MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:34 PM
i am sure apple is finding the world of phone carriers complex and difficult.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 08:56 AM
Redundant power supplies are generally not a standard feature for most x86 servers sold. It isn't a must (requirement); it is an optional feature need if want to sell to the relatively small subset of the market that wants them. (e.g, none of Google's, Microsoft's ,etc search/cloud servers have dual power supplies and they number in the many, many thousands. )
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
RIDES AT SIX FLAGS OVER
six flags over georgia new
six flags over georgia new
Six Flags Over Georgia - Theme
six flags over georgia new
Six Flags Over Georgia
six flags over georgia rides.
Six Flags Over Georgia
six flags over georgia new
six flags over georgia rides
six flags over georgia new
six flags over georgia new
six flags over georgia
six flags over georgia rides
Six Flags Over Georgia
six flags over georgia rides.
six flags over georgia new
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
acfusion29
Mar 26, 10:40 PM
i can see them releasing the iPhone 5 in the fall, along with iOS5, but i hope it doesn't happen.
scibry
Jul 30, 05:57 PM
I stated this exactly in a previous thread but I could change my stance if I could be convinced of one or more of the following were possible.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
All I have to say is that Apple will ideally solve the voice chat market's needs, connecting us to any person with a phone or computer cheaply or for free and offering a beginner wireless to wireless service perhaps through an iPod accessory. I use Skype from my Mac to talk unlimited and free to a friend in Nederlands (also on Skype) unlimited and free because not everyone uses AIM (or has a Mac with iChat). He for example uses MSN. Adium is an example of software that unifies the IM experience and iChat is not. iChat's best features are not usable by my foreign PC using friends with other IM services like Yahoo! and MSN (which are now apparently merging). If Apple can support Microsoft Office they can surely support MSN and they already do in Address Book. So not only do they need to offer voice chat to homes but they also need to offer voice chat to EVERY modern computer/PC.
Will there be a cell phone? I was thinking maybe a walkie talkie built into an iPod.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
All I have to say is that Apple will ideally solve the voice chat market's needs, connecting us to any person with a phone or computer cheaply or for free and offering a beginner wireless to wireless service perhaps through an iPod accessory. I use Skype from my Mac to talk unlimited and free to a friend in Nederlands (also on Skype) unlimited and free because not everyone uses AIM (or has a Mac with iChat). He for example uses MSN. Adium is an example of software that unifies the IM experience and iChat is not. iChat's best features are not usable by my foreign PC using friends with other IM services like Yahoo! and MSN (which are now apparently merging). If Apple can support Microsoft Office they can surely support MSN and they already do in Address Book. So not only do they need to offer voice chat to homes but they also need to offer voice chat to EVERY modern computer/PC.
Will there be a cell phone? I was thinking maybe a walkie talkie built into an iPod.
Tones2
Apr 26, 03:58 PM
What makes a product "Best" in its category is defined by different people differently. For some people "best" is a free phone because they can't afford anything else. Some people pour over the specs and select the "best".
For me, "best" is the phone that operates the most intuitively to my way of thinking. I want something that I don't need to refer back to the manual to use its features. My Android Incredible came with a 8" x 11", 73 page manual that I need to use to operate the phone... that fact speaks volumes to what separates the Android from the "best."
Oh come on. :rolleyes: If you can't figure out how to use an Android phone in less than a minute then you have some issues. It's the same friggin thing. The reason it comes with a manual is just a reference document. Apple doesn't include one because they are too cheap to put it in the package as a printout. If you want it, here it is. All 274 pages of it!
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/iphone_user_guide.pdf
Tony
For me, "best" is the phone that operates the most intuitively to my way of thinking. I want something that I don't need to refer back to the manual to use its features. My Android Incredible came with a 8" x 11", 73 page manual that I need to use to operate the phone... that fact speaks volumes to what separates the Android from the "best."
Oh come on. :rolleyes: If you can't figure out how to use an Android phone in less than a minute then you have some issues. It's the same friggin thing. The reason it comes with a manual is just a reference document. Apple doesn't include one because they are too cheap to put it in the package as a printout. If you want it, here it is. All 274 pages of it!
http://manuals.info.apple.com/en_US/iphone_user_guide.pdf
Tony
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.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 03:08 PM
Well, the fact is that there is one iPhone, and ten Android phones. But anyway, of course this fact is relevant. If I have 10 chances to do something, and only one chance to do something else... how often do you think the 1 in 10 chance is going to come around.... maybe 1 in 10 times?
