool idea but unless it had support for divx/transport stream files wouldn't really interest me either and cant imagine apple allowing support of an outside player like VLC and without any kind of download structure available to view apple sourced files outside the USA cant imagine it taking off. Having moaned a bit though I have still ordered a 24 imac and cant wait for it to arrive ( I love watching hdtv files on my 20' imac now so 24' must be heaven)
digitalbiker
Aug 11, 03:05 PM
I wouldn't say it would be anything noticable!
Probably make the low end one a 1.66 Duo and the top one a 1.8 or 2.0 Duo
I think it would be cool if Apple came out with a Mac Mini Pro.
Merom core 2 duo, X1900 GPU, slightly enlarged case, Sata 500GB HD, FW 800, SuperDrive. All for under $1250.00
Probably make the low end one a 1.66 Duo and the top one a 1.8 or 2.0 Duo
I think it would be cool if Apple came out with a Mac Mini Pro.
Merom core 2 duo, X1900 GPU, slightly enlarged case, Sata 500GB HD, FW 800, SuperDrive. All for under $1250.00
netdog
Jul 31, 01:46 AM
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 11:36 AM
No they do it to manage the negative externalities of capitalism. There is no perfect world where business ventures generate absolute gains for everyone. We have governments (and pay for them) so that life isn't nasty, brutish, and short.
Hong Kong has been wealthy for a long time, and a lot of it is due to the fact that it was a Royal Colony during the Second Industrial Revolution and a major port for the Royal Navy. At the peak of the British Empire, Hong Kong was one of the colonies that received a large boost from the opium trade in China. Modern Hong Kong wasn't dependent on low taxes; it was dependent on aggressive government spending.
As for mainland China, it hasn't been "communist" for a very long time. Moreover, no one is advocating a 100% tax on all goods and services. Anytime you go from one extreme to a moderate position, you'll see improvements.
In the US, we are flirting with the other extreme at this time. Taxes are at historic lows and we have a terrible economy to show for it. Clearly the 0% mantra does not work because as the marginal rate drops further and further, more people find themselves in poverty, unemployed, and with a smaller share of the pie.
You could be right. I've changed my mind a bunch of times before. But I'd like to hear your explanation for why a lower marginal tax rate has caused more people to enter poverty and unemployment.
Hong Kong has been wealthy for a long time, and a lot of it is due to the fact that it was a Royal Colony during the Second Industrial Revolution and a major port for the Royal Navy. At the peak of the British Empire, Hong Kong was one of the colonies that received a large boost from the opium trade in China. Modern Hong Kong wasn't dependent on low taxes; it was dependent on aggressive government spending.
As for mainland China, it hasn't been "communist" for a very long time. Moreover, no one is advocating a 100% tax on all goods and services. Anytime you go from one extreme to a moderate position, you'll see improvements.
In the US, we are flirting with the other extreme at this time. Taxes are at historic lows and we have a terrible economy to show for it. Clearly the 0% mantra does not work because as the marginal rate drops further and further, more people find themselves in poverty, unemployed, and with a smaller share of the pie.
You could be right. I've changed my mind a bunch of times before. But I'd like to hear your explanation for why a lower marginal tax rate has caused more people to enter poverty and unemployment.
janellelk
Apr 20, 10:25 AM
I just bought the iPhone 4 and to be honest, I don't even feel an ounce of disappointment that I could've waited a 5 months for the iPhone 5. I am so thrilled with the iPhone 4 and its capabilities. I've never run into any issues with the external antennae.. I dunnno. I'm a long time diehard apple fan.
Sorry if this seemed a bit irrelevant, just wanted to throw my two cents in.
Sorry if this seemed a bit irrelevant, just wanted to throw my two cents in.
Reach9
Mar 26, 10:18 PM
As long as they show it and preview it, I'm okay with waiting. Especially if it's a redesign
Agreed. As long as the preview looks amazing, and Apple delivers, and if this is a complete revamp of iOS, then i'm all up for more waiting.
But the iPhone 5 should be released in the usual time period.
Agreed. As long as the preview looks amazing, and Apple delivers, and if this is a complete revamp of iOS, then i'm all up for more waiting.
But the iPhone 5 should be released in the usual time period.
heisetax
Aug 4, 09:09 AM
Isn't that what Rosetta is for :p :D
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
DJMastaWes
Aug 11, 10:06 AM
I'm holding off for the new MBP because from what I've seen, the current ones still have issues. It was Apple's first Mac to go to Intel, and although they've made some changes, it's still "first generation". I'm hoping the next revision will have more than just a processor upgrade.
The iMac was the first to go to intel.
The iMac was the first to go to intel.
Peace
Sep 11, 01:33 PM
I still can't help but wonder what Apple is going to do with the Conroe CPU if anything.
