MacbookSwitcher
Mar 29, 03:14 PM
I avoid most american made products, half of them are crap. Prime examples are the cars made by Chrysler and GM between 2000-2008. This however are drastically improving though, not sure if we (Americans) could produce all of these things with taxes, restrictions, trade barriers etc. I am sure there are very good reasons why the parts are made there and not here. Plus there is a plethora of unknown pollution aspects of producing tech products. Tree hugger's would freak
What a stupid statement. Are you aware that Apple is an American company? So is Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Oracle, Cisco, GE and other world-leading companies.
What's your alternative? Can you even name more than one world-class Chinese company?
*rolls eyes*
What a stupid statement. Are you aware that Apple is an American company? So is Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, Oracle, Cisco, GE and other world-leading companies.
What's your alternative? Can you even name more than one world-class Chinese company?
*rolls eyes*
BlizzardBomb
May 7, 10:46 AM
Why not just make it a $20 product instead of giving it away for no profit?
PODshady
Nov 22, 02:46 AM
I would buy a Palm Treo BUT their GUI needs a lot of work.... it is very ugly and this could be the reason that they have found it "difficult" to get people to like their smart-phones. If Apple comes out with an iPhone (and I hope they do) it would blow anything Palm can come up with out of the water. Apple is well known for well designed products and if the iPhone's GUI is even half has nice as the GUI in Mac OS X it will be way better than the Palm Treo and all those Windows Mobile devices.
zivilist
Apr 21, 05:05 PM
Max 2 SSDs or 2 HDDs?
doctor-don
Apr 26, 03:00 PM
Where do these survey companies get there data from? I have NEVER been asked any questions about stuff like this. Plus with statistics you can fudge the numbers to represent just about anything.
Interesting. I say the same thing when the news stations announce popularity polls of the President, healthcare reform, etc.
Interesting. I say the same thing when the news stations announce popularity polls of the President, healthcare reform, etc.
Whozown
Apr 5, 04:55 PM
2010 - Apple Loses #1 Mobile OS spot to Android OS
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
puuukeey
Jul 30, 12:28 PM
If apple can make it so that cellphones don't suck the user into a void where s/he unaware that they are pissing the living ***** out of everyone around them, well then they are TRUE gods
ArtOfWarfare
Mar 26, 10:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
I hope I can upgrade as soon as the iPhone 5 is released. This 3GS is getting old.
Agreed!
What am I supposed to do when my contract ends this July!?
I hope I can upgrade as soon as the iPhone 5 is released. This 3GS is getting old.
Agreed!
What am I supposed to do when my contract ends this July!?
infobhan
Jul 31, 05:17 AM
I'll be VERY surprised if the Apple phone doesn't support Wifi.
A WiFi phone would be unlikely, in my mind. WiFi is not yet ubiquitous, so this would be of limited usefulness. Furthermore, WiFi is a notorious waster of battery life, and this device will have to be small to be successful.
A WiFi phone would be unlikely, in my mind. WiFi is not yet ubiquitous, so this would be of limited usefulness. Furthermore, WiFi is a notorious waster of battery life, and this device will have to be small to be successful.
Rocketman
Nov 27, 10:11 AM
Since Apple is now doing more form factor differentiation than chip differentiation, they should come out with a tablet product line (3 sizes) and see where it goes. They will likely sell more copies than 17 inch MacBookPros so it should be economical.
By simply offering the product line, they wil get user feedback and increased capability versions year after year.
The Windows equivalent devices seem to start from scratch every year.
Rocketman
By simply offering the product line, they wil get user feedback and increased capability versions year after year.
The Windows equivalent devices seem to start from scratch every year.
Rocketman
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
mutantteenager
Aug 11, 03:47 PM
While no hard insider information exists pointing to the specs of the new machines, currently Merom tops out at 2.33 GHz, so it is not unreasonable to believe that Apple will use the 2.33 GHz chip in its MacBook Pro, and slightly slower speeds in its MacBooks. Also of note, Merom being a Core 2 Duo chip has architectural advances over Core Duo ("Yonah") such as 64-bit support and a 4 MB L2 Cache in higher end models.
I would be happy with the *real* replacement for the 12" Powerbook. Can't work with that gloss screen, and can't bear the integrated graphics. Apple need to get real if they want professionals like photographers to buy a new laptop. :confused:
I would be happy with the *real* replacement for the 12" Powerbook. Can't work with that gloss screen, and can't bear the integrated graphics. Apple need to get real if they want professionals like photographers to buy a new laptop. :confused:
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:44 AM
As amazing as free MobileMe sounds, I find this HIGHLY unlikely.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
Why not? The Pros outweigh the cons.
Pros:
Ends developer confusion on the app store about whether to support MobileMe, Wifi or roll their own Cloud sync.
Benefits mainly Mac users (nice iLife tie in) but also benefits those running Windows and Outlook with Windows MobileMe Control Panel
Will clearly sell more iPhone/iPod Touch/iPads because consumers know their data will be in sync across the devices.
Cons:
Cost - free means a LOT more users which means a need to beef up infrastructure. Apple does have a new large data center being built.
Current members - do I get a refund or does Apple announce a free version of MobileMe and boosts the features of the paid account creating a Free/Paid tier?
There are certainly plusses and minuses about the strategy but make not bones about it people want Mobileme they just don't want to pay for it. A free "lite" version satiates those people.
Let's face it the popularity of Google stems from the fact that their tools are free to the end user.
NoNothing
Apr 7, 10:50 AM
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Actually, this is more of a situation of a monopsony in play where there are multiple sellers of various components but only a single buyer. This, in turn, locks out other buyers from being able to leverage price efficiencies and limits the competition from achieving an upper hand price wise.
