HecubusPro
Aug 31, 02:53 PM
I posted this on the mini specs forum, but thought it would be needed here as well.
Are they already shipping then?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010
Are they already shipping then?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010
hulugu
Apr 20, 04:54 PM
Sure is. A hypothetical I like to propose:
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
HecubusPro
Sep 4, 07:56 PM
I'm confused. Movie downloads for $10?!? What happened to the whole "Jobs is hammered by the movie industry into movie rentals only" ?!? This CANNOT possibly mean renting a movie for $10!! :eek:
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
GimmeSlack12
Apr 28, 06:36 PM
Wow, what a fail for Micro$oft, no no I mean MicroSoft (you don't get an $ in your name anymore).
Instead of making: $5,990,000,000.00
They only made: $5,230,000,000.00
What a bunch of losers. :\
Instead of making: $5,990,000,000.00
They only made: $5,230,000,000.00
What a bunch of losers. :\
calculus
Oct 12, 01:07 PM
I'll probably come of sounding like a jerk and opening a HUGE can of worms with this, BUT...
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
That said, bravo to Apple, U2, and anyone else involved here. Anytime you can use your power and influence to raise funds and awareness - no matter the alterior motives - it's a good thing.
Exactly, why just limit this to people with AIDS. That discriminates against people who are healthy.
I'm glad somebody else was thinking what I was thinking! Why do we constantly have to place a line between men and women, black and white, American and everyone else. If we actually want equality and unity and all those wonderful things, I think it's about time we stop dilineating between groups of people.
It can't be both ways... if women/minorities want equality in the work place, or government, or in society as a whole, there can't also be inequality in the world when it comes to things like this... men and women, black and white, straight and gay - they have to be equal across the board, or not at all. We can't have it both ways.
That said, bravo to Apple, U2, and anyone else involved here. Anytime you can use your power and influence to raise funds and awareness - no matter the alterior motives - it's a good thing.
Exactly, why just limit this to people with AIDS. That discriminates against people who are healthy.
RKpro
Apr 30, 07:07 PM
Yes! Credit card is ready.
I kind of wish they made a 24" model, but it's very unlikely. Because it would have a smaller pixel density than last year's 21.5" model.
Unless they can somehow source some 24" LCDs with very weird resolutions that slot between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440.
I kind of wish they made a 24" model, but it's very unlikely. Because it would have a smaller pixel density than last year's 21.5" model.
Unless they can somehow source some 24" LCDs with very weird resolutions that slot between 1920x1080 and 2560x1440.
BRLawyer
Mar 22, 03:06 PM
Nobody wants the 24". That's why they stopped making it. It was useless.
Sure it is useless; I've been using one for what, 2 years now? ;)
Sure it is useless; I've been using one for what, 2 years now? ;)
zz5555
Sep 9, 08:57 AM
Well, wasn't the iMac G5 restricted to 2GB, yet it was a 64-bit processor? A 32-bit computer can take up to 4GB, but due to the hardware Apple was/is using, they can't even take this.
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I suspect that it will take 2GB in each and you will get more than 3GB total, then. But HW addresses are going to eat up some of the 4GB total address space, so you're not going to get all 4GB. (Apple could restrict things to just 3GB regardless, although I can't see any reason for them to do so.) I suspect the 3GB is just a marketing move. After all, they wouldn't want to advertise something like "for an extra $500 we'll stick in a 2nd 2GB stick to give you an extra .1 GB of memory!"
I'd hoped for a full 64 bit system, though that probably wasn't realistic in the time frame. I'm not buying until January, so we'll see what comes out at MacWorld (which I think I'll actually go to this year) and then I'll decide. All in all, I think I'd be very happy with the 24" model (with a 2nd display).
Steve
What i find odd is that it appears to allow 1 or 2GB in either slot, but no more than 3GB in total. That is obviously the maximum the board can take, but it would have made a little more sense to allow 2GB in each. This will not really effect it's ability to run 64-bit software, just restricts how much memory can be used. Remember that you have been able to get AMD systems with 64-bit processors for some time now. They won't take more than 4GB, but will allow you to run 64-bit OSes and Apps.
