Biscuit411
Apr 6, 05:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
xpipe - Nice honest, straight-forward review of your two different tablets and experiences. Thanks. Prepare to be attacked... :-)
xpipe - Nice honest, straight-forward review of your two different tablets and experiences. Thanks. Prepare to be attacked... :-)
anomie
Apr 20, 04:15 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
Not if it reduces battery life.
Not if it reduces battery life.
bedifferent
Apr 23, 04:30 PM
If this is true, I'd be a little pissed lol. I just traded up from my two 23" ACD's for two 24" LED LCD's.
Hopefully this means with the Mac Pro rumors refresh and Final Cut release that Apple is refocusing on their neglected pro-line. Maybe we'll see a full line of dedicated displays instead of one stripped down iMac panel.
Hopefully this means with the Mac Pro rumors refresh and Final Cut release that Apple is refocusing on their neglected pro-line. Maybe we'll see a full line of dedicated displays instead of one stripped down iMac panel.
Eriden
Sep 16, 06:00 PM
If they souped up a 13.3" MB enclosure, wouldn't it require a serious overhaul of the appropriate internals, especially ditching the integrated graphics for a dedicated solution? (Not that Jonathan Ive & Co would have much of a problem making it happen.) Before I went to the recently opened Apple Store in Norfolk, VA, I might have considered a 13.3" MBP. But after having played around with the 17"... I'm in love. When Tuesday cometh, I'll be ordering a 17" MBP... merom or yonah. From all the shipping delays, merom is looking more hopeful all the time!
meecect
May 6, 12:40 AM
Another option:
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
they may include an instant-on iOS in addition to an intel OSX environment. Several other manufacturers have done something similar.
eric_n_dfw
Aug 7, 01:52 PM
Excellent. Now it's time to wait for the sub-$2000 "Pro" desktop announcement. There's a suspicious gap in their lineup. Mac Pro Cube (http://macprocube.com), perhaps?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. (although the Mac Pro is VERY tempting right now.)
I was thinking exactly the same thing. (although the Mac Pro is VERY tempting right now.)
mdgm
Mar 30, 10:10 PM
No.
That's a shame. I'd like to get a 3rd party SSD but would prefer to wait till using TRIM with it is officially supported by Mac OS X.
That's a shame. I'd like to get a 3rd party SSD but would prefer to wait till using TRIM with it is officially supported by Mac OS X.
rovex
May 6, 03:38 AM
Going British was Jonathan Ive's plan. :p
IntelliUser
Dec 24, 06:39 AM
With Sophos, users may find heaviness in different ways.
The default number of WorkerThreads seems to make the system unusable for some users of the current version of Sophos. That's heaviness of one sort.
A higher number of WorkerThreads, for which there's no GUI, will use resources in a different way. That's heaviness of a different sort.
A system that's consistently usable is a must, so for as long as there's uncertainty around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1027#M599 I should recommend approaching SAV with caution, and with readiness to work around things from the command line.
I didn't run into any such problem. I did notice an appreciable decrease in performance when using Kaspersky though. Sophos only slowed down my Mac on startup. But so far the only antivirus which doesn't noticeably slow down the system on startup seems to be ESET, after some tweaking.
The default number of WorkerThreads seems to make the system unusable for some users of the current version of Sophos. That's heaviness of one sort.
A higher number of WorkerThreads, for which there's no GUI, will use resources in a different way. That's heaviness of a different sort.
A system that's consistently usable is a must, so for as long as there's uncertainty around http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Unable-to-complete-login-after-reboot/m-p/1027#M599 I should recommend approaching SAV with caution, and with readiness to work around things from the command line.
I didn't run into any such problem. I did notice an appreciable decrease in performance when using Kaspersky though. Sophos only slowed down my Mac on startup. But so far the only antivirus which doesn't noticeably slow down the system on startup seems to be ESET, after some tweaking.
duction
Apr 20, 11:28 AM
blah, will upgrade next year in that case :)
svenas1
Jul 22, 06:13 AM
I don't think we'll see these at WWDC unless there are other substantial changes. Going from a Yonah to a Merom chip may be great news, but it's hardly something Steve can crow about on stage. "Here's the new macbook pro... it looks and functions exactly like the old one, but 20% faster. Um, yeah. You already know all about the macbook pro, so there's really nothing else for me to say, is there?"
Trust SJ to be able to say something amazing about that !! That's why he is CEO... he can make the smallest thing look like it's the coolest thing on earth. RDF at full swing...!
Trust SJ to be able to say something amazing about that !! That's why he is CEO... he can make the smallest thing look like it's the coolest thing on earth. RDF at full swing...!
mr.barkan
Aug 12, 10:31 AM
I think we will see the upgrade the Tuesday after they have enough supply to meet the demand. These laptops are selling great and they don't want to have to interrupt the supply. I think this is especially true at the stores.
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
citizenzen
Apr 18, 07:52 PM
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort.
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.
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.
boncellis
Jul 23, 06:35 PM
Personally, i'd love Apple releasing a intermediate desktop solution (between iMac and Mac Pro) sporting a not-yet-released 3.2GHz Conroe porcessor. That would be my dream machine BUT this is unlikely as its clocked higher than the top Woodcrest chip which tops out at 3.0GHz.