That's rather flawed reasoning. Unless you actually believe that people buying a smartphone will just pick one randomly. The outcome here isn't random, nor is the chance for every outcome 1/10.
That's rather flawed reasoning. Unless you actually believe that people buying a smartphone will just pick one randomly. The outcome here isn't random, nor is the chance for every outcome 1/10.
dextertangocci
Jul 30, 01:46 AM
my t-mobile contract expires in september..
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
maybe along with the mac pros, new macbook pros, intel core 2 duo, movies on iTunes, WWDC will bring about the iPhone and no-touch full screen video iPod..
*yeah right*
You forgot to ad in the 13.3" MBP. lol.
Timepass
Jul 30, 11:15 PM
That is pure, Apple style right there. Of course, I don't picture this phone being a flip phones. I believe (and hope) flip phones are on their way out. They were a fad, but aren't as practical as candy bar phones. They have more moving parts that can break and take longer to answer, especially if your hands are full or you're driving your car. (All you flip-phone people out there, before you start lashing out in defense, just accept those statements as truth, because you know they are.) Nothing beats hearing your phone, looking down, and pushing a button to start talking. As far as accidently calling people, I lock my phone with the push of a button and don't have any problems.
I am surpise no one said anything in the rest of the pages about this but I am just going to say What...
I hate the candy bar phones and I would never get the apple iPhone is it was not a flip phone.
Reason I like the flip phone. When talking on it it a closer to the size of a normal phone so it is easy to hold and talk on. Close it and it smaller than you candy bar phone in demition and fits in my pocket better.
I dont have to deal with a keygaurd and forgetting to put it on and I dont have to deal with turn it off. Just close my phone and every thing is covered.
I find it EASIER to answer them. Phone rings I glance down at the outside LCD and flip the phone open (all with one hand) and the call is answer (answer on flip) or I hit one of the side buttons to turn off the ringer all of this with out have to look at the phone. I can turn off the ringer with out taking it out of my pocket (cannt do that on a candy bar). Compare to a candy bar phone I would glace down at the LCD to see who is and then I would have to hit the talk button to answer it. yet again the flip phone wins
And to top all that off the main LCD and keys are ALWAYS protected when the phone is not in use (candy bar nope).
So far is Flip phone 3 candy bar 0. I like the flip phones long before they where a fad and I will contine to like them after the fad wears off. I didnt go back to candy bar when they where back in again. I stuck with the flip phone and contine to like the flip phone for the advatages I listed above.
I am surpise no one said anything in the rest of the pages about this but I am just going to say What...
I hate the candy bar phones and I would never get the apple iPhone is it was not a flip phone.
Reason I like the flip phone. When talking on it it a closer to the size of a normal phone so it is easy to hold and talk on. Close it and it smaller than you candy bar phone in demition and fits in my pocket better.
I dont have to deal with a keygaurd and forgetting to put it on and I dont have to deal with turn it off. Just close my phone and every thing is covered.
I find it EASIER to answer them. Phone rings I glance down at the outside LCD and flip the phone open (all with one hand) and the call is answer (answer on flip) or I hit one of the side buttons to turn off the ringer all of this with out have to look at the phone. I can turn off the ringer with out taking it out of my pocket (cannt do that on a candy bar). Compare to a candy bar phone I would glace down at the LCD to see who is and then I would have to hit the talk button to answer it. yet again the flip phone wins
And to top all that off the main LCD and keys are ALWAYS protected when the phone is not in use (candy bar nope).
So far is Flip phone 3 candy bar 0. I like the flip phones long before they where a fad and I will contine to like them after the fad wears off. I didnt go back to candy bar when they where back in again. I stuck with the flip phone and contine to like the flip phone for the advatages I listed above.
teiresias
Apr 4, 03:42 PM
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.
Not if you buy your music from Amazon and have it saved to your cloud storage be default. All mp3 purchases from Amazon (so long as cloud storage is set as your default when purchasing) are stored free in the cloud and don't count against your storage limit. You can download it to your Mac/PC later (while leaving it in the Amazon cloud) and add it into your iTunes library on your local storage if you'd like.
