illa romza

Wouldn't it be kinda cool to have a Mac Pro with 3 nCore chips, 3 GPU's, 3 SSD's, and an internal HD RAID?

Kinda makes you wonder why we don't just have a chip and memory combo unit. :D

Rocketman

Does anyone else really just not care about this? I could care less. It's not like the info is going to end up in China.

And what if it did end up in china? Is china going to pre-emptively place cheap toys where they predict me to go next?

This whole thing is massively overblown. There is no evidence this information is ending up anywhere... The information is there for a reason and serves a specific purpose. I am fine with it.

For someone to access it they would have to steal your phone. As others have mentioned if that was the case, for most people the information about cell tower locations you might have been near is the absolute least of your worries.

People have to realize this information is not private in the first place. Your location as you move from public place to public place is not some kind of protected right to privacy. Sometimes I wish it was, but it is not. We have no right or expectation of privacy as we move around the public world.

There are a myriad of ways our public movements are tracked hundreds of times every day as we move about. I really do wish people would spend more time investigating and understanding these issues then just knee jerk flipping out and "demanding" answers. Especially since they don't even understand the question, so how can they expect to understand the answer?

If this were Google or M$ you apologists would be foaming at the mouth. Nice fallacious argument - just because we can be tracked in our cars with traffic cams, or GPS devices, etc, doesn't mean this, or those instances are legal.

This is clearly in violation of EU law, for those of you who are interested:

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/information_society/l14012_en.htm

We should at least be given the choice to opt-out, and the purposes and disclosure policies should be clearly stated, not buried in a 30-page ToS.

Europe has a law against a device you own tracking your movements from one public place to another? That must be tough not to be able to have any GPS devices.

Do you understand privacy? Do you understand what is actually happening with the iPhone and this information? Do you understand the European law you cited?

It seems you do not understand any of those three.

Yes I can drive one. I also think that if you can't drive one, you shouldn't be allowed to drive period. Automatics are just things to get you from point A to B, whereas a standard transmission car is something you use for fun, with getting from point A to B just being a side effect.

-Don

I can't believe that MS still holds J. Allard as a big ruling leader
There is a 40 minute podcast on Inside Home Recording that has J.Allard singing the praises of the Zune to a group of music/podcast/executive types at the 2006 Music Tech Summit. Great listening, and he explains the features of Zune media player, plus reasons for whoring with Universal Music.

podcast (http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=79061694&s=143455&i=12059569) < takes you to iTunes podcast page.

luv ya bunches! xoxoxo

What makes this commercial so awesome is that they didn't throw the technical specifications in your face (RAM, storage, etc) like some of the other competitors have.

If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.


Any car will go 250K miles if properly maintained, yet some cars would need more proper maintenance.

There is nothing better looking on the inside and out as the new BMWs, and if I could have a company car for 5 years, it would be a BMW. But today's BMW (engine longevity wise) is not the same company in any way as the one who put together the very rugged 2002 model. There may not have been the same attention to looks and style, but what counted was that the engine was made to last forever. You wouldn't believe how many of those rusted out and ripped up 2002s there are out there, but they keep on going. Kids get them from their parents and soon grandkids will have them from their grandparents.

That being said, today's automobile safety standards are far more strict. If I got hit, or crashed, I would want to be in a new BMW with airbags vs. an old BMW 2002. And I am sure the new BMW could simply kill the 2002 on a slalom course. And as far as chick magnets (or what some guys use as an accessory), the new BMWs have all the looks going for it.

The maintenance on indestructible cars like the BMW 2002 series, and cars like my 70s/80s Volvo DL-GL series amounts to making sure the upholstery is not too ripped up and the rust is kept to a minimum (bondo, sanding, etc) but what you have is a car, as ugly as the weather and age can pit the hell out of it, which will go for 40 or 50 years without any major engine work. And to be fair, my mechanic says the new Volvo engines of the last decade are pretty fragile. A three year old Volvo engine appears to have more wear than my '84's engine according to him. Of course, the sheer durability and weight of my old Volvo engine does amount to a heavier car that doesn't handle any better than a school bus, and gets terrible mileage. ;)

And when you look at where American cars used to be in terms of reliability compared to anything post 1970s, it's sad. Take a look at Cuba who got left behind after Fidel Castro. Many of the cars people have that are still running are 1950s American cars, back when America used to build everlasting cars.

if not, how am I supposed to convice my wife this time?:D

Tell her about the extra three inches to "love".

First, couple of corrections. Netflix is already offering both HD-DVD and Bluray Disk rentals of available movies. So, technically high definition movie is for rent. I have not rented any yet because I am waiting for the prices to come down a little bit and also a victor to emerge.


I rented an HD-DVD from netflix (Van Helsing) and it wouldn't play on my Mac. I thought that the current version of DVD player would let you play these discs but all I could find through Apple tech support is that DVD player will let you play DVD Studio Pro burnt HD discs.

