illa romza

congrats to whiterabbit for 14 million points!

well - that's my point. I'd like my mac for work at my "working" place and the iTV connected to the hifi-system, external hdd with the iTunes library, movies etc. close to the "entertainment" area. And the ipod should be closer to the entertainment than work area..

hope you're wrong - althought I think you might be right ;)

cheers. hans



I mean I get what you are saying, but it doesn't seem like it would be very useful for two reasons. 1. By the very nature of how iTV works, you have a Mac somewhere else in the house and therefore have a tiny, hidden out of the way docking station right there. 2. iTV should either slip seemlesly into your aray of tv components and look elegant. Slapping an ipod on it makes it look like just another charging dock station and not nearly as sleek as the houaing it is in now.

Just curious, Why?

In-car usage. I use my classic most in the car. I appreciate its tactile feedback. It would be awesome if I could use a Bluetooth stereo connection to play my music instead of a crappy FM adapter. I'd buy a new one if it had Bluetooth capability.

and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.Oh as a side note. The 965 chipset which features the GMA 3000 or GMA X3000 will indeed have more features (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2837), but preliminary benchmarks (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pconline.com.cn%2Fmarket%2Fsh%2Fshoppingguide%2Fchangshang%2F0608%2F844 892.html&langpair=zh-CN%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8) show it performing even worse than the GMA 950.

Edit: And you may be quite right on your prediction of the 965 chipset. Due to a design flaw (http://digitimes.com/mobos/a20060731A5025.html) in the integrated graphics subsystem (GMA X3000/3000) the availability of the chips has been delayed to mid August, making them just in time for new Mini's in September.

You realize that you'll be on Aperture 5 before you spend more money than just buying 3 outright. The upgrade from 2 to 3 cost more than just buying 3 on the app store.

Why do you want to spend more money?

If I buy Aperture 3, 4, and 5 on the app store I'll have spent $240.

Didn't it used to be $300 for 1 version? What did the upgrades cost? I feel like I'll be way past 5 before I break even.

Available on the App Store?!?

Seriously, this better come in a box.

I can't get this approved for use without probably buying it myself first, let alone using my own iTunes account, which brings up a whole lot of licensing issues at work. And before you say "create a iTunes account for work."... Tying the corporate credit card to a shared iTunes account? I'd have a better chance of having our CEO give me one of his Jaguars than that. Not to mention, IT would slaughter me for the amount of bandwidth I'd use in downloading it.

Yeah, our editing machines aren't even allowed to be on the internet.

Hopefully there's a way around this.

I think is too early for either HDDVD or Blue-Ray

I think Blu-Ray should have been out 3 years ago. There have been HD displays for reasonable price for some time now, but nothing to really use them with. 3 years ago you would probably have been right saying it's too early, but still IMHO it would have been great if Blu-Ray were released together with the G5's.

It's so sad to think that Blu-Ray shouldn't be here now, because it is still rather expensive. Everything is, until they can produce larger volumes. Using this kind of "too early" thinking, we would have nothing ever released. How cool would that be :P

Hi, here's an excited essay for you all!

You've read some talk about apple releasing the iPhone concurrently with the next gen iPod... I'm going to make a prediction (read: wish) of what I see as the ultimate convergance of all the rumours I've seen lately. If I'm right, I'll keep talking about it for quite a while :)

I predict that the "iPhone" is the next-gen-iPod. I think that apple will happily combine both devices if/when they could be satisfied that both sets of functionality were covered.

I forsee a (3G?) phone which is also the next gen ipod (has a none-touch screen over it's entire face). This timing would tie in well with Leopard's release timing. My reasoning is that if Leopard's rumored ability to call any Phone is true, why not speak of it at the wwdc06 keynote unless they had integration with a smart new phone that they hadn't released yet? (the tech itself isn't anything new)

I therefore think the iPhone (combined with iPod or not) has to come before Leopard's release.

It is the talk of wireless iPods which has made me think that iPod/iPhone will eventually be combined. If a combo device has bluetooth/wifi, it also means it can function seemlessly with front row - also not mentioned in wwdc06 keynote and begging for an update given Apple's obsession with Macs as media devices.

For the record, I'd also like to see something like elgato's eyetv incorporated into front row - record from tv and send to your phone/iPod while using the device as a remote control for tv - but that probably counts as a second wish.

