scrapple
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
yawn..
they both made billions... who cares.
they both made billions... who cares.
toddybody
Apr 22, 12:29 PM
The TDPs are around the same as with previous gen, or possibly even less (the TDP of 320M is unknown). Also, Turbo Boost will only be activated if the thermals allow that. If your CPU is already running at 90�C, then Turbo most likely won't kick in.
I doubt SB will make MBA run noticeably hotter.
Agreed. Though I thought SB was roughy 10% more efficient in regards to TDP, than previous core gens...thereby making it a thermal improvement. Also, no cooling requirements for a 320m...all on the SB chip.
I doubt SB will make MBA run noticeably hotter.
Agreed. Though I thought SB was roughy 10% more efficient in regards to TDP, than previous core gens...thereby making it a thermal improvement. Also, no cooling requirements for a 320m...all on the SB chip.
nsayer
Mar 23, 04:46 PM
They are couching this as a fight against drunk driving, but Trapster primarily is about alerting you to speed traps, red light cameras and other purely revenue generating tools used by local cops and insurance companies to take your money from you using the fig leaf of allegedly improving traffic safety.
pro-tip: You want to reduce red light crashes? Make the yellow light longer. Oh but that won't make you more money in traffic fines. Oops. In actual fact, many communities that have put in red light cameras have been caught cheating - REDUCING the length of the yellow lights beyond the minimums in the MUTCD.
If they ban Trapster from the store I solemnly swear that I will make it my life's work to build a web-based replacement that they can't ban.
pro-tip: You want to reduce red light crashes? Make the yellow light longer. Oh but that won't make you more money in traffic fines. Oops. In actual fact, many communities that have put in red light cameras have been caught cheating - REDUCING the length of the yellow lights beyond the minimums in the MUTCD.
If they ban Trapster from the store I solemnly swear that I will make it my life's work to build a web-based replacement that they can't ban.
dukebound85
Apr 25, 02:42 AM
I volunteered only to further my college applications. I really couldn't give a crap about the people my work supposedly helped. All I care about is that it helped me.
I don't view myself as cold hearted, I view myself as being a realist. This "let's be nice to everyone" crap has turned 95% of society into blithering retarded bleeding hearts. I only care about people who I can use to further myself, or those who have genuinely done something caring for me (family); otherwise you are completely expendable to me (take note anyone who works under me in a decade). I do not feel that society's rules apply to me, because I simply know that I am better than many of the people in society; the rules (including speed limits) are there for lesser folk. Look at our pop culture, it shows how stupid most are. What you call morally and ethically bankrupt, I call opportunistic and motivated.
For proclaiming yourself as a realist, you live in quite the imaginary land if you think you can disregard laws and then think you won't have to face some very real consequences.
Lesser folk...who do you think you are? Thank god my 16 year old brother does not have this mindset as I would have to smack some sense into him
Then again, it must be nice being born into a fortunistic household (harvard parents, judges in family, etc) in terms of monetary means only with no doing of your own. But of course, that mere act of being born earned you that right to be better than everyone else. Got it.
I don't view myself as cold hearted, I view myself as being a realist. This "let's be nice to everyone" crap has turned 95% of society into blithering retarded bleeding hearts. I only care about people who I can use to further myself, or those who have genuinely done something caring for me (family); otherwise you are completely expendable to me (take note anyone who works under me in a decade). I do not feel that society's rules apply to me, because I simply know that I am better than many of the people in society; the rules (including speed limits) are there for lesser folk. Look at our pop culture, it shows how stupid most are. What you call morally and ethically bankrupt, I call opportunistic and motivated.
For proclaiming yourself as a realist, you live in quite the imaginary land if you think you can disregard laws and then think you won't have to face some very real consequences.
Lesser folk...who do you think you are? Thank god my 16 year old brother does not have this mindset as I would have to smack some sense into him
Then again, it must be nice being born into a fortunistic household (harvard parents, judges in family, etc) in terms of monetary means only with no doing of your own. But of course, that mere act of being born earned you that right to be better than everyone else. Got it.