Or am I doing something wrong?

any chance you think they are gonna put the update the MB the same time they do the MBP's?

*sigh* I hope they do, if they do, I think that they wont redesign. I've decided to get a white macbook with a gig of memory and buy a desk hammer hard drive from staples.... the macbooks look soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo nice *sigh* But they could bump the specs and lower the price:D :D

there is a destinct difference between 'sharing' and 'synching'.

Exactly! Now maybe you see my first point.

And, your "solution" to fingerprinting libs could, very well I believe, impact this other distinct feature.

It makes no sense to "share" from an iPod (or to one for that matter) - costs are too high as pointed out ad nauseum (see above posts yet to be refuted).

Making it an iPod w/ AirTunes would cannibalize sales of ATEs and also - again - be too expensive from a power standpoint unless you tether your iPod to a charger defeating one of the great bonus points of wireless. Or get a dock for the TV - oh wait, you've again made the "wireless" not so wireless - and redundant...

Are you able to download System Voices in DP2?

No, unfortunately.

'Course, if Microsoft could, hypothetically, stop being such an evil company, I'd certainly overlook their shady past and could even, Jobs forbid!, use some of their products (provided they'd be up to my typical Mac User's standards :rolleyes: ). :D

"Jobs forbid" - funny

Yes, their EQ (Evil Quotient) may change over time as might their global strategy. We won't know until we know, ya know?

If in 1960 you told me the day would come when IBM wouldn't make a ton of money leasing card sorters I'd have been sceptical. (many called them evil for refusing to sell card readers to companies while charging the fair market value many times over on long-term leases) If in 1990 I had told you the day would come when IBM wouldn't be in the PC business you might have been sceptical. I, a dyed in the wool Apple fan, wouldn't have predicted Apple's success 10 years ago. MS has the money and worker-bee brains to stay in any game they choose to play. They should be ashamed of the Zune and I don't understand why they rushed it to market but I don't think it's a slam-dunk that it, and they, are doomed for the trashbin of corporate history.

I wouldn't mind being wrong in the least.

They're going to have to go multi-thread capable, demands on consumer software is only going to increase as we take what is cutting edge today and integrate it into everyday life.


Yes, and apple can start with QUICKTIME... for heaven's sake.

Rovio's generic use of the word "App Store(s)" made me think about this issue when I watched the trailer with my daughter the other day.

If Apple retain the trademark, I wonder what they'll do to stop people and companies using it in this way?


Good point. My local ABC station tells you to, "go to any app store" to get their mobile apps. They make apps for iPhone, iPad, BB and Android.

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)

Good thing Al Franken is on the case...

I don't know if this update is imminent. apple.com store still shows macbooks and mbp as shipping within 24 hours....

Unless the new MBPs are shipping tomorrow..:rolleyes:

here my G

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8002/ashleyqq.jpg


of course i got it fully loaded with Bose Sound etc.
http://img821.imageshack.us/img821/69/ashley2d.jpg


on the far left in the snow last night

http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/6651/ashley3p.jpg

Awesome, another infiniti owner! I posted my 09 G37S sedan in this thread (probably first page)... also fully loaded :cool:

Love this car!!

----

And for the Volvo S60R or whatever.. I find it funny how Volvo said that they were trying to get away from trying to copy basic german lines and looks, yet they completely ripped off the Mercedes E-class styling (with the front lights and the car lines)... it basically looks like a less appealing version of the E class... and the side mirrors look exactly like the Audi S-series side mirrors...

Marketing geniuses :)

Hmmm... not really. I hate marketing. Nothing they say will change that. They also need to stop calling the iPad "magical". It really isn't. It's very nice, but not magical.

could be abused by...bad actors

At least he's an expert in this area...

Wow. For someone who seems to have all the answers, you're not reading the rest of this thread very well.

http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327

In short, Apple's monitors are for higher-end users. Anyone can go out and get a Dell. Most people do. If you want cheap and easy, you get a Dell monitor.

I noticed that you didn't mention any of the 20" NEC Displays that run much, MUCH higher in price than even Apple's. Now why are they so much more expensive? Are they too high-priced? Vastly overpriced?

There are differences. You'd know that if you took the time to look.

Yes, you are indeed correct. Those are "real" numbers. Numbers that are comparing two different types of monitors.

Next time you wish to present facts, try and present them all instead of just the ones that support your case.


Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs? If you're buying a $2400 + Mac Pro the choice is obvious and you could justify the higher price, but what about the low end?

I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20". The Apple monitor is extremely dim, so much so I'm not buying the superior color argument with that model, it's very noticable; the iMac however is very bright and the colors look much richer. If you want to argue that the Apple monitor is sooo much better with color reproduction and the numbers don't lie, than OK, I'll give you that. But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.

If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.

Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?

So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one. Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?

