callmemike20
Apr 18, 08:18 PM
What constitutes being a "last resort"?
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
You clause is a great idea, but we all know that taxes never go away. Wasn't the income tax supposed to be temporary also? Once the government gets their hands on more money, they become less worried about adjusting their spending because the problem is basically fixed (in their minds) due to the additional income.
You are right about using all the tools available to solve the problem. So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
An example (with simplified numbers):
Government Income: $1 billion
Government Spending: $1.50 billion
Total government debt: $5 billion
Defense Spending: $ 300 million (20%)
Social Security: $300 million (20%)
Police/Fire Spending: $200 million (about 13%)
Medical: $250 million (about 17%)
Other: $450 million (30%)
Now, let's say an agreement was made that would increase tax income to $1.2 billion, but in order for those taxes to be effective, the spending must be cut to $1.1 billion ( $0.1 billion difference for miscalculations and to pay off debt). So, each of those departments should still obtain the same amount of funding as % of government income, so 20% of $1.1 billion would be $220 million, which is a reduction of 80 million for defense.
Go down the line and do this for every department. If it doesn't work, then cut other programs to provide adequate funding the the extremely necessary departments that need it.
It makes more sense to me to put in clauses that reverse tax increases once a goal has been reached.
Use all the tools in the tool chest to solve the problem.
You clause is a great idea, but we all know that taxes never go away. Wasn't the income tax supposed to be temporary also? Once the government gets their hands on more money, they become less worried about adjusting their spending because the problem is basically fixed (in their minds) due to the additional income.
You are right about using all the tools available to solve the problem. So let me recommend something. It's basically a reversal of your clause. The clause would allow a taxation adjustment (which would be predetermined) once 20% of spending has been cut (or some other amount).
An example (with simplified numbers):
Government Income: $1 billion
Government Spending: $1.50 billion
Total government debt: $5 billion
Defense Spending: $ 300 million (20%)
Social Security: $300 million (20%)
Police/Fire Spending: $200 million (about 13%)
Medical: $250 million (about 17%)
Other: $450 million (30%)
Now, let's say an agreement was made that would increase tax income to $1.2 billion, but in order for those taxes to be effective, the spending must be cut to $1.1 billion ( $0.1 billion difference for miscalculations and to pay off debt). So, each of those departments should still obtain the same amount of funding as % of government income, so 20% of $1.1 billion would be $220 million, which is a reduction of 80 million for defense.
Go down the line and do this for every department. If it doesn't work, then cut other programs to provide adequate funding the the extremely necessary departments that need it.
gugy
Aug 2, 01:08 PM
finally someone reasonable! so many of you flippin fools don't realize what WWDC stands for...
World wide DEVELOPER'S conference!
this is about professional stuff. in they launched the powermac g5, because developers could then write 64-bit apps. in they discussed tiger (and i think launched new pro displays) so that users could write stuff using core image and all the cool new tiger features. in they announced the transition to intel, because devs could now write stuff for the intel platform (and i don't think they really announced anything else AFAICR...). so in they are going to talk about leopard and how it relates to developers, and maybe release PROFESSIONAL products, like a mac pro or xserve.
you have got to be CRAZY to think that he's going to intro an ipod at WWDC, when MW Paris is right around the corner! MW Paris in september is pretty much ALWAYS when they intro ipods and consumer products this time of year.
edit: last year, they had a special media event around october to intro the imac g5 with isight and video ipod and did not have anything at MW Paris. this will probably be the same this year.
You are right if you follow the WWDC event history.
I am pretty sure just PRO stuff at WWDC.
Ipods, Iphone, Nanos, Etc. after that, maybe at special events or at Paris Expo.
So if you are not a Professional, I would not have your hopes too high for WWDC.
World wide DEVELOPER'S conference!
this is about professional stuff. in they launched the powermac g5, because developers could then write 64-bit apps. in they discussed tiger (and i think launched new pro displays) so that users could write stuff using core image and all the cool new tiger features. in they announced the transition to intel, because devs could now write stuff for the intel platform (and i don't think they really announced anything else AFAICR...). so in they are going to talk about leopard and how it relates to developers, and maybe release PROFESSIONAL products, like a mac pro or xserve.
you have got to be CRAZY to think that he's going to intro an ipod at WWDC, when MW Paris is right around the corner! MW Paris in september is pretty much ALWAYS when they intro ipods and consumer products this time of year.
edit: last year, they had a special media event around october to intro the imac g5 with isight and video ipod and did not have anything at MW Paris. this will probably be the same this year.