EagerDragon
Sep 9, 06:59 PM
I stopped at the Apple store this morning and tried out the 24 inch iMac and the Mac Pro. These are sweet machines. No did not buy anything.
The systems both had 1 gig on them and I compared them to a MacBook Pro. One weird thing.... the 24 incher had some stuttering on the iMoviedemo they all had. However the second time I tried it it was smoth as silk. I think it was not cached in memory and since the second time it was it ran smothly. I was also plesantly surpriced that the 24 incher screen was very readable at it highest setting even with my bad eyes. Nice screen realstate and resolution with nice easy to read fonts.
Im still waiting for Leopard to release these powerful anymals of their chains. By them the systems will be even better, maybe even incluse Santa Rosa.
The systems both had 1 gig on them and I compared them to a MacBook Pro. One weird thing.... the 24 incher had some stuttering on the iMoviedemo they all had. However the second time I tried it it was smoth as silk. I think it was not cached in memory and since the second time it was it ran smothly. I was also plesantly surpriced that the 24 incher screen was very readable at it highest setting even with my bad eyes. Nice screen realstate and resolution with nice easy to read fonts.
Im still waiting for Leopard to release these powerful anymals of their chains. By them the systems will be even better, maybe even incluse Santa Rosa.
Some_Big_Spoon
Sep 9, 06:47 PM
I was credit card in hand when these were released, but I stopped myself. I'd like to wait a bit and see the 64 bit boost (if there is any), and Leopard in general.
I feel like these are speed demons, but I can't take advantage of a lot of it due to my heavy use of CS2 and the in-between feeling of Apple's apps/OS right now.
The second Leopard is out, I'm on the 24" iMac train.
I feel like these are speed demons, but I can't take advantage of a lot of it due to my heavy use of CS2 and the in-between feeling of Apple's apps/OS right now.
The second Leopard is out, I'm on the 24" iMac train.
BlizzardBomb
Aug 28, 12:38 PM
Why so many negative votes?
Maybe because most manufacturers have started selling Core 2 Duo computers but Apple hasn't.
Maybe because most manufacturers have started selling Core 2 Duo computers but Apple hasn't.
n-abounds
Sep 15, 06:34 PM
It's funny...and I say this not as a rumor...just coincidence.
There was a guy in a pizza place I went for lunch that was showing his friends his phone. And it was white. I thought that was a little odd because I don't think I've ever seen a white phone, and odd that someone was showing it off.
But it was a flip-phone and it was ugly, and it had lots of seams...
There was a guy in a pizza place I went for lunch that was showing his friends his phone. And it was white. I thought that was a little odd because I don't think I've ever seen a white phone, and odd that someone was showing it off.
But it was a flip-phone and it was ugly, and it had lots of seams...
TangoCharlie
Sep 14, 03:17 AM
Sure is overpriced! Over in Australia it's around $1200. The one good thing I liked was the diamond coated dsiplay. It was scratch proof. Maybe apple should diamond coat their iphone! :p
EDIT: Actually I just did a bit of research. I think my claim that they diamond coated their displays is false. No one take my word on it.
Diamond wouldn't be a good choice for a display coating.... Sapphire would
be much better.
EDIT: Actually I just did a bit of research. I think my claim that they diamond coated their displays is false. No one take my word on it.
Diamond wouldn't be a good choice for a display coating.... Sapphire would
be much better.
xMBPx
Mar 23, 04:59 PM
Tell them NO ! No ! NO ! The States/Cities do not enforce the Law to the extreme like they should after the 1st offense !!!!! What difference does it make if all you are going to do is smack their little hand the first few times !!!! The folks that are going to break the law are going to break the law no matter what !!! Also I might add that I have seen here in the greater Kansas City Mo area that the newspapers post the areas anyway ...
