Evangelion
Apr 8, 05:01 AM
another low for apple, i ordered Mar 19th still waiting ...
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
How exactly is this Apple's fault? BB played shenanigans, Apple called them out on it.
And yes, you have to wait for your order to go through. I bet that's just terrible for all those entitled people out there who feel that world revolves around them, and when they want something, they have to have it NOW. Fact is that there are simply so many people buying iPads that Apple has problem satisfying demand.
fiasco just continues, does not look nice apple.
How exactly is this Apple's fault? BB played shenanigans, Apple called them out on it.
And yes, you have to wait for your order to go through. I bet that's just terrible for all those entitled people out there who feel that world revolves around them, and when they want something, they have to have it NOW. Fact is that there are simply so many people buying iPads that Apple has problem satisfying demand.
BenRoethig
Apr 6, 12:35 PM
I can't wait. I think a 13" air will be my next Mac.
dustinsc
Mar 22, 12:53 PM
Assuming this gets out of vaporware status, it looks pretty good. The custom interface also looks good. Apple better have some improvements to the UI (ahem, notifications) in iOS 5
cmaier
Apr 20, 03:45 PM
I noticed that the HTC and Samsung cases only share just one patent: the bounce-back one.
And the Samsung adds many trademark and state law unfair competition claims.
Arguing that they're the same because Apple will lose them both is bootstrapping.
And the Samsung adds many trademark and state law unfair competition claims.
Arguing that they're the same because Apple will lose them both is bootstrapping.
Intarweb
Apr 27, 08:04 AM
I wonder if this is why I can no longer get more than a days charge on my iPhone 4 with minimal use since it seems like it's an always on thing.
Multimedia
Jul 21, 12:20 PM
It really depends on your application.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
On the desktop, if you're a typical user that's just interested in web surfing, playing music files, organizing your photo collection, etc., more than two cores will probably not be too useful. For these kinds of users, even two cores may be overkill, but two are useful for keeping a responsive UI when an application starts hogging all the CPU time.
If you start using higher-power applications (like video work - iMovie/iDVD, for instance) then more cores will speed up that kind of work (assuming the app is properly multithreaded, of course.) 4-core systems will definitely benefit this kind of user.
With current applications, however, I don't think more than 4 cores will be useful. The kind of work that will make 8 cores useful is the kinds that requires expensive professional software - which most people don't use...
Cluster computing has similar benefits. With 8 cores in each processor, it is almost as good as having 8 times as many computers in the cluster, and a lot less expensive. This concept will scale up as the number of cores increases, assuming motherbaords can be designed with enough memory and FSB bandwidth to keep them all busy.
I think we might see a single quad-core chip in consumer systems, like the iMac. I think it is likely that we'll see them in Pro systems, like the Mac Pro (including a high-end model with two quad-core chips.)
I think processors with more than 4 cores will never be seen outside of servers - Xserves and maybe some configurations of Mac Pro. Mostly because that's where there is a need for this kind of power.I strongly disagree. I could use 16 cores right now for notihng more than simple consumer electronics video compression routines. There will be a Mac Pro with 8 cores this Winter 2007.
You are completely blind to the need for many cores right now for very simple stupid work. All I want to do is run 4 copies of Toast while running 4 copies of Handbrake simultaneously. Each wants 2 cores or more. So you are not thinking of the current need for 16 cores already.
This is not even beginning to discuss how many Final Cut Studio Editors need 16 Cores. Man, I can't believe you wrote that. I think you are overlooking the obvious - the need to run multiple copies of today's applicaitons simultaneously.
So as long as the heat issue can be overcome, I don't see why 8 Cores can't belong inside an iMac by the end of 2008.
I apologize if I read a little hot. But I find the line of thought that 4 or 8 Cores are enough or more than enough to really annoy me. They are not nearly enough for those of us who see the problem of not enough cores EVERY DAY. The rest of you either have no imagination or are only using your Macs for word processing, browsing and email.
I am sincerely frustrated by not having enough cores to do simple stupid work efficiently. Just look at how crippled this G5 Quad is already only running three things. They can't even run full speed due to lack of cores.
princealfie
Nov 29, 11:25 AM
Here's my take.
I started a small record label with 3 signed artists. 2 have gone nowhere and probably won't. 1 has finished her debut release (look for Kyria -Whispers In The Dark on itunes!) and we are working on a follow up.