I suspect that it will take 2GB in each and you will get more than 3GB total, then. But HW addresses are going to eat up some of the 4GB total address space, so you're not going to get all 4GB. (Apple could restrict things to just 3GB regardless, although I can't see any reason for them to do so.) I suspect the 3GB is just a marketing move. After all, they wouldn't want to advertise something like "for an extra $500 we'll stick in a 2nd 2GB stick to give you an extra .1 GB of memory!"
I'd hoped for a full 64 bit system, though that probably wasn't realistic in the time frame. I'm not buying until January, so we'll see what comes out at MacWorld (which I think I'll actually go to this year) and then I'll decide. All in all, I think I'd be very happy with the 24" model (with a 2nd display).
Steve
firsttube
Sep 13, 09:57 PM
My friend has that phone, it's amazing.
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
I wouldn't say amazing, but I really like it. The interface is very inconsistent, however. I complain quite a bit about that - but then again, maybe I'm spoiled! :D
THESE SLIDER PHONES ARE A HUGE HIT RIGHT NOW!
Some of you may not like the slider style, but most consumers love it. And love the idea of a True music playing cell phone that can replace your iPod (nano at least)
I wouldn't say amazing, but I really like it. The interface is very inconsistent, however. I complain quite a bit about that - but then again, maybe I'm spoiled! :D
JAT
Oct 27, 03:34 PM
Macs as far as I know are not easily tossed out. apple computers have been primarily hand me downs unless some terrible accident happened rendering it useless.
My cousin's iBook died last winter. I discovered he disposed of it, not sure if he did environmentally-well or not. But since he should've given it to me, even though dead, I had to shoot him. That's one that won't hose the environment anymore!
(this post is partly hyperbole.....no Apple is ever "dead")
My cousin's iBook died last winter. I discovered he disposed of it, not sure if he did environmentally-well or not. But since he should've given it to me, even though dead, I had to shoot him. That's one that won't hose the environment anymore!
(this post is partly hyperbole.....no Apple is ever "dead")
Cougarcat
Apr 30, 03:14 PM
You are also stuck in current times. Physical media will be dead by then, everything is going to be cloud based, there will be no such thing as a physical copy of movies any more :)
The bottleneck is internet speed. Until the world has South Korean-esque internet speeds, physical media isn't going anywhere.
The bottleneck is internet speed. Until the world has South Korean-esque internet speeds, physical media isn't going anywhere.
Dagless
Apr 11, 05:14 AM
Lucky its not Sony. Those that exposed it would be in a never ending court case, and everyone's IP that visited macrumors would be subpoenaed by a federal judge.
Not the same thing.
Not the same thing.
Multimedia
Aug 31, 04:04 PM
I posted this on the mini specs forum, but thought it would be needed here as well.
Are they already shipping then?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010Yes they are. But we are still looking for a second report to corroborate this report. This is the same report of 1.66GHz Core Duo instead of 1.5GHz Core Solo.What about this report of a silent mini update already in the pipeline on the French HardMac website? (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869) :)
"I have ordered a Mac mini Core solo with 1GB of RAM last Saturday to use it as a server, and what a surprise when I received the box!
My Mac mini has been upgraded:
- Core Duo 1.66GHz instead of Core Solo 1.5GHz
- HD 100GB instead of 60GB
- and a SuperDrive instead of a Combo!
Thanks Apple !
On the box, the specifications are those of a Mac mini Core Solo..."Thank you.
Are they already shipping then?
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2010Yes they are. But we are still looking for a second report to corroborate this report. This is the same report of 1.66GHz Core Duo instead of 1.5GHz Core Solo.What about this report of a silent mini update already in the pipeline on the French HardMac website? (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869) :)
"I have ordered a Mac mini Core solo with 1GB of RAM last Saturday to use it as a server, and what a surprise when I received the box!
My Mac mini has been upgraded:
- Core Duo 1.66GHz instead of Core Solo 1.5GHz
- HD 100GB instead of 60GB
- and a SuperDrive instead of a Combo!
Thanks Apple !
On the box, the specifications are those of a Mac mini Core Solo..."Thank you.
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 07:58 PM
No, not at all.
