ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 06:59 PM
i like the powerbook g5 jokes and have been around for a long time if that helps
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
I like them as well, but I think it's been replaced with Merom next tuesday, G6 Video iPod next next tuesday and the good old iPhone next tuesday rumors.
Still good for a laugh ;)
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 10:35 AM
Feel free to discuss the same things I am next time so that we can actually have a meaningful debate about it.
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
Okay, got it!
Well let's just check we are 'on the same page then'..
You agree Samsung have copied Apple, but only on things that you think don't really matter, while on the other hand anything where they don't look the same is terribly important..
Okay, got it!
Popeye206
Mar 22, 08:01 PM
My take...
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
Competition is good.
It will be interesting to see if the Playbook sticks. RIM is losing ground in so many areas and from what my daughter says (who works for one of the cell phone companies) that even with all the nice new goodies in BB's, that they are the smart phone that makes them all grimace. She says it's by far the worst phone to activate to trouble shoot. So, will the Playbook be any different?
Samsung... could they have rushed that one out any quicker? They seem desperate to get a tablet to sell. So much for quality control I'm sure.
Is the new Xoom about ready to be run over two minutes out the gate by other Android devices?
From what I can see, the most damage is not going to come in the Apple arena... the iPad is different with iOS, it's proven (15 million sold and growing fast)... it's going to be the other Android devices. Each of them fighting for a small share of customers who don't want Apple.
I honestly believe most consumers care less about the specs. The geeks on this site do.... but the average person does not care. They care about what they hear and see. They see iPads flying out the door. They know the iPad is slick and works.
I'll go with the Analysts on this one... by the end of Apple will own 70-80% market share and the rest will be a mixed bag of struggling tablet makers.
babyj
Sep 19, 09:52 AM
Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
Dark K
Jun 22, 03:24 PM
Nevermind my previous post, I just pass by my local Radioshack, and I think that every Radioshack will be getting the iPhones, why? I do not live in the states, I live in Puerto Rico, and by that being said, one of the sellers told me that they already receive the phones, just like Walmart, he even told me that the store has 8 (6 16GB black and 2 32GB black) iPhone 4s. Now is just a matter of time and wait.
MrCrowbar
Jul 20, 08:25 AM
Would be a very long keynote too:
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
And one more thing: The Auad PowerMac has been the fastest Mac until today. I present to you the new Octa Mac Pro!"
- release date of 10.5 revealed - possibly more stuff revealed
- new software (considerable update to iWork if the rumours are true)
- iMac/MacBook updates
- iPod/iTunes stuff
And one more thing: The Auad PowerMac has been the fastest Mac until today. I present to you the new Octa Mac Pro!"
iJohnHenry
Apr 27, 04:39 PM
The difference between me and you is that I'd want an explanation in either account. ;)
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Get Dr. Gilbert "Gil" Grissom, (Ph.D.), on the case.
I'm sure he could match the keystrokes to a late 50's/early 60's typewriter.
Mr-Stabby
Mar 26, 10:08 PM
Speaking of the server part, a lot of people have mentioned SMB. On a related note, i noticed in some of the screenshots i've seen that in 'Server Admin' AFP has disappeared as a service too. Does anybody know if the AFP Server still exists in Lion? There is a File Sharing option in the new server manager, but as far as i can see (i haven't got a copy, just seen pics) it's a bit lacking in features.
nick123222
Mar 26, 12:23 PM
Looks like they are going for another Snow Leopard (aka disappointingly small) release.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
Do you use stacks for accessing applications? If yes, then why wouldn't you want to use launchpad? It is like the application stack but makes organising apps into folders so much easier and allows you to find apps easier. Yes you could just use spotlight to find apps quickly, but not everyone likes doing this.
Launchpad is one of the features that I am most looking forward to for easy app management and access.
Also, I use dashboard every day usually as I use to see the time on an analogue clock when I want to check the time (I find an analogue clock easier to visualise time with), currency conversion, stickies, translator, and iStat Pro.
Not sure about what everyone else wants out of the OS, but I certainly don't want ANY of the iOS style features they have announced. I can see launchpad becoming another unused feature (I'm looking at you dashboard!) that people forget about.
I guess we'll know just how committed Apple are to the Mac after this. We already know they couldn't give a damn about the hardware side of the business any more. The final stab in the back would be XCode for windows.
I really do fear that within 3-5 years Apple will have a tiny mac lineup with all focus on iOS. No more yearly OS updates, no more updates to iLife, etc. They make peanuts from it compared to the iOS income.
Do you use stacks for accessing applications? If yes, then why wouldn't you want to use launchpad? It is like the application stack but makes organising apps into folders so much easier and allows you to find apps easier. Yes you could just use spotlight to find apps quickly, but not everyone likes doing this.
Launchpad is one of the features that I am most looking forward to for easy app management and access.
Also, I use dashboard every day usually as I use to see the time on an analogue clock when I want to check the time (I find an analogue clock easier to visualise time with), currency conversion, stickies, translator, and iStat Pro.
msb3079
Apr 7, 10:59 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
I was a manager at Circuit City for several years and I could not disagree any more.
The quicker you move stock, the better.
Obviously, you DON'T know.
I was a manager at Circuit City for several years and I could not disagree any more.
The quicker you move stock, the better.
Obviously, you DON'T know.
zerofour
Mar 26, 06:42 AM
Got to wait for the results from the beta testers who buy 10.7 on release. Learn the lessons of 10.6, I waited until 10.6.2 was out!
Or in my case, until 10.6.6 !!! (Came a bit late to the snow party...)
Will def be waiting for 10.7.1 or 10.7.2, just makes sense :)
Or in my case, until 10.6.6 !!! (Came a bit late to the snow party...)