If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper. Apple won't make as much money off of a mini/cinema combo as they will off of a 20" iMac; especially if the profit margin on the monitor is razor thin.

So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it. I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right? But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html

That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.

This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:



I got the same thing.

Basically: "You Wait While I Render."

New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.

To be more exact, "You wait while I use 2 of your 8 cores to render"

Well, see... there's this little thing called market analysis and listening to the people you sell things to. I highly doubt Apple was sitting around going "we need to release something new because its been months. I know! How about a different monitor size!"

Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?

Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.

IMAGINED?

Let's look at the facts.

20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499

Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.

What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.

You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.

I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.

I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!

So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.

I have used Linux before, admit that I gave up with linux with Suse 9. The point I was trying to make with the package manager is that its not easy to go out and find something, every time you either have to find a package for your specific distribution or have it "built" for your distro. If you look at the way the mac works now I can drag the aduim icon to a remote drive, and from almost any machine that meets the basic specs I can then double click that app, even if its on a network drive, it will run, can you say the same for Linux?

Yes I can. Like I said, I just fire up the package-manager, find the app in question and click "Install". That really is all there is to it. No need to browse the web, looking for installers to download.

By unification I meant giving a constant user experience with singal points of administration, management ect. Some of my previous sessions with linux the applications did not always fully adhere to guidelines that were set out by KDE, whatever theme i choose, it didnt adapt to it for example.

Things are different these days. You are basing your judgement on SUSE9, which was released three years ago. During that three years, Linux has made HUGE progress. Things are chaning for the better, and they are changing FAST. I would say that Linux has changed more during the last three years than it did during the five years before 2003.

Note: that is NOT a bad thing for Apple. I bet that Apple would much rather co-exists with Linux than with Windows. There could never be a monopoly Linux could exploit to harm competitors, Microsoft could do that, and they have done it. Linux is open and follows established standards, Microsoft does not, if they can get away with it. Linux has no interest in destroying competitors, Microsoft does.

I fully admit im not a linux guru, and that things very likely have changed, but my perception is that every distro comes with a boat load of software on the DVD or via download, if you want to get something thats not listed it becomes a bit more difficult.

Well, SUSE does ship with tons of apps on the DVD (mainly so that it could be used wby people without broadband). But if you look at Ubuntu for example, it ships with relatively few apps. In a way, they have selected "best of breed"-apps for their distro. But if the user wants to have some additional piece of software, he can just fire up the package-manager, where he can choose from 16.000 pieces of software. The app the user is looking for is most likely listed there. If he's installing a piece of commercial software, they usually ship with nice installers that are not one bit harder to use than the ones in OS X or Windows.

There is the issue of building your own kernel

You have no need to do that. Seriously. I haven't built my own kernels in years. And when I did, it was because I wanted to do it, not because I had to do it.

Just because you CAN compile your own kernel does not mean that you are required to do so. The possibility is there for power-users.

The mac advantage is that its a bit easier to get, install and run applications than windows, and IMO linux as well.

I disagree. In Linux all the apps I could even want were just few mouse-clicks away. On OS X (and on Windows) I have to hunt for those apps in internet, only to find out that I'm expected to pay for them. I had none of those problems in Linux.

why is there a few big distros out there after years of linux development, why are there so many niche ones, and why do linux users argue with others over their favorite distro?

There are several distros, because one distro can't do it all. Want an OS that can be tweaked and customized to your exact needs and for your specific hardware? Obviously Ubuntu is not ideal then, but Gentoo is. Want a distro that "just works"? Ubuntu would be a good choice then. Want a distro with rock-solid reliablity? Try Debian. Want to run Red Hat servers, but don't want to pay for support? Use CentOS.

All those distros exist because there are users who find them to be better for their needs than the other distros are. And there's nothing wrong with that, since one size does not fit all. No-one could tell the users that "from now on, there will be just one distro". And even if someone could say that, the users who were unhappy with the "one true distro" could start their own distro if they wanted to.

Why do users argue which distro is best? For the same reason why Mac-users tell Linux and Windows-users that OS X is the best? For the same reason why BMW-drivers tell others that BMW is better than Merc is? People like to rationalise their choice of OS.

Diversity and flexability is one of the strenghts of Linux, its users know that, and having a single distro that does everything will counter that strength, they also know that.

They know that there can't be one distro that "does everything". Ubuntu wants to be easy to use OS that just works. Gentoo wnts to be as customizable, flexible and powerful as possible. It would be very, very hard for single OS to offer both of those ideoogies in one package. It would en up being "jack of all trades, master of none".

Take Mandrake (Mandiva these days) and Red Hat for example. Years ago Red Hat decided to use GNOME as their default desktop. There were bunch of Red Hat users who liked the distro, but liked KDE more than GNOME. So they took Red Hat, replaced GNOME with KDE and voila: Mandrake was born. From that point te two started to diverge. as independted OS'es.