Actually, this is more of a situation of a monopsony in play where there are multiple sellers of various components but only a single buyer. This, in turn, locks out other buyers from being able to leverage price efficiencies and limits the competition from achieving an upper hand price wise.
leetlamer
May 6, 08:05 AM
Lmfao. There is absolutely no way they are going to put ARM chips in desktop or laptop computers in the near future.
Its not gonna happen. You can't beat Intel in performance.
ARM is good because its low power. Thats great for phones and tablets, but for freaking desktops you need performance.
Its not gonna happen. You can't beat Intel in performance.
ARM is good because its low power. Thats great for phones and tablets, but for freaking desktops you need performance.
wclyffe
Nov 20, 07:48 AM
Looks like they just flagged the Tomtom car kit as discontinued at BLT and are no longer carrying the item. Looking for a new place to order it around this price. Any thoughts?
cdavis11
Apr 26, 03:41 PM
In related news, all models of Ford vehicles combined outsold the toyota prius.
Film at 11.
Film at 11.
applekid
Nov 26, 01:43 PM
Interface with iTV, AirPort Express, possibly your Macs for some limited controlling, maybe your iPod or iPod HiFi... I don't want the tablet to be a remote...
I still want a real Tablet Mac. It probably isn't all that easy to hit the sweet spot for price and capability. You could do something stupid like a remote as I stated above, something like a PDA or something full-blown like a laptop. Frankly, I would love tablet because for college it's useful to whip out the tablet and scribble some things, and it would be nicer than a trackpad on laptop. I just wish my Palm TX and MacBook Pro would meld together... The best I could do is hook up my graphics tablet, but that's just unwieldy to carry around and I don't have the desk space in my dorm.
Stop talking about it and just make it already!
I still want a real Tablet Mac. It probably isn't all that easy to hit the sweet spot for price and capability. You could do something stupid like a remote as I stated above, something like a PDA or something full-blown like a laptop. Frankly, I would love tablet because for college it's useful to whip out the tablet and scribble some things, and it would be nicer than a trackpad on laptop. I just wish my Palm TX and MacBook Pro would meld together... The best I could do is hook up my graphics tablet, but that's just unwieldy to carry around and I don't have the desk space in my dorm.
Stop talking about it and just make it already!
spicyapple
Aug 11, 09:25 AM
Quad Xeons in the MacBook Pro, pretty please. After all, it is Apple's professional notebook line.
JAT
Apr 20, 11:59 AM
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
Really. So, your fingers are so hard that they don't bend slightly over the edge of an object you are holding? You should get that checked out. Maybe try a little lotion.
What are you people doing to scratch your phones so much? I don't use a case with my iPhone 4, carry it in my pocket (sometimes with my car keys) and there's not a noticeable scratch on the front or back.
I agree. I had a 1G Touch for over 3 years and it didn't have a scratch on it from normal use. My daughter once threw it across the driveway, causing gouges and scratches all over the bezel and rear. Nothing on the glass. The iPhone 4 glass is less prone to scratching.
So tired of this.
Really. So, your fingers are so hard that they don't bend slightly over the edge of an object you are holding? You should get that checked out. Maybe try a little lotion.
What are you people doing to scratch your phones so much? I don't use a case with my iPhone 4, carry it in my pocket (sometimes with my car keys) and there's not a noticeable scratch on the front or back.
I agree. I had a 1G Touch for over 3 years and it didn't have a scratch on it from normal use. My daughter once threw it across the driveway, causing gouges and scratches all over the bezel and rear. Nothing on the glass. The iPhone 4 glass is less prone to scratching.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
BRLawyer
Nov 23, 03:54 PM
Sounds like a virus in itself. A pointless piece of software which just hogs your RAM. Totally useless for Mac OS X.
Absolutely true. Just for kicks I downloaded it and scanned ALL my HDs. Results?
- for 2,500,000 files, it took at least 8 hours while slowing my Mac to a crawl for anything else - Dual-core CPU usage of 100% on average (out of 200%);
- Of course it didn't find anything relevant for Macs; just 2 VERY old Windows worms that were apparently attached to a couple of archived Outlook messages received by my Windows PC at work - these files were just part of a dormant 2006 backup of my Windows work files stored on my Mac for more than 4 years.
Following that waste of time, I simply clicked on Remove Sophos and got rid of it. Nice effort and free, but irrelevant nonetheless. Wake me up again when there is a real virus for OS X.
Absolutely true. Just for kicks I downloaded it and scanned ALL my HDs. Results?
- for 2,500,000 files, it took at least 8 hours while slowing my Mac to a crawl for anything else - Dual-core CPU usage of 100% on average (out of 200%);
- Of course it didn't find anything relevant for Macs; just 2 VERY old Windows worms that were apparently attached to a couple of archived Outlook messages received by my Windows PC at work - these files were just part of a dormant 2006 backup of my Windows work files stored on my Mac for more than 4 years.
Following that waste of time, I simply clicked on Remove Sophos and got rid of it. Nice effort and free, but irrelevant nonetheless. Wake me up again when there is a real virus for OS X.
dashiel
Mar 28, 10:34 AM
Surely this just means the iPhone released in June will simply be like the iPhone 3G to 3GS transition. Same form factor, upgraded internals, etc� Hard to imagine there won't be an iPhone with an A5 this year.
dj2mc
Nov 28, 02:23 AM
what do you mean by dual boot?
You mentioned Boot Camp, so I assume you run Windows on the partition? That's what I mean by dual boot, 2 OS's on one hard disk.
You mentioned Boot Camp, so I assume you run Windows on the partition? That's what I mean by dual boot, 2 OS's on one hard disk.