I write/perform the music and she writes lyrics and sings. We split ANY money coming in 45/45/10. 45% for her, 45% for me and 10% for the label.
We've sold a few hundred songs on itunes and have made a few hundred bucks from it.
I think that itunes is a boon for the music biz. But, now you have to have good songs and good artists to succeed. People will not buy 1 hit and 9 loads of crap anymore. Make the very best music, and people will buy it.
I don't want any tax on what might happen with something. What if the State gave you 25 speeding tickets and 40 parking tickets when you bought a new car? We all know that cars are just used for speeding and parking violations.
NOW, if Universal get's a cut from every ipod sold, we would want a cut too (not as big of a cut, but still). Not to be greedy, but to be fair to my artists.
This is why it won't work. Too many independents that would want their piece too.
Oh ya, go buy Kyria's album on itunes! (If I was a big label, I could charge her for the time I took to post that as advertising expenses... broken is the music industry!)
Does she appear on emusic?
I started a small record label with 3 signed artists. 2 have gone nowhere and probably won't. 1 has finished her debut release (look for Kyria -Whispers In The Dark on itunes!) and we are working on a follow up.
I write/perform the music and she writes lyrics and sings. We split ANY money coming in 45/45/10. 45% for her, 45% for me and 10% for the label.
We've sold a few hundred songs on itunes and have made a few hundred bucks from it.
I think that itunes is a boon for the music biz. But, now you have to have good songs and good artists to succeed. People will not buy 1 hit and 9 loads of crap anymore. Make the very best music, and people will buy it.
I don't want any tax on what might happen with something. What if the State gave you 25 speeding tickets and 40 parking tickets when you bought a new car? We all know that cars are just used for speeding and parking violations.
NOW, if Universal get's a cut from every ipod sold, we would want a cut too (not as big of a cut, but still). Not to be greedy, but to be fair to my artists.
This is why it won't work. Too many independents that would want their piece too.
Oh ya, go buy Kyria's album on itunes! (If I was a big label, I could charge her for the time I took to post that as advertising expenses... broken is the music industry!)
Does she appear on emusic?
KnightWRX
Apr 7, 09:36 AM
You make it seem like intel told apple they can't use the sb chips unless they use the IGP, which is obviously false.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
~Shard~
Jul 15, 10:49 AM
I disagree. Using ATX power supplies is a stupid idea. I am sure Apple uses higher quality power supplies than you would pick up at your local CompUSA.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
If they allow this there will be a lot of dead Macs, from power supplies whose rails aren't strong enough.
Not to mention those who buy the 400W model because it is only 20 bucks and drastically underpower there Mac.
This would cause to many problems. Keep it proprietary IMO.
Actually that is a good point. Another good example is how some people install incorrect RAM into their Mac - they just pick up generic cheapo RAM, not Mac-certified, and wonder why they have all sorts of issues.
TallGuy1970
Mar 31, 04:20 PM
Maybe, just maybe, Steve jobs knows a bit about computing. You may not like his business model, but the man isn't stupid.
AppleFreak89
Jun 9, 08:58 AM
Everything BIBBZ is saying is correct and works the same at my store. we had a lot of people trade in their 3g for 3gs' and pay $5 out of pocket :). its a good deal.
severe
Jun 22, 01:00 AM
Yeah I thought about that... But I'd rather not go through the hassle of craigs list and eBay...
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
Just a suggestion. Don't blame ya. eBay is a disaster. And Craigs wasn't far off, with all the inquiries and little follow through. I let it go for less than I would have liked, just to be done with it.
Still glad I did.
faroZ06
Apr 8, 12:53 AM
I am in the Geek Squad at a Best Buy, and at least at my store there is no such thing happening, nor have we ever been instructed to tell a customer that we don't have a certain product, unless it's unreleased such as new movies etc,,, but once something is released, if we have it we sell it.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
I agree, this rumor is sketchy. It looks like they have one unreliable source. Still, I don't see why BB is good for Apple stuff unless the Apple store is too crowded.
Geckotek
Apr 7, 10:29 PM
Every day Apple stores get shipments of iPads....but they don't sell them when the arrive. They hold them for the line that forms the next morning.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
This morning the store I went to had NO AT&T models?!?!?! So tomorrow morning there will be yet another line of those that failed today (including myself).