Cheers,
MikeELL

Does this count for the Apple Death Knell Counter? Maybe if they counted all the signatures someone would finally break Rob Enderle's record.... :rolleyes:

Dell has the market cornered in cheaper computers, so much so that they are the only PC maker still pulling in a profit doing it. Apple can't compete with Dell there, and it would be foolish of them to put even a dollar of their R & D money towards trying.

Not everyone will shell out the money for an Alienware system either, and their marketshare is also a fraction of the overall PC industry, but no one's saying they should sell cheaper computers or die. Get a grip. There's room for the smaller players here.

Oil reserves in Libya are the largest in Africa and the ninth largest in the world with 41.5 billion barrels (6.60�109 m3) as of 2007. Oil production was 1.8 million barrels per day (290�103 m3/d) as of giving Libya 63 years of reserves at current production rates if no new reserves were to be found. Libya is considered a highly attractive oil area due to its low cost of oil production (as low as $1 per barrel at some fields), and proximity to European markets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_reserves_in_Libya


The average cost of a Tomahawk missile is close to $1.5 million. But this takes into account the initial research and development costs. As a pure production cost it costs less that $500,000.

http://www.buzzle.com/editorials/11-10-2004-61475.asp


The maths doesn't lie.

That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.

The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.

On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.

Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.

So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.

Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.

OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...

i don't think this rumor will come out to be true because this might take a lot of people from getting Mac Pro, unless this iMac comes out to be north of $2500, at which point nobody will buy this.

As is the norm for most rumored Apple products... it's been done before to some extent. In this case, a company in Valencia, CA, humorously called Troll Touch (http://www.trolltouch.com) (wonder if they hang out on forums much?) performs touchscreen upgrades to virtually any Mac product. As I understand it, the majority of their customers are businesses (http://www.tomsguide.com/us/macworld-touchscreen-mac,news-417.html) that use touchscreen iMacs as point of sale machines, equipped with the [/url="http://www.xsilva.com"]Lightspeed POS[/url] software. And no, POS does not stand for what you call your '79 Ford Pinto.

I could see there being a strong market for systems like these, especially considering the markup Apple could put on them. I've worked heavily with Radiant POS systems which run XP Embedded and used a few other XP Pro software packs and CE based devices - most of which crashed on a weekly basis. When running a retail/restaurant business, the last thing you want is to lost precious time and customers due to a faulty system. Macs have a great reputation with not crashing, so I can see why a smart business owner would see the advantage of investing in a few of these.

As for incorporating iOS in there, I could see it being a very light "embedded" version of OS X that would be great for running on smaller, less powerful computers - much like XP Embedded. Kind of like what it is already, except capable of being run on other hardware platforms.

And finally, I could see an iMac-based Surface-like Mac. You know, tabletop computing and all. Not as much market, but pretty dang cool, even if Microsoft has done it before. We all know Apple's always trying to one-up Microsoft.

Be as it may though, I couldn't see Apple pumping out a consumer-level touchscreen iMac. For anything other than light, 15 minute usage, it would be a real pain. I couldn't see many non-business owners buying one. I'm putting my money (har har) on seeing an Apple produced iMac POS either running OS X or a slightly beefed up form of iOS. What do you think about the name OS X$?

Twitter (http://twitter.com/ShababLibya) is informative, but after 42 years of impotence, normal service cannot be resumed instantaneously. The prospects seem remarkably good, though, that what emerges from this will be an unusually honest democracy.

I hope so, but the next question is how long Libya will have miultiple governments, and under what conditions the rebels recieve official international recognition.

Just in time. My wife's desktop PC is on it's last leg. Lasted a good 5 years and now due for an upgrade to an iMac. When does the back to school promotion normally start?

I will accept this 'protection'.

Most of the players in this drama do not directly gain anything from Libyan oil.

The direct gain is to stop the price of oil from rising.

I thought the keynote was scheduled to take place on Jan 8.:confused:

If the MacBook and Mini stay with core 1 CPUs, sales will grind to a halt.


I don't understand the people who say stuff like this, and HAVE been saying stuff like this for months.

Look - most of the people who buy MacBooks and Minis don't even know what type of CPU they have.