This is actually a much better thing for me, as if I'm away from my home computer, I can still buy music, have it go to the cloud by default, and immediately have it available to both any computer that runs the cloud player and my phone without having to wait to go home and purchase through iTunes and sync a device.
Not if you buy your music from Amazon and have it saved to your cloud storage be default. All mp3 purchases from Amazon (so long as cloud storage is set as your default when purchasing) are stored free in the cloud and don't count against your storage limit. You can download it to your Mac/PC later (while leaving it in the Amazon cloud) and add it into your iTunes library on your local storage if you'd like.
This is actually a much better thing for me, as if I'm away from my home computer, I can still buy music, have it go to the cloud by default, and immediately have it available to both any computer that runs the cloud player and my phone without having to wait to go home and purchase through iTunes and sync a device.
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 03:06 PM
.........................................3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
maclaptop
Apr 20, 08:10 AM
I wonder how many of these they'll sale? If it's not due out until September, but everything still points to a summer release of the iPhone 6, which is supposed to be a redesign, then why not wait six more months? I'm due for a new phone this June and if the iPhone is delayed til September I will certainly wait six more months and get the redesigned one. I'm not crazy about this form factor anyway.
You and I are thinking alike.
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
You and I are thinking alike.
Sobering stuff when Apple fails to impress.
Right or wrong the glass iphone will be forever associated with Antennagate.
I'm too much of an Apple enthusiast to keep an albatross like that.
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
oscarmacca
Apr 24, 03:45 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Good post.
superleccy
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MBP updates? About time too!
Cboss
May 2, 08:02 PM
SI is superior in conversions only
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
I also have a better feel for imperial units, but wouldn't someone who has grown up with SI have a great feel for those units?
The conversion to SI would be confusing for those who haven't grown up with it, I know I would have a bit of trouble getting used to it, but after a generation or two everyone would be used to SI.
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
I also have a better feel for imperial units, but wouldn't someone who has grown up with SI have a great feel for those units?
The conversion to SI would be confusing for those who haven't grown up with it, I know I would have a bit of trouble getting used to it, but after a generation or two everyone would be used to SI.
citizenzen
Apr 19, 12:05 PM
I went and found sources on my own.
Okay. But this is a forum ... an online discussion (or an online cocktail party as I like to think about it). So hear we are at the party and you've just told me that our discussion is over until I've read a 1,000 page book.
So...
Yeah...
Uhhh ... did I see sushi at the buffet table?
Nice chatting with you.
Okay. But this is a forum ... an online discussion (or an online cocktail party as I like to think about it). So hear we are at the party and you've just told me that our discussion is over until I've read a 1,000 page book.
So...
Yeah...
Uhhh ... did I see sushi at the buffet table?
Nice chatting with you.
Phil A.
Apr 10, 01:14 PM
I must say i just found this sight through google and had to join because of this post. I am a math teacher and the correct answer is 2
48/2(9+3) is a different equation than 48/2 * (9+3)
using Pemdas or the correct order of operations in the first problem
we first add whats in the parentheses (9+3)= 12
second step we multiply 2(12) =24
final step 48/24 = 2
the people who are getting 288
are adding (9+3) =12
then they are skipping an order of operations and going straight to division 48/2 =24
24 * 12 = 288
Sorry, you are wrong (math teacher or not!)
48/2(9+3) is 48/2(12) (parenthesis first)
=48 divided by 2 multiplied by 12
division and multiplication have the same order of precedence so are executed left to right
that means 48 divided by 2 = 24 multiplied by 12 = 288
To get 2 requires you to make assumptions about the equation. If you make no assumptions and simply apply the rules then you get 288
48/2(9+3) is a different equation than 48/2 * (9+3)
using Pemdas or the correct order of operations in the first problem
we first add whats in the parentheses (9+3)= 12
second step we multiply 2(12) =24
final step 48/24 = 2
the people who are getting 288
are adding (9+3) =12
then they are skipping an order of operations and going straight to division 48/2 =24
24 * 12 = 288
Sorry, you are wrong (math teacher or not!)