An affinity mask sets the set of CPUs that can be scheduled. A job won't be run on another CPU, even if the assigned CPUs are at 100% and other idle CPUs are available.
And that, by the way, is why setting affinity is usually a bad idea. Let the system dynamically schedule across all available resources -- or you might have some CPUs very busy, and others idle.
Win2k3 also has "soft" affinity masks, which define a preferred set of CPUs. If all of the preferred CPUs are busy, and other CPUs are idle, then soft affinity allows the system to run the jobs on the idle CPUs - even though the idle CPUs aren't in the preferred affinity mask.
But I am pretty sure the newest developer tools can cope with that, considering that multicore chips are a rather new thing in the mainstream market...
Try the Processor Preferences app contained in the Apple CHUD tools, for instance...
An affinity mask sets the set of CPUs that can be scheduled. A job won't be run on another CPU, even if the assigned CPUs are at 100% and other idle CPUs are available.
And that, by the way, is why setting affinity is usually a bad idea. Let the system dynamically schedule across all available resources -- or you might have some CPUs very busy, and others idle.
Win2k3 also has "soft" affinity masks, which define a preferred set of CPUs. If all of the preferred CPUs are busy, and other CPUs are idle, then soft affinity allows the system to run the jobs on the idle CPUs - even though the idle CPUs aren't in the preferred affinity mask.
But I am pretty sure the newest developer tools can cope with that, considering that multicore chips are a rather new thing in the mainstream market...
Try the Processor Preferences app contained in the Apple CHUD tools, for instance...
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:54 AM
No prob. Sorry I wasn't more verbose at first. I actually edited it fast (on my iPhone lol) but it took a min.
Hey, good on you for being a trooper on it. I always nitpick when people reply with one word.
Hey, good on you for being a trooper on it. I always nitpick when people reply with one word.
Jefferyd32
Apr 30, 02:04 PM
Where is the new Mac Mini update. I have been waiting and waiting to set up my HTPC.
cwt1nospam
Mar 20, 04:38 PM
Is there some reason you feel the need lash out at people?
Only at shills, and I hardly consider them people.
You seem to be utterly oblivious to the whole point of the message which is that OSX is not invulnerable by any means, which seems to be the fanboy mantra of the week.
You seem to be intent on ignoring the fact that whatever vulnerabilities exist in OS X, antivirus software does nothing to reduce them and can actually add new vulnerabilities. There's only one reason I can think of for taking that stance, and that is that you're income depends on it.
Only at shills, and I hardly consider them people.
You seem to be utterly oblivious to the whole point of the message which is that OSX is not invulnerable by any means, which seems to be the fanboy mantra of the week.
You seem to be intent on ignoring the fact that whatever vulnerabilities exist in OS X, antivirus software does nothing to reduce them and can actually add new vulnerabilities. There's only one reason I can think of for taking that stance, and that is that you're income depends on it.
jrv3034
Oct 12, 01:07 PM
there is no such thing as charity in america, it always comes through commerce. why not just donate the $200 bux? does a lot more than the 10 bux you are donating now, so you can justify getting a new ipod. hell i would buy a red ipod just cos of the color i don't see why the cos has to be associated with it, if they're gonna do this they might as well just donate 10% of all ipod sales. at least it does something more than haveing a "show off" recipet for your so called act of charity.
"Hi i'm bono, there's a huge aids problem in africa and people don't pay attention, heres a new ipod"
wtf.
The point is, If I'm going to buy an iPod, I might as well buy the one that gives a little to those who need it. Everybody wins. How can this be a bad thing?
"Hi i'm bono, there's a huge aids problem in africa and people don't pay attention, heres a new ipod"
wtf.
The point is, If I'm going to buy an iPod, I might as well buy the one that gives a little to those who need it. Everybody wins. How can this be a bad thing?
JAT
Mar 30, 12:02 PM
Yes, but that doesn't matter. The word Windows is no generic IT word, while app(lication) is. That's the difference.
"Apple" can't be used to trademark a fruit, but it can be used to trademark a computer. "Windows" can't be used to trademark "windows of a house" but it can be for an operating system. "App store" can be trademarked for a brothel but not for a store that sells computer applications.