I live in KC too and whenever theres a checkpoint I get about 3-5 texts that day warning me and telling me to forward it to everyone I know. :rolleyes:
I live in KC too and whenever theres a checkpoint I get about 3-5 texts that day warning me and telling me to forward it to everyone I know. :rolleyes:
DOMCHO101
Apr 30, 03:59 PM
Okay, so now all I have to do is hope for SATA 3 SSD connections and the prices to drop to i5 @ $1699 and i7 @ $1999. Some REAL good GPUs and more standard ram. :cool:
I hate to say it but I'll keep holding off if the interface connections don't start jumping up in spec. It's retarded to see Thunderbolt and no SATA 3 or USB 3. It will a (re)selling point later on when you're looking to sell it off for the next new one.
ThunderBolt to USB 3.0 adapters do exist. And it's not in direct view so it doesn't really matter how the connection looks....
I hate to say it but I'll keep holding off if the interface connections don't start jumping up in spec. It's retarded to see Thunderbolt and no SATA 3 or USB 3. It will a (re)selling point later on when you're looking to sell it off for the next new one.
ThunderBolt to USB 3.0 adapters do exist. And it's not in direct view so it doesn't really matter how the connection looks....
cube
Mar 30, 12:04 PM
I'm not sure why there is so much argument about the term "app". The trademark is for "App Store" not for "app". It would be like arguing that "Burger King" is not a valid trademark because "burger" is a generic term.
What about "Burger Store" ?
What about "Burger Store" ?
DeSnousa
Sep 4, 07:10 PM
I believe this media player will simply be a better iPod with better integration to your television, via possibly a nice dock. It makes sense, it's keeps the iPod in the forefront which would enable the market to grow because most will buy it for the music, but seeing it can attach to the t.v... :)
balamw
Sep 1, 12:55 AM
Please explain to me how a computer company would benefit from aquiring a camera company because I just don't see it.
Canon is far more than just a camera company, even tough that is their core business.
In the consumer area, their scanners and printers are usually quite decent.
However, I too just don't see the synergy.
B
Canon is far more than just a camera company, even tough that is their core business.
In the consumer area, their scanners and printers are usually quite decent.
However, I too just don't see the synergy.
B
cube
Apr 22, 11:52 AM
then why did apple cripple the 13" macbook pro's with ****** resolution then?
Why did they cripple all MBPs having discrete graphics with Thunderbolt, instead of having a DisplayPort 1.2 port?
Why did they cripple all MBPs having discrete graphics with Thunderbolt, instead of having a DisplayPort 1.2 port?
aristotle
Nov 14, 12:00 AM
Wow. That's quite a diatribe. Historically inaccurate, too. English common law descends from the Roman system of laws that predates christianity (and which was not based on judaism) and from Saxon law, which also has nothing to do with judeo-christian ethics.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
And juries are given instructions to follow the letter of the law as explained to them by the judge. Further, in the U.S. system, only matters at law, not equity, are subject to jury trial, and, in many cases, only if the defendant demands a jury trial.
You say:
"You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not."
Ok. So when your third grader copies a few quotes from a book for his book report, he is infringing the copyright statute. But, of course, you complain that it's not the letter of the law that matters - it's the spirit. That's why judges came up with the fair use defense (later codified into the statute).
But what if the third grader copies 10 quotes? Still okay? A chapter? How about now? Where's the dividing line? What if instead of a third grader, it's another author who copies a few of the best quotes and competes with the first author? How about then? Gets more complicated, huh?
And that's why the fair use defense has evolved into a complicated legal test involving multiple factors. Among the factors:
the purpose and character of your use
the nature of the copyrighted work
the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
the effect of the use upon the potential market.
Let's look at these.