TedSlawski
Aug 7, 02:25 PM
Well a really fast computer at a reasonable price that you don't have to wait months for? I'm pinching myself before I make the call and order one. The idea that this could be what the original dual 2gig G5 that I (and a lot of other people) waited months for and really was kind of a ho-hum experience updating from a dual 800 quicksilver. Just playing around with a dual core iMac and being impressed says "this has got to be the one". The promise that they made for the G5 and didn't come across with. I would really like to play around with one of thses and say WOW!, not try to remember if it opened Photoshop faster than my quicksilver or not. 4 X 2.66Ghz Woodcrest�oughta do it!
toddybody
Apr 25, 07:57 AM
Is that why you bought the iPad? One would think if you have an iPad, you'd already see the error in judgement that you made there. Just because Apple stuff looks cool doesn't mean it's sacrificing function - to the contrary.
If you've used an iPhone, or iPad, for any period of time you'd know that.
Other computer makers put wavy lines, green blinking lights and all sorts of other kitsch on their machines - by kitsch I mean design features that have no function, that are there only to look "good".
When has Apple made a device that didn't work very well??? You'd have to go all the way to the Newton for that. And that happened while Steve Jobs was away, not a co-incidence. Ever since the iPod, it's been hit after hit.
Well, I think the previous commenter's point has some validity. A great example of this "form over function" is the iMac. Mobile graphics (and poor ones at that), horrendous thermal management, limited stand orientation...but one damn fine looking computer:D Dont get me wrong, Apple does amazing things with their products. (Im obviously a fan :D) But I do think design is paramount to their efforts (not that function ever takes backseat, it just can be slightly lessoned on some releases). Now, IMO...they knocked both form and function out of the park with the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and 2010 MBA. Bravo
If you've used an iPhone, or iPad, for any period of time you'd know that.
Other computer makers put wavy lines, green blinking lights and all sorts of other kitsch on their machines - by kitsch I mean design features that have no function, that are there only to look "good".
When has Apple made a device that didn't work very well??? You'd have to go all the way to the Newton for that. And that happened while Steve Jobs was away, not a co-incidence. Ever since the iPod, it's been hit after hit.
Well, I think the previous commenter's point has some validity. A great example of this "form over function" is the iMac. Mobile graphics (and poor ones at that), horrendous thermal management, limited stand orientation...but one damn fine looking computer:D Dont get me wrong, Apple does amazing things with their products. (Im obviously a fan :D) But I do think design is paramount to their efforts (not that function ever takes backseat, it just can be slightly lessoned on some releases). Now, IMO...they knocked both form and function out of the park with the iPad 2, iPhone 4, and 2010 MBA. Bravo
Full of Win
Apr 5, 01:32 PM
How one big multinational company arguing with another affects your phone, I don't quite understand. Oh, wait...you're saying you WANT to make your homescreen a Toyota ad?
I tell you what, all you "I demand my freedom" folks confuse me more and more. The right to let Toyota advertise to you was never a big arguing point in the past for the radicals I used to read about.
I just don''t like to see Apple flex their power to do things they cannot legally force under the DMCA (per The Library of Congress).
I tell you what, all you "I demand my freedom" folks confuse me more and more. The right to let Toyota advertise to you was never a big arguing point in the past for the radicals I used to read about.
I just don''t like to see Apple flex their power to do things they cannot legally force under the DMCA (per The Library of Congress).
acslater017
Mar 30, 07:28 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They're updating scrollbars, buttons, drop-downs, etc. It's not an "overhaul" per se but we're not gonna get one of those for awhile.
Quick Look, full-screen windows, Mission Control, Launchpad, etc. I'd say it's a solid update
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They're updating scrollbars, buttons, drop-downs, etc. It's not an "overhaul" per se but we're not gonna get one of those for awhile.
Quick Look, full-screen windows, Mission Control, Launchpad, etc. I'd say it's a solid update
Beaverfish
May 6, 03:46 AM
Does anyone think that this could possibly be about having OS X running on ARM..... i.e OS X iPads etc. With the type of convergence we are seeing in Lion, it is only a matter of time before iOS and OS X become one and the same.
johnnyturbouk
Apr 10, 10:35 AM
hence the ambiguity, IMO, of the presentation of the equation.
ksgant
May 4, 05:29 PM
keep in mind, right now exactly 0% of the products sold on the app store will run without the OS already installed.
I didn't know this. You mean I have to have an OS installed before I play Angry Birds?
I didn't know this. You mean I have to have an OS installed before I play Angry Birds?
WildCowboy
Jul 21, 10:05 PM
Can someone tell me the advantages of the Merom chip?
More Speed? Less Heat? Improved battery performance?
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Intel claims that it will have 20% more performance at the same clock speed when compared to the current Yonah processor.
More Speed? Less Heat? Improved battery performance?
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Intel claims that it will have 20% more performance at the same clock speed when compared to the current Yonah processor.
CIA
Apr 21, 06:38 PM
Add a couple SSD slots, and lose the superdrive & PCIe slots.
Could this become the fabled "headless iMac"?
I need:
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
Could this become the fabled "headless iMac"?
I need:
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
CIA
Apr 21, 10:19 PM
Yah CIA, I think you'd be surprised with what little you can get by on these days in smaller boxes and with Thunderbolt.