One, windows is a generic IT word. Yes, it is. That's WHY M$ named it Windows, because it was a term that described what you see on screen. Personally, I was annoyed when they called it that for their 2bit crap OS shell. Two, that doesn't matter today, M$ is not going after people for usage of "windows". Three, Apple can certainly attempt to trademark a term. That's why we have trademarks. All these arguments are circular. "You can't because you can't." Silly.
Yeah -- makes you wonder why the American Revolution ever happened. We replaced somebody who ruled by birthright with somebody who ruled by the merits of being a better lawyer. I guess you can't win. If only all political leaders could have been like George Washington who hated political parties.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
I'll say it again "App Store" is a generic term, I think everyone should be able to use it.. I hope Apple doesn't win this one.. If someone used "Mac App Store", completely understandable..
See, that's really the point. Apple was the first to use this term. It doesn't matter what letters it uses, it's the combination that is at stake, here. I don't care who wins, they could certainly trademark this no problem. That's what a trademark is, if your term was so strange and unrelated to your industry, you wouldn't need legal backup.
"Apple" can't be used to trademark a fruit, but it can be used to trademark a computer. "Windows" can't be used to trademark "windows of a house" but it can be for an operating system. "App store" can be trademarked for a brothel but not for a store that sells computer applications.
One, windows is a generic IT word. Yes, it is. That's WHY M$ named it Windows, because it was a term that described what you see on screen. Personally, I was annoyed when they called it that for their 2bit crap OS shell. Two, that doesn't matter today, M$ is not going after people for usage of "windows". Three, Apple can certainly attempt to trademark a term. That's why we have trademarks. All these arguments are circular. "You can't because you can't." Silly.
Yeah -- makes you wonder why the American Revolution ever happened. We replaced somebody who ruled by birthright with somebody who ruled by the merits of being a better lawyer. I guess you can't win. If only all political leaders could have been like George Washington who hated political parties.
Yes, military rulers have always been so wonderful in human history. :rolleyes:
I'll say it again "App Store" is a generic term, I think everyone should be able to use it.. I hope Apple doesn't win this one.. If someone used "Mac App Store", completely understandable..
See, that's really the point. Apple was the first to use this term. It doesn't matter what letters it uses, it's the combination that is at stake, here. I don't care who wins, they could certainly trademark this no problem. That's what a trademark is, if your term was so strange and unrelated to your industry, you wouldn't need legal backup.
zap2
Apr 11, 03:22 AM
All those monthly bills add up. I'm glad I never bought an iPhone, for example, when they first came out. I've saved a ton of money not buying the required data plan that goes comes with it. I don't want to put words in your mouth but it sounds like our priorities are all wrong and I agree.
I don't see what your point is...how does that respond to the person you quoted? He was saying people made bad choice due to keep oil and you say "I'm glad I didn't get an iPhone right away"
The price of gas living in suburbia is much more of a drain on a household then an extra 20 dollars for iPhone data. 20 bucks is nothing in a month of gas. And for the amount of usage iPhones often get(like in my case) it is well worth the money for many people.
Don't criticize people for making different choices then yourself
I don't see what your point is...how does that respond to the person you quoted? He was saying people made bad choice due to keep oil and you say "I'm glad I didn't get an iPhone right away"
The price of gas living in suburbia is much more of a drain on a household then an extra 20 dollars for iPhone data. 20 bucks is nothing in a month of gas. And for the amount of usage iPhones often get(like in my case) it is well worth the money for many people.
Don't criticize people for making different choices then yourself
Old Smuggler
Sep 13, 09:42 PM
i agree its got to compete with my treo
ill admit palm OS garnet blows but its not as bad as windows
ill just wait for OS X Mobile
ill admit palm OS garnet blows but its not as bad as windows
ill just wait for OS X Mobile
ro2nie
Jul 18, 10:48 AM
Any one know when the 45nm architecture processors are going to appear?
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
I'm gonna wait for those, for OS X 10.5 and iLife 07 to invest in a Mac
spinko
Aug 28, 12:06 PM
bring them on...
GGJstudios
Mar 18, 07:58 PM
It certainly has a huge amount to do with market share and therefore return on investment in creating malware.
False. Read post #95 and post #59.
False. Read post #95 and post #59.