48/2(9+3) is 48/2(12) (parenthesis first)
=48 divided by 2 multiplied by 12
division and multiplication have the same order of precedence so are executed left to right
that means 48 divided by 2 = 24 multiplied by 12 = 288
To get 2 requires you to make assumptions about the equation. If you make no assumptions and simply apply the rules then you get 288
PBF
Mar 26, 09:59 PM
As long as we get the first beta some time in April, I couldn't care less about the Fall release. :D
-aggie-
May 5, 07:37 AM
BTW, searching a room disarms traps, so we should get to a point where our last move is search instead of move, if I understand the rules.
mscriv
May 4, 09:38 PM
And so it begins. Heed my words and remember them. For it is only a matter of time until the rest of you suffer the same end as your friend.
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQS2cKIzv51FauVm6EwA27iNLBe4TflXi_DIbFCUtLboTEftLE8MQ
http://t2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQS2cKIzv51FauVm6EwA27iNLBe4TflXi_DIbFCUtLboTEftLE8MQ
syklee26
Sep 15, 06:22 PM
I ordered my MBP today... the ship date isn't until the 20th? It said 24 hours on the site...
A clue?
Possibly?
well that means maybe MBP is getting an upgrade next tuesday.
A clue?
Possibly?
well that means maybe MBP is getting an upgrade next tuesday.
Llewellyn
Nov 28, 02:25 PM
Sure, a programmer or tech geek or business person or writer may have little use for a tablet, but artists are another story. Carrying around a separate, cumbersome USB tablet can become a pain. It's much easier to draw with a pen than it is with a mouse.
I once contacted a touch screen manufacturer concerning how a touch screen tablet compared to the wacom cintiq display tablet. I was told that touch screens are very basic in comparison and would not provide anywhere near the level of sensitivity of a art tablet or the Cintiq.
Last I looked the Wacom Cintiq was $2500+ by itself so I would expect you would at least have to add $1500 to the price of a top of the line laptop to have the kind of tablet you describe.
It would be very cool, just not practicle.
I once contacted a touch screen manufacturer concerning how a touch screen tablet compared to the wacom cintiq display tablet. I was told that touch screens are very basic in comparison and would not provide anywhere near the level of sensitivity of a art tablet or the Cintiq.
Last I looked the Wacom Cintiq was $2500+ by itself so I would expect you would at least have to add $1500 to the price of a top of the line laptop to have the kind of tablet you describe.
It would be very cool, just not practicle.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 06:30 PM
Bogus story because Apple would never fit graphics cards capable of outputting at that res in the iMacs or laptops
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
3200x2000 requires 6,400,000 pixels. At 32 bit per pixel, we're talking 25,600,000 bytes of data. Considering modern framebuffers are double buffered, this requires 51,200,000 bytes of memory to hold. That fits into 48.82 MB of RAM. GPUs have had that much since ... hum... 2004 ? So we're good on framebuffer RAM.
Now, bandwidth. In order to refresh the screen 60 times, we need to push out those 25,600,000 pixels. That's going to require 11718 Mbps of bandwidth. Let's see... Display port 1.1a has 10.8 Gbps so it's a no go (though it could almost do it). If only there was a DP 1.2 spec that had a 21.6 Gbps cap... Oh wait there is. :D
So we're good on RAM and bandwidth. Now, what ATI family introduces DP 1.2 so that we can use this new standard ? Oh right, the Radeon HD 6000 series, AMD's current shipping tech! Now if only Apple would release some kind of support for these GPUs, like they did back in 10.6.7 ;) :
http://appleheadlines.com/2011/03/24/10-6-7-update-brings-native-graphic-acceleration-for-amd-5000-and-6000-series-video-cards/
So let's see if I got all of this right. We're good on RAM (have been for quite a few years). We're good on bandwidth for 60 hz 3200x2000 resolution. We're good on hardware (AMD 6000 series) and we're good on OS X support (with 10.6.7).
What exactly is missing here ? Oh right, a hardware refresh with said hardware included, which is probably a formality seeing all of these news and facts :cool:
kxbcvoi
Mar 27, 10:03 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 not in 2011 for 3 reasons
1. iPad 2 still do not reach other countries.
2. Software update will make iPad 2 new during half cycle.
3. Jobs said "2011 is the year of iPad 2".
iPad 3 not in 2011 for 3 reasons
1. iPad 2 still do not reach other countries.
2. Software update will make iPad 2 new during half cycle.
3. Jobs said "2011 is the year of iPad 2".