I might just get a windows box and dump linux on it....after all i already own a mac (PowerBook) with lots of life left. So if i miss Mac OS X i'll simply use my PB.
Other alternative would be to buy any conroe machine and just swap out the CPU with the 3.2 GHz chip launches. Too bad conroes will most likely be launching on iMacs though.
Don't do it man! You deserve better!
I might just get a windows box and dump linux on it....after all i already own a mac (PowerBook) with lots of life left. So if i miss Mac OS X i'll simply use my PB.
Other alternative would be to buy any conroe machine and just swap out the CPU with the 3.2 GHz chip launches. Too bad conroes will most likely be launching on iMacs though.
Don't do it man! You deserve better!
Phil A.
Apr 18, 02:51 PM
Ridiculous. Nothing is at all similar, aside from the bezel. But then if that's an "infringement" then all those digital picture frame makers can sue Apple for copying their "user interface". Honeycomb itself, the actual aspect ratio, none of that is similar. Get a grip Apple.
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
ikir
May 4, 04:38 PM
I will download it from App Store the day of release!
bad03xtreme
Mar 28, 10:54 AM
If there is no new iphone in June/July I am getting a Thunderbolt.
ThunderSkunk
Apr 25, 10:46 AM
I like Steves sense of brevity.
Perhaps if people bothered to look up some info on what they were talking about before they went off half-cocked about the latest hyped paranoia...
Perhaps if people bothered to look up some info on what they were talking about before they went off half-cocked about the latest hyped paranoia...
CalBoy
May 3, 03:39 PM
I see no reason why 99, 99.5, and 100 are easier to track than 37.2, 37.5, and 37.7. As you said, we accept body temp to be 98.6 and 37.0 in Celsius. If decimals are difficult to remember, then clearly we should pick the scale that represents normal body temp as an integer, right? ;)
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 23, 05:59 AM
I posted this question in another thread but no one has answered it, so... I was wondering what thoughts you had on this:
Will this upgrade to Core 2 Duo be considered a RevB strictly speaking, for the iMacs? I mean, since it's a new generation of Intel chip as opposed to a speed bump of an existing chip, is it likely to cause any unknown bugs or dramas that the Core Duos didn't?
I'm in the market for a new iMac when they put the new chips in, but I want to be confident that this time they'll have ironed out all the bugs from the initial release of Intel iMacs, plus not be likely to have new bugs caused by the new architecture of the Core 2 Duos.
Thoughts?
Chuck.
If iMacs get Merom its highly likely there'll be 0 new problems. If they get Conroe there is a very very small possibility of heat issues.
Will this upgrade to Core 2 Duo be considered a RevB strictly speaking, for the iMacs? I mean, since it's a new generation of Intel chip as opposed to a speed bump of an existing chip, is it likely to cause any unknown bugs or dramas that the Core Duos didn't?
I'm in the market for a new iMac when they put the new chips in, but I want to be confident that this time they'll have ironed out all the bugs from the initial release of Intel iMacs, plus not be likely to have new bugs caused by the new architecture of the Core 2 Duos.
Thoughts?
Chuck.
If iMacs get Merom its highly likely there'll be 0 new problems. If they get Conroe there is a very very small possibility of heat issues.
hob
Mar 27, 05:03 PM
Cloud based services will require mobile phone operators to change their pricing structures or see lots of dissapointed customers.
O2 UK - 24 month contract �35pm, right now = 1000 SMS's, 600 minutes, 500MB data. I'd far rather see 500SMS's, 300 minutes, 1.5GB data... but of course, the SMS and minutes cost them next to nothing vs. data costs...
O2 UK - 24 month contract �35pm, right now = 1000 SMS's, 600 minutes, 500MB data. I'd far rather see 500SMS's, 300 minutes, 1.5GB data... but of course, the SMS and minutes cost them next to nothing vs. data costs...
wizard
Apr 21, 03:38 PM
I can understand the death of XServe. A product that doesn't make money should't stay around, it is simple as that. Such a dual purpose machine would allow Apple to address a broader range of user needs.
In any event I think part for the reason XServe failed was the lines limited nature. Like it or not a 1U server is still limited in capability. Also this idea that TB will effectively replace PCI-E slots is a bit crazy in my mind. Some cards simply need the lowest possible cost implementation and compatibility with PC hardware. In other words a Mac Pro without PCI slots would be crazy on Apples part.
In any event I think part for the reason XServe failed was the lines limited nature. Like it or not a 1U server is still limited in capability. Also this idea that TB will effectively replace PCI-E slots is a bit crazy in my mind. Some cards simply need the lowest possible cost implementation and compatibility with PC hardware. In other words a Mac Pro without PCI slots would be crazy on Apples part.
Roy Hobbs
Aug 2, 01:38 PM
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
It does matter if they are built in or not......many government facilities adn the like will not allow ANY cameras in the building regardless if you are using them or not. More and more companies are implementing policies like this.
It does matter if they are built in or not......many government facilities adn the like will not allow ANY cameras in the building regardless if you are using them or not. More and more companies are implementing policies like this.
macfan881
May 7, 08:37 PM
Great news considering you can get 90 percent of the stuff for free online the only feature i would want is find my iPhone when i get the 4th gen iPhone but if i can get my own .me account i would ditch gmail in a second for me