You are right if you follow the WWDC event history.
I am pretty sure just PRO stuff at WWDC.
Ipods, Iphone, Nanos, Etc. after that, maybe at special events or at Paris Expo.
So if you are not a Professional, I would not have your hopes too high for WWDC.
JBytes
Apr 25, 10:08 AM
I've been reading MacRumors for years - only added to the discussion a few times since 08. Not a troll, but still considered a "newbie". :D
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
Wow, I just realised I've been on this forum for quite a while.
-aggie-
May 3, 08:49 PM
The problem with all this splitting up is that we become weaker as a split up team. Be careful before you make rash decisions.
JRM PowerPod
Nov 27, 05:53 AM
Everyone.......... would buy Two
They would
They would
Rdclark
Mar 31, 02:28 PM
You get 20 gigs if you buy an album on Amazon. Here's an album for a dollar:
http://www.amazon.com/Neroli/dp/B001LK0HVU/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_cart_3
You do the math.
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
http://www.amazon.com/Neroli/dp/B001LK0HVU/ref=pd_ecc_rvi_cart_3
You do the math.
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
marksman
Mar 31, 09:06 AM
Ah yes can we have a decent source please not that ridiculous piece of ill conceived drivel that is the Daily Mail.
It seems legitimate enough... Although the reality of that story is Apple chose to pay some guy who was down on his luck and he lost some patents to public domain a bit of change and a trip to California as opposed to potentially have to pay Burst millions and 10s of millions of dollars or even more on their patent claims.
Was a pretty good move on Apple's part.
In every release of Mac OS X, there have been a separate client & server editions, so this is nothing new. Not sure why Apple bundled the 2 together for preview 1.
Yeah but one of the features of Lion is server will be included with it, so it makes sense that they ultimately be bundled.
It seems legitimate enough... Although the reality of that story is Apple chose to pay some guy who was down on his luck and he lost some patents to public domain a bit of change and a trip to California as opposed to potentially have to pay Burst millions and 10s of millions of dollars or even more on their patent claims.
Was a pretty good move on Apple's part.
In every release of Mac OS X, there have been a separate client & server editions, so this is nothing new. Not sure why Apple bundled the 2 together for preview 1.
Yeah but one of the features of Lion is server will be included with it, so it makes sense that they ultimately be bundled.
RHatton
Apr 7, 11:09 AM
Ehh, purposeful or not (as a sabotage)...not good news for iPad competition:( Which isnt good news for us iPad users...Apple needs constant pressure to release revolutionary products.
You know I used to say this same thing but honestly, I think this statement is irrelevant. There is a difference between being competitive in a market and creating your own market all together. They did this with both the iPhone and iPad in particular. Apple's desire to make "revolutionary" products simply stems from a desire to make "revolutionary" products. They don't seem to be affected too much by outside influences. RIM doesn't come out with the storm and Apple rush an iPhone to compete. Apple stays on a consistent product cycle, releases products with features that leave other companies boggled and doesn't look back. I honestly think even if these other companies gave up trying to compete, Apple would still make great products because its in their DNA to do so.
Some of these creations I promise you sat in Ive's office for years undiscovered until someone thought it a good time to release.
You know I used to say this same thing but honestly, I think this statement is irrelevant. There is a difference between being competitive in a market and creating your own market all together. They did this with both the iPhone and iPad in particular. Apple's desire to make "revolutionary" products simply stems from a desire to make "revolutionary" products. They don't seem to be affected too much by outside influences. RIM doesn't come out with the storm and Apple rush an iPhone to compete. Apple stays on a consistent product cycle, releases products with features that leave other companies boggled and doesn't look back. I honestly think even if these other companies gave up trying to compete, Apple would still make great products because its in their DNA to do so.
Some of these creations I promise you sat in Ive's office for years undiscovered until someone thought it a good time to release.
joost538
Aug 11, 09:26 AM
Makes no sense to put these in Macbook so soon. Macbook Pro, yes, but not the macbook. Apple have always differentiated the two lines, the fact that current Macbooks are comparable to the Pros is just plain luck and won't last long, IMO.
mscriv
May 5, 12:48 AM
Why would the villain ever move out of the lair?
So that I can have the pleasure of killing you in person. It's so much more enjoyable when I get to stand over you and watch the color drain from your face and the light disappear from your eyes.