On topic, I called Best Buy and was told that unless I pre-ordered before the day of the sale, I could not get an iPad 2. My co-worker walked in last week off the street and purchased one. Why the inconsistent message? I don't get it.
Seems odd to me. Like they are purposely making a spectacle in front of the store every morning.
This morning the store I went to had NO AT&T models?!?!?! So tomorrow morning there will be yet another line of those that failed today (including myself).
On topic, I called Best Buy and was told that unless I pre-ordered before the day of the sale, I could not get an iPad 2. My co-worker walked in last week off the street and purchased one. Why the inconsistent message? I don't get it.
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:41 PM
Ridiculous. Mac OS X and iOS can never merge because their UI paradigms are completely different. Why don't people understand this?
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
radiohead14
Apr 6, 11:45 AM
as long as the new MBAs will have longer battery life (7+ preferably), then i'm cool with the HD 3000 in there, as the MBA's purpose is to be an ultra portable
jrb363
Apr 7, 10:39 PM
Quota? Are these guys idiots?
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
Best Buy isn't the only place to buy these... I've thought through the various marketing gimmicks, and really none apply here. Why would they do this...
Maybe they ate too much magical unicorn dust and it clouded their judgement. :rolleyes:
SactoGuy18
Apr 27, 08:41 PM
yg17, I hate to say this but Obama HAD to do this to avoid the entire "birther" issue from turning into a major distraction that ends up wasting everybody's time during the election cycle next year. Heck, it's already wasted everybody's time for the last three years anyway. :rolleyes:
mcrain
Mar 23, 02:59 PM
"Lying" implies intent. Are you accusing them of lying, or getting it wrong? They absolutely lied, and they got stuff wrong. I believe there was malevolent intent, and to the extent that can't be proven, there was clear reckless disregard for the truth.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
Is it your position that Libya represents a larger danger to American assets/security than Iraq? If not, is it your suggestion that America should be involved in every humanitarian crisis with brutal dictators worldwide, or at least those comparable to Libya? If so, why aren't we in North Korea? Why aren't we in any number of African nations? There are many in the mainstream media and many on the left who are saying today that there are problems. Asking why we didn't go into other African countries, criticizing the coalition and the idea that this is "minimal" US involvement. I'm not claiming the left is perfect, but rather pointing out that your claim (re: hipocricy from 'the left in media') is far too broad and ignores the realities of the media coverage and congressional responses.
But I also think it's important (especially in this forum) to point out hypocrisy stemming from the left so that the Macrumors Echo Chamber doesn't keep you all in denial. I've been in these forums for a long time, and I can tell you that while some denial occurs, liberals are far more likely to be critical of the politicians they support than conservatives are.
angrynstupid
Apr 27, 08:02 AM
I actually thought looking at a history of where my phone has been on a map was kinda cool. Bummer.
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
Since I'm neither a criminal nor paranoid, I thought it was kind of cool/interesting too.
mmmcheese
Nov 28, 11:41 PM
Universal has already stated that half of the money will be going to the artists.
Do you work for Universal, or the RIAA?
Do you work for Universal, or the RIAA?
NAG
Mar 31, 03:39 PM
What the heck is this? The "Steve was right" month?
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Pathetic Dell and HP, desperate Microsoft, Samsung aka Mr. "Smoothbastic", Google inhibiting fragmentation, the very one, which does NOT exist, really...
who is next? Oh, i have got it - Adobe. So come on, resistance is futile.
Adobe showing how the iPad is only for consumption and not worth their time. (http://www.electronista.com/articles/11/03/30/adobe.photoshop.for.ipad.to.get.layers/)
Moonlight
Aug 26, 08:14 PM
I just called Apple support, I was on hold for over 20 minutes, then I was disconnected. No wonder people are unhappy :mad: :( :confused:
NJRonbo
Jun 18, 07:32 AM
There has been a lot of speculation that PIN
numbers were given out as early as 7am that
morning -- well in advance of the 12pm CST
preorder start.
If you read posts here on Mac Rumors you
will see that claim is substantiated.
Very unhappy with the way Radio Shack ran
this entire preorder campaign.
numbers were given out as early as 7am that
morning -- well in advance of the 12pm CST
preorder start.
If you read posts here on Mac Rumors you
will see that claim is substantiated.
Very unhappy with the way Radio Shack ran
this entire preorder campaign.