1) the purpose and character of your use
This is often called the transformative test. Am I creating something new and different and worthwhile to society, involving my own creativity? Many people say that the use in this case was pretty creative and useful, but let's assume no. So this factor weighs against fair use.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work
Published works, such as these icons, are entitled to less protection than unpublished. Also, factual or representative works, such as icons, are entitled to less protection than creative works like novels. So this factor weighs for fair use.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion taken, and
A handful of icons out of an entire operating system? Seems small to me. Weighs for fair use.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market.
By using these icons, is the "infringer" somehow preventing Apple from selling this sort of software, or preventing Apple from selling these icons? No. Again, weighs for fair use.
You simultaneously argue that things are black and white (you either infringe or you don't) and then you argue that the spirit of the law matters, not the letter. You argue for a bright line test, then for shades of gray.
Well, the answer is a little of both, but men and women far smarter than you have come up with the best tests they can to figure out how to deal with these fuzzy situations.
You can go to church and pray instead of going to court, if you'd like, but for those of us that believe in the legal system, we take solace in the fact that things really aren't black and white, and yet there is a framework in place that let's us try and figure these things out.
LOL. Please tell us which law firm you work for. That was quite funny. Are you a historian now too? Would the real cmaier please stand up?
So the arbitration system comes from the roman law as well? Do tell.
I'm not interested in what revisionist historians have come up with the justify this perversion of justice that you call "law". The roman empire fell a long time ago and while Roman law may have influenced much of our legal proceedings, including the structure of civil cases, I was talking about how civil disputes are generally dealt with. Lawyers arguing a case are supposed to be the last resort, not the first.
This process is based on Judeo-christian principles on how you settle disputes over land or labour. It has nothing to do with criminal law.
Here is how disputes were supposed to be dealt with.
1. You go to the person in question and try to talk it out.
2. If that does not work, you meet in front a mediator such as as priest, local official, magistrate or arbitrator.
3. If that does not work, you hire an advocate and make your case in front of the community.
4. If that does not work, you take your case before the court which would usually have been a king back in the day.
The bible frames it slightly different but that is the gist of how it appears in the bible.
To put in a modern context:
1. Go for coffee.
2. Arbitration.
3. Public Hearing.
4. Court case.
dadoftwogirls
Mar 23, 05:33 PM
Very surprised by many of the responses in support of pulling the apps. I think Apple shouldn't. No I don't support drunk driving, but his borders on ridiculous. There are other apps that supposedly help to circumvent the law... red light camera apps, speed trap apps, police radio scanner apps. So doing one of these things is different? Type in the word "Pot" int he app store and your find apps for cannibus. Isn't that against the law? So now we are going to censor the app store. You open the door for one thing and the government will march right through and pick thing after thing. Bad idea.
ClimbingTheLog
Sep 4, 10:17 PM
Anyone else notice that Elgato have now pulled their Eyehome media streaming device without a replacement? Anything to do with rumors of a rival device from Apple?
Rivalry or acquisition?
Rivalry or acquisition?
ranReloaded
Apr 19, 11:08 AM
I agree it's likely pointless for Apple to sue on this issue, but IMHO the lameness of all these me-toos is quite shocking. But law and personal opinion are two very different beasts.
prady16
Sep 14, 08:59 AM
Any news if Steve will give a keynote in the special event preceeding photokina?
dextertangocci
Sep 16, 02:57 AM
I' SO sick of iPhone rumours:rolleyes:
The iPhone will NOT be released..... EVER!
The iPhone will NOT be released..... EVER!
andiwm2003
Sep 19, 01:37 PM
1mio for 125000 movies. so they make an avaerage of $8 per movie. iTS sells them for about $10-$12.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
so it seems apple makes about 2-3 bucks per movie (minus the bandwith/server cost).
i wonder if the movie business is profitable for apple or if it's merely to promote iPod's iTV and Mac's.