Awww... don't be so anxious, it's not all bad. I'll let you stay around by turning you into one of my zombie ghouls. That way you can welcome the next party of ill fated adventurers who dare to darken my doorstep.
http://images.buycostumes.com/mgen/merchandiser/17862.jpg?zm=350,350,1,0,0
So that I can have the pleasure of killing you in person. It's so much more enjoyable when I get to stand over you and watch the color drain from your face and the light disappear from your eyes.
Awww... don't be so anxious, it's not all bad. I'll let you stay around by turning you into one of my zombie ghouls. That way you can welcome the next party of ill fated adventurers who dare to darken my doorstep.
http://images.buycostumes.com/mgen/merchandiser/17862.jpg?zm=350,350,1,0,0
rbgb
Sep 16, 02:34 AM
What about the inclusion/release of Blu-Ray Drives?
decimortis
Apr 25, 09:09 AM
I never understand these things.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
I'm guessing silence, since burgers don't talk. ;)
D.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
I'm guessing silence, since burgers don't talk. ;)
D.
42streetsdown
May 6, 01:48 AM
This seems unlikely. The PPC to Intel switch was a result of Apple not being impressed by both IBM and Motorola's lack of interest in continuing the advances in the PowerPC architecture. Intel's current architecture and future planned architectures are still of great interest to apple and consumers. There isn't enough motivation (unless some huge new breakthrough in ARM tech is in the works.)
The PPC-Intel transition was confusing for many consumers and a pain for developers. I don't think Apple is likely to put us through it again.
The PPC-Intel transition was confusing for many consumers and a pain for developers. I don't think Apple is likely to put us through it again.
milo
Jul 21, 03:26 PM
This may be a dumb question, but why would apple just use the new chips in mbp's and not the mb? Dosn't seem to make sense. As soon as core 2 merom comes out every pc notebook will have it. Price wouldn't be an issue cause merom is same price as yonah, correct?
Because yonah will be cheaper. Yonah prices will drop again when merom ships.
And "every PC notebook" will most certainly NOT have merom. Cheaper PC laptops will still have yonah.
To date we have not seen Apple update any of their Intel products. So it may not be any different. The pressure will be on Apple with new processors coming out all of the time. Steve Jobs keps Apple from doing what you would exspect much of the time.
They speed bumped the MBP before it shipped, didn't they also do a minor update when the 17 shipped?
With the more frequent processor changes/speed upgrades that goes along with switching to Intel, what is Apple going to do with all the "left overs" of old versions of products?
They can sell them at a discount. But there won't be many of these in most cases, since for example the MBP doesn't need any additional changes along with swapping in a merom chip. The imac and mini could take merom just by swapping a chip in a socket (so the user could even do it).
Because yonah will be cheaper. Yonah prices will drop again when merom ships.
And "every PC notebook" will most certainly NOT have merom. Cheaper PC laptops will still have yonah.
To date we have not seen Apple update any of their Intel products. So it may not be any different. The pressure will be on Apple with new processors coming out all of the time. Steve Jobs keps Apple from doing what you would exspect much of the time.
They speed bumped the MBP before it shipped, didn't they also do a minor update when the 17 shipped?
With the more frequent processor changes/speed upgrades that goes along with switching to Intel, what is Apple going to do with all the "left overs" of old versions of products?
They can sell them at a discount. But there won't be many of these in most cases, since for example the MBP doesn't need any additional changes along with swapping in a merom chip. The imac and mini could take merom just by swapping a chip in a socket (so the user could even do it).
Detlev
Aug 4, 08:54 PM
Who cares for Quicken - it's not performance critical. It probably wasn't worth the effort given the gains probaby wouldn't even be noticeable.
The market for small businesses running their office/financials is small indeed but isn't an executive of Intuit on the Apple BOD? They should have been ahead of the game. It is suprising that the 2007 product line is not Universal. Oh, I would argue that it is performance critical. Try crunching numbers all day...
I did not hear of any market research by Intuit on the subject but I'm sure they are aware that their users are using BootCamp or Parallels and using the Windows versions (which are much more developed). Check their forums, users every day are posting they are "switching" away. This comes back to the "doomsday" reports of old when Apple announced the move to Intel. Will developers give up developing for Macs when Mac users themselves are booting up Windows on their machines? Time will tell.
The market for small businesses running their office/financials is small indeed but isn't an executive of Intuit on the Apple BOD? They should have been ahead of the game. It is suprising that the 2007 product line is not Universal. Oh, I would argue that it is performance critical. Try crunching numbers all day...