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
Ya, you know what, it is OLD and Slow, and Legacy. Because that's what small (under 20) staff TV stations usually have. We're not WNBC, we are a small town TV station that is held together by ducktape and fishing wire. I would LOVE a brand new station with cutting edge equipment, but that's just not in the cards when we are fighting to stay above water. So we use what we have available and it works. I didn't buy that whole setup all at once. (yes, it's my PERSONAL setup, since when started I refused to use the PC based Avid system.) It was pieced together over the last few years as we slimmed staff over the recession and sold off Avid machines to buy new macs. Thunderbolt is awesome, but right now it's 1998 all over again, when my first DV deck and Premiere running B&W G3 system cost $10,000 put together. Is there a single SHIPPING thunderbolt device yet? No, and the first few that do ship will cost a zillion dollars that we don't have. I love the promise of thunderbolt, but I'm more excited for 2014 thunderbolt when devices are cheap and plentiful. Right now hard drives are cheap, tape is cheap, and legacy firewire cases are all over the place. It's old, legacy, but here and essentially free. If I was swimming in cash it would be a different story.
So for the moment I'd prefer a single big box that does the job of many less expensive boxes that add up in cost to more then the one box. I need a box that I can add to over the years since buying new $2,000 machines every year is out of the question. Our Edit bay is 2 Mac Pro's, and a pair of 27" 2.93 iMac i7's. A G4 for Cold Storage, and a G5 for when interns need to learn the basics of Final Cut. (also a few OLD HP Avid Workstations from 2003 or 2004.)
And I agree with you, I hate tapes...lol. I wish we would go to 1 damn standard but we know that is how people make their money...no standards. I'm so sick of all the formats and all the output formats. I just want 1080p and that's it. Burn the rest. ;)
Ya, you know what, it is OLD and Slow, and Legacy. Because that's what small (under 20) staff TV stations usually have. We're not WNBC, we are a small town TV station that is held together by ducktape and fishing wire. I would LOVE a brand new station with cutting edge equipment, but that's just not in the cards when we are fighting to stay above water. So we use what we have available and it works. I didn't buy that whole setup all at once. (yes, it's my PERSONAL setup, since when started I refused to use the PC based Avid system.) It was pieced together over the last few years as we slimmed staff over the recession and sold off Avid machines to buy new macs. Thunderbolt is awesome, but right now it's 1998 all over again, when my first DV deck and Premiere running B&W G3 system cost $10,000 put together. Is there a single SHIPPING thunderbolt device yet? No, and the first few that do ship will cost a zillion dollars that we don't have. I love the promise of thunderbolt, but I'm more excited for 2014 thunderbolt when devices are cheap and plentiful. Right now hard drives are cheap, tape is cheap, and legacy firewire cases are all over the place. It's old, legacy, but here and essentially free. If I was swimming in cash it would be a different story.
So for the moment I'd prefer a single big box that does the job of many less expensive boxes that add up in cost to more then the one box. I need a box that I can add to over the years since buying new $2,000 machines every year is out of the question. Our Edit bay is 2 Mac Pro's, and a pair of 27" 2.93 iMac i7's. A G4 for Cold Storage, and a G5 for when interns need to learn the basics of Final Cut. (also a few OLD HP Avid Workstations from 2003 or 2004.)
rdowns
Apr 14, 09:44 AM
Long and very interesting article on taxes. Very good read. (http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html)
As millions of Americans prepare to file their annual taxes, they do so in an environment of media-perpetuated tax myths. Here are a few points about taxes and the economy that you may not know, to consider as you prepare to file your taxes. (All figures are inflation-adjusted.)
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That�s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don�t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes.
The 2004 American Jobs Creation Act, which passed with bipartisan support, allowed more than 800 companies to bring profits that were untaxed but overseas back to the United States. Instead of paying the usual 35 percent tax, the companies paid just 5.25 percent.
The companies said bringing the money home��repatriating� it, they called it�would mean lots of jobs. Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican, put the figure at 660,000 new jobs.
Pfizer, the drug company, was the biggest beneficiary. It brought home $37 billion, saving $11 billion in taxes. Almost immediately it started firing people. Since the law took effect, Pfizer has let 40,000 workers go. In all, it appears that at least 100,000 jobs were destroyed.
As millions of Americans prepare to file their annual taxes, they do so in an environment of media-perpetuated tax myths. Here are a few points about taxes and the economy that you may not know, to consider as you prepare to file your taxes. (All figures are inflation-adjusted.)
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That�s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don�t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes.
The 2004 American Jobs Creation Act, which passed with bipartisan support, allowed more than 800 companies to bring profits that were untaxed but overseas back to the United States. Instead of paying the usual 35 percent tax, the companies paid just 5.25 percent.
The companies said bringing the money home��repatriating� it, they called it�would mean lots of jobs. Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican, put the figure at 660,000 new jobs.
Pfizer, the drug company, was the biggest beneficiary. It brought home $37 billion, saving $11 billion in taxes. Almost immediately it started firing people. Since the law took effect, Pfizer has let 40,000 workers go. In all, it appears that at least 100,000 jobs were destroyed.
bense27
Aug 5, 10:44 PM
i predict something cube shaped
to match their new store:)
to match their new store:)