The obsessive 5% of Mac users that live their lives on MacRumors (which, admittedly, I'm a part of) will put off a purchase for months waiting for their dream processor to show up in a Stevenote.

The 95% of Mac users living in the real world go to the Apple Store and buy a computer. They don't know, nor do they care, if some new Intel processor is in the works. Heck, I bet a lot of them don't even know Apple's using Intel chips now.

I have a buddy who just bought a MacBook Pro last week. I told him the Core 2 Duos are imminent, and he didn't care.

You think the kids going to the Apple store with mom and dad, ready to buy a MacBook, are going to run to Best Buy instead to pick up an HP notebook because it has a Core 2 Duo and the MacBook has a Core Duo? I highly doubt it. In fact, it's ridiculous.

They want the MacBook because it looks cool, it's what those trendy ads talk about, it works well with their iPod, etc, etc.

Ask the majority of MacBook and Mini owners where in level of importance they place the rev of Intel processor that's inside their computer and I bet most of them give a blank stare and go, "huh?"

With so many people using iOS nowadays, making the deletion process consistent throughout all hardware can ultimately be more logical and intuitive. This is Apple leveraging the ecosystem in a way to make PCs easier to use through familiarity. And this is a strong selling point for non computer users or for Windows users to switch to Mac. People who just never "got" computers or only familiar with Windows but know how to operate their iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad (and there are MANY people like that) would benefit greatly from this direction.

Too bad it hurts usability in the end. Let's face it, Apple themselves have said that what works on laptops/desktops doesn't on tablet/smartphones and vice versa and now it seems they are making the same mistakes Microsoft did trying to cram Windows on touch tablets, except they are doing it on their laptop/desktop OS.

The touch UI paradigm (and UIKit) doesn't work on a laptop/desktop where you have a trackpad/mouse.

You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost.

since CRT monitors cost next to nothing these days, eMac price can't be lowered that much even if it was headless. that will just eat into the profits. and why give the money for the monitor to other companies?

apparently, apple's marketing dept. has concluded that the sale of AIO units with bigger margin turns more profit than that can be expected from increased sale of headless units with smaller margin. and as long as apple's profitable, there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...

eMac and iMac are for people who want to take home a box, open it up, plug in the power and start using them. they are NOT meant for people who want the absolute cheapest computers. right now, apple is not interested in making that kind of "cheapest" computers... nor has they ever been. the only time that happened was when they allowed clones and that certainly went nowhere because Macs were suddenly a commodity and apple took a major hit as "premium" hardware company.

mind you, apple could change their mind and offer such a headless machine in the future, if their dept. sees that the computer market is changing. so while you may well be 100% correct in principle, apple hasn't had to or is yet to find a reason to offer such a headless.

It does not. With this new glass, I don't feel I need one. A screen protector is far softer and would take more damage in dents and scratches, not to mention expensive (and a pain) to replace.

One more question. For the glass side, if you were to put it face down on a table or flat surface, would the glass make contact or is there a pretty good space?

I used to love that I could do this with the Incase slider for my 3G iPod Touch.

I'm sorry, why is their target audience dwindling?It all comes down to how much extra you are willing to pay for the increased monitor specification. Most will pay 20% very few will pay 75%.

safari is still being a biatch to me. it freezes and won't load anything if i go to pages like www.redmondpie.com and sometimes i can't type anywhere on safari unless i quit safari and reopen it, anyone have the same issues?

oh and adblocker isn't properly blocking ads anymore, i even get pop ups sometimes ... i thought those were extinct

Next you'll be telling us that the US President is an American, too.

Well some people think that's debatable ;).

Multiple cores are useful for more then improving the processing of multiple threaded applicaitons individually.

Multiple cores are very useful when you run more then one application at a time as long as the operating system is able to allocate core use to more than one application at a time (as OSX does quite nicely). Therefore, with multiple cores, you will get better performance for each application when more then one applicaiton is run at the same time.

When Intel multicore processors are used (as in the Mac Pro) which support hardware virtualization, you can run software (such as Parrallels Desktop) that lets your run additional operating systems (such as Windows, Solaris, and Linux) concurrently with OSX at near full native speeds since one or more cores are used for OSX and one is used for each of the virtual operating systems.

Therefore, multiple cores are still useful even if many of the applications you use are not highly multithreaded.

Dave