I did not hear of any market research by Intuit on the subject but I'm sure they are aware that their users are using BootCamp or Parallels and using the Windows versions (which are much more developed). Check their forums, users every day are posting they are "switching" away. This comes back to the "doomsday" reports of old when Apple announced the move to Intel. Will developers give up developing for Macs when Mac users themselves are booting up Windows on their machines? Time will tell.
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
derbothaus
Apr 27, 10:21 PM
I think the iMac will take care of gamers and builders.. the mac pro is NOT a gaming device, it is a high class workstation that is designed for use with using and manipulating multi-threaded pro and audio apps.
Yeah but it is the fastest "gaming" device Apple sells so...
The stock 5770 is faster than the iMac 27". The iMac has always had pathetic graphics. It is never paired with a card that can actually play a game in the res native to the screen your playing on. You always have to down res to get any AA or heavy shadows. This is unacceptable for any respectable gamer. I play on a smaller screen specifically because I want everything dot to dot. The graphics chip is soldered to the motherboard, also not ever going to be cool.
On the Mac side my Pro functions as a fancy pants Xeon workstation and on the Win side it performs as a Core i7 980x and 5870 should perform and that is a damn respectable gaming rig. The less capable machine is never seen as ok for gaming. For me to think of iMac 27" they'd have to ship it with at least a 5870 if not a 6970 to ever hope to get 2560x1440 res in game. The heat alone would melt that case in a couple months:)
Yeah but it is the fastest "gaming" device Apple sells so...
The stock 5770 is faster than the iMac 27". The iMac has always had pathetic graphics. It is never paired with a card that can actually play a game in the res native to the screen your playing on. You always have to down res to get any AA or heavy shadows. This is unacceptable for any respectable gamer. I play on a smaller screen specifically because I want everything dot to dot. The graphics chip is soldered to the motherboard, also not ever going to be cool.
On the Mac side my Pro functions as a fancy pants Xeon workstation and on the Win side it performs as a Core i7 980x and 5870 should perform and that is a damn respectable gaming rig. The less capable machine is never seen as ok for gaming. For me to think of iMac 27" they'd have to ship it with at least a 5870 if not a 6970 to ever hope to get 2560x1440 res in game. The heat alone would melt that case in a couple months:)
ChiltonWebb
Nov 26, 08:59 PM
Hi,
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I will pay up to $5,000 for an Apple branded Tablet Mac. I don't understand why they don't have one already. I've always preferred pen and paper to a keyboard, and will be the happiest dork alive when Apple releases a Tablet Mac.
Pen and paper are the foundations for most graphic artwork. One of Apple's target audiences is the graphics industry. It just makes sense.
I'm not a fan of Palm or any other of those tiny handhelds. A Tablet Mac needs to be a freakin' Tablet. I'd pay more for a decent one of those than I would for a Mac Pro.
-Chilton
I've said it before, and I'll say it again. I will pay up to $5,000 for an Apple branded Tablet Mac. I don't understand why they don't have one already. I've always preferred pen and paper to a keyboard, and will be the happiest dork alive when Apple releases a Tablet Mac.
Pen and paper are the foundations for most graphic artwork. One of Apple's target audiences is the graphics industry. It just makes sense.
I'm not a fan of Palm or any other of those tiny handhelds. A Tablet Mac needs to be a freakin' Tablet. I'd pay more for a decent one of those than I would for a Mac Pro.
-Chilton
Vitruviux
Apr 20, 06:17 AM
Keep the shape the same, I like iPhone 4's design, a lot.
Here's my criteria for an upgrade...
-iPhone 4 design
-Dual core A5 with SGX543MP2 GPU
-1GB RAM - I don't think this will happen but would've been nice!
-64GB Storage
-8MP Camera capable of 1080p recording(but there must be a 720/1080 switch iOS) - With good lens and sensor, I want Galaxy S II like images
-Wi-Fi Direct
-Bluetooth 3.0(hopefully iOS will take advantage of this)
-Revamped and much improved iOS 5 with notifications, live icons and other features we're all been asking for added/fixed.
Here's my criteria for an upgrade...
-iPhone 4 design
-Dual core A5 with SGX543MP2 GPU
-1GB RAM - I don't think this will happen but would've been nice!
-64GB Storage
-8MP Camera capable of 1080p recording(but there must be a 720/1080 switch iOS) - With good lens and sensor, I want Galaxy S II like images
-Wi-Fi Direct
-Bluetooth 3.0(hopefully iOS will take advantage of this)
-Revamped and much improved iOS 5 with notifications, live icons and other features we're all been asking for added/fixed.