MCIowaRulz
Apr 30, 04:39 PM
To Quote Hellhammer specs,
"1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
750GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB"
More is here
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=943495&page=14
"1199$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i3-2100 (3.1GHz)
AMD 6490M with 256MB GDDR5
750GB HD
2x2GB RAM; option for 4x2GB
1499$ 21.5" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400S (2.5/3.3GHz); option for Core i5-2500S (2.7/3.7GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM: option for 4x2GB
1699$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i5-2400 (3.1/3.4GHz)
AMD 6750M with 512MB GDDR5; option for AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x2GB RAM; options for 4x2GB, 2x4GB and 4x4GB
1999$ 27" iMac
Intel Core i7-2600 (3.4/3.8GHz)
AMD 6950M with 1024MB GDDR5
1.5TB HD; option for 3TB
2x4GB RAM; option for 4x4GB"
More is here
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=943495&page=14
jav6454
Apr 25, 12:52 AM
I cannot even begin to describe how much i hate these idiotic people. They just enrage me. Anyone who has been doing 85mph+ on the highway and then has to slow down to under 70 knows what I mean.
Today I was doing 90mph+ in the far left lane, for miles everyone moved out of the way for me. Then all the sudden I come up on this minivan with "Baby on Board, "I Love Children," "Being Nice is the #1 Rule," etc. bumper stickers and magnets. The woman was doing under 65mph would not move out of my way (and there was plenty of space). When I tried to push her, flash brights, honk, etc. she decided to brake check me. Now, not moving over is one thing, but trying to teach me a lesson when I tell you that you're in my way and that you can move over, is just asking me to screw you over.
I drove behind her for a few miles, and then when the opportunity stuck, I shot a gap to pass her, made sure she couldn't move over to another lane (besides the service lane) and I slammed off my brakes (I swear I saw a squirrel run across the highway;)), she had to veer off of the road to avoid hitting me. I guarantee she'll never try to brake check someone or force the speed limit on them again. I seriously hope she or her damn baby got whiplash. (NO LECTURES PLEASE, THEY WILL ALL BE IGNORED)
I seriously wish that .50 cal guns would be options on cars so that I could just blow up people like her.
-Don
1. You are not Speed Racer
2. Going over 80Mi/hr is already fast enough.
3. I have patience on the road, I wait until there is enough clearance to pass. Your road rage will get you killed.
4. There is a reason for speed limits.
5. I hope a cop catches you and takes your license away. Also your mom should be ashamed of you for being reckless driver. Hell, if I'd be that woman you forced of road, I'd have your plate number and dial 911 and acuse you of reckless driving. Then I'd be laughing
Today I was doing 90mph+ in the far left lane, for miles everyone moved out of the way for me. Then all the sudden I come up on this minivan with "Baby on Board, "I Love Children," "Being Nice is the #1 Rule," etc. bumper stickers and magnets. The woman was doing under 65mph would not move out of my way (and there was plenty of space). When I tried to push her, flash brights, honk, etc. she decided to brake check me. Now, not moving over is one thing, but trying to teach me a lesson when I tell you that you're in my way and that you can move over, is just asking me to screw you over.
I drove behind her for a few miles, and then when the opportunity stuck, I shot a gap to pass her, made sure she couldn't move over to another lane (besides the service lane) and I slammed off my brakes (I swear I saw a squirrel run across the highway;)), she had to veer off of the road to avoid hitting me. I guarantee she'll never try to brake check someone or force the speed limit on them again. I seriously hope she or her damn baby got whiplash. (NO LECTURES PLEASE, THEY WILL ALL BE IGNORED)
I seriously wish that .50 cal guns would be options on cars so that I could just blow up people like her.
-Don
1. You are not Speed Racer
2. Going over 80Mi/hr is already fast enough.
3. I have patience on the road, I wait until there is enough clearance to pass. Your road rage will get you killed.
4. There is a reason for speed limits.
5. I hope a cop catches you and takes your license away. Also your mom should be ashamed of you for being reckless driver. Hell, if I'd be that woman you forced of road, I'd have your plate number and dial 911 and acuse you of reckless driving. Then I'd be laughing