Krafty
Apr 5, 02:32 PM
75% of the wallpapers are some asian chick sitting on the hood of some car
Nothing wrong with that on my end.
Nothing wrong with that on my end.
rand()
Aug 2, 12:14 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used.
I don't think that's what the OP meant... it could be though. I think what he meant was don't use the new Apple displays, get a different brand without one built in. And at least with a desktop, you have that option.
My father-in-law can't buy one of the new Intel MacBook/MBP's simply because of the camera. He does government work occasionally, and they'll stop him at the door with anything that can behave as a camera, camphones & camlaptops included.
Maybe if they had some kind of lock-able latch that he could cover the camera and give the key to the door man... I've seen covers, but not lockable ones. That way, the agency/company can be secure knowing that the cameras have been rendered non-functional. I guess he could also simply shatter the lens, although that seems a bit extreme :-).
-rand()
I don't think that's what the OP meant... it could be though. I think what he meant was don't use the new Apple displays, get a different brand without one built in. And at least with a desktop, you have that option.
My father-in-law can't buy one of the new Intel MacBook/MBP's simply because of the camera. He does government work occasionally, and they'll stop him at the door with anything that can behave as a camera, camphones & camlaptops included.
Maybe if they had some kind of lock-able latch that he could cover the camera and give the key to the door man... I've seen covers, but not lockable ones. That way, the agency/company can be secure knowing that the cameras have been rendered non-functional. I guess he could also simply shatter the lens, although that seems a bit extreme :-).
-rand()
NinjaHERO
Mar 30, 01:37 AM
The good news is that it sounds like the plant wasn't damaged. While I am sure making batteries for Apple is not on the top of their priority list, their economy starting back up will help speed their recovery. A little bit of good news I hope.
Rot'nApple
Mar 29, 04:41 PM
It would be something if the brains at Apple could find a way to utilize and harness that high level of radiated water Japan has since trying to cool down the reactor cores and create some kind of supercharged liquid powered battery with a runtime describe in half-life versus 40 hours music and 7 hours video that the iPod Touch currently has... :eek:
Japan get's rid of that juiced water and Apple's iPod Touch gets some high energy liquid juiced batteries. Of course, there's the issue of health... But Ives can redesign it using lead encasement instead of aluminum pronounced, Al - U - Men - Yum...
Besides, by the time your doctor tells you of any health issues, you're deaf anyway form iPod earbud listening and you wouldn't hear the bad news. :rolleyes:
/
/
/
Japan get's rid of that juiced water and Apple's iPod Touch gets some high energy liquid juiced batteries. Of course, there's the issue of health... But Ives can redesign it using lead encasement instead of aluminum pronounced, Al - U - Men - Yum...
Besides, by the time your doctor tells you of any health issues, you're deaf anyway form iPod earbud listening and you wouldn't hear the bad news. :rolleyes:
/
/
/
Tomorrow
May 4, 02:50 PM
"If you have a stick that is 3' 7 13/16" and need to divide it into 3 equal sections, what is the length of the each section to the nearest 1/64 inch?" as opposed to "If you have a stick that 1233 mm long....." - and no, I didn't check to see if they are the same -
I'd use a calculator in either example, so it's a moot point.
2) Same idea as above.... "If you have a tank filled with 450 cubic yards of water, and it is flowing out at a rate of 3 gallons a minute, how long does it take to empty?" as opposed to the metric system where 1000 litres of water is 1 cubic meter which is 1 tonne (approximately - since altitudes and temperatures affect the density of water).... but it's close enough for horseshoes....
I've never seen a tank meant for holding liquid that wasn't rated in gallons - and I'm talking about up to 5 million gallons. But still, I'd be using a calculator in either event. But to illustrate my earlier point, 1 cubic yard = 27 cubic feet, 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons. Simple math.
I'd use a calculator in either example, so it's a moot point.
2) Same idea as above.... "If you have a tank filled with 450 cubic yards of water, and it is flowing out at a rate of 3 gallons a minute, how long does it take to empty?" as opposed to the metric system where 1000 litres of water is 1 cubic meter which is 1 tonne (approximately - since altitudes and temperatures affect the density of water).... but it's close enough for horseshoes....
I've never seen a tank meant for holding liquid that wasn't rated in gallons - and I'm talking about up to 5 million gallons. But still, I'd be using a calculator in either event. But to illustrate my earlier point, 1 cubic yard = 27 cubic feet, 1 cubic foot = 7.48 gallons. Simple math.