Will def be waiting for 10.7.1 or 10.7.2, just makes sense :)
Multimedia
Aug 27, 04:03 PM
I really hope that they keep the option for a matte screen open when the upgraded MacBook Pros finally arrive.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
I have been waiting a while now to upgrade to a MacBook Pro but have held off primarily as i would like to see if the enclosure gets a few nips and tucks a la Macbook!
The switchable HD bay would be awesome, and the magnetic latch and updated keyboard also would be nice but PLEASE DO NOT make glossy screen a standard on Pro notebooks!
I have a few friends who own PC laptops with glossy screens and all of them have keyboards imprinted on their screens! I cannot say from experience if this happens with the MacBooks but i'd rather not risk it....Closing A Laptop Without The Foam Barrier it ships with Or A Cloth Barrier Is Poor Maintenance. I would NEVER close my laptop without a barrier between the keyboard and the screen. I don't understand those who do. :rolleyes:
I still have the foam barrier and slipcase that came with my 3 year old PowerBook and always use them in addition to two iKlear (http://iKlear.com) cloth barriers on the keyboard as well as on the trackpad.
whatever
Jul 20, 07:37 PM
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
Now you're not thinking like a competitive company that needs to continue to make money.
Sun is on the ropes and Apple now has a chance to soar in and take a lot of business from them.
joemama
Nov 28, 07:54 PM
Jobs should walk into negotiations with the attitude of - "We would like more of a royalty for every song sold because if we didn't sell them on iTunes, people would simply download them illegally."
"...And if you don't adhere to this, we will stop selling Universal music and this is exactly what will happen."
Apple may be out 20 cents a song, but people will still buy iPods.
Think how much Universal will be losing.
"...And if you don't adhere to this, we will stop selling Universal music and this is exactly what will happen."
Apple may be out 20 cents a song, but people will still buy iPods.
Think how much Universal will be losing.
Rangers30
Apr 8, 06:06 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
0% interest on BB credit card? Believe me, it's the only reason I did. Their service was beyond ******. I had to practically haul someone down by the ankles to get them to notice me loitering by the Macbooks.
0% interest on BB credit card? Believe me, it's the only reason I did. Their service was beyond ******. I had to practically haul someone down by the ankles to get them to notice me loitering by the Macbooks.
janstett
Sep 13, 01:11 PM
Sheesh...just when I'm already high up enough on Apple for innovating, they throw even more leaps and bounds in there to put themselves even further ahead. I can't wait 'til my broke @$$ can finally get the money to buy a Mac and chuck all my Windows machines out the door.
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
I'm sure we'll see similar efforts from other PC manufacturers eventually, but let's see the software use those extra cores in Windows land. Ain't gonna happen...not on the level of what Apple's doing at least.
First, this is INTEL innovating, not Apple.
Second, Apple has been the one lagging behind on multiprocessor support. Pre OSX it was a joke of a hack to support multi CPUs in Mac OS and you had to have apps written to take advantage of it with special libraries.
On Windows, the scheduler automatically handles task scheduling no matter how many processors you have, 1 or 8. Your app doesn't have to "know" it's on a single or multiple processor system or do anything special to take advantage of multiple processors, other than threading -- which you can do on a single processor system anyway. Most applications are lazy and unimaginative, and do everything in a single thread (worse, the same thread that is processing event messages from the GUI, which is why apps lock up -- when they end up in a bad state they stop processing events from the OS and won't paint, resize, etc.). But when you take advantage of multithreading, there are some sand traps but it's a cool way to code and that's how you take advantage of multiple cores without having to know what kind of system you are on. I would assume OSX, being based on BSD, is similar, but I don't know the architecture to the degree I know Windows.
In Windows, you can set process "affinity", locking it down to a fixed processor core, through Task Manager. Don't know if you can do that in OSX...
Sped
Aug 7, 04:58 PM
Not a glimpse of the Finder...! :eek:
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
Here, here. I have been a very happy Mac fan for several years now, but the Finder is a POS. Although specifically mentioning a new Finder might be considered acknowledgment that it stinks, I think Steve could couch it in favorable language. Bottom line, Leopard better FTFF.
BrianMojo
Jul 20, 09:59 AM
I got it!
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Well, the 80's have made a comeback, who's to say the 90's won't be returning anytime soon?
The Macintosh Quadra!
No, wait . . . .
;)
Well, the 80's have made a comeback, who's to say the 90's won't be returning anytime soon?
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
ugp
Jun 15, 07:48 PM
This has to be the worst a pre-order has ever gone in history. Better preparation needs to be made in the future to avoid these problems.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
I was able to get Apples site to get to the final stage and "Place Order" but I opted not to. I am first on the list at my local Radio Shack and I will take my chances there. I am not going to be able to be home when the iPhone would deliver. If I have to wait I will wait. My friend is the Manager and he would process my ticket for me if he had to and drop it off to me if it doesn't come launch day. Otherwise I will be there the 24th in the morning at opening.
ehoui
Apr 27, 05:35 PM
It's just like kings, innit?
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
Probably has more to do with trying to avoid the label "Junior" than pretending to be a king.
In any event, I think Obama shouldn't have release anything. There was no need.
wovel
Mar 31, 03:20 PM
This is a smart move. It had to happen sooner or later.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
Despite what the fandroids think, the Android Ecosystem is in a world of hurt. Fragmentation is a much bigger problem then even Jobs said and they have almost no market at all for paid applications today. They will continue to dominate the worthless bottom of the market and nothing else if they do not do something to reign in these manufacturers.
John Gruber would eat Steve Job's ***** if he could. His opinion is extremely biased.
Yet what he said is 100% accurate..Weird how that can happen sometimes.
Except... he's right. This was a bait-and-switch from Google. I don't think it was a bad move for the future of the platform, but it does render a lot of their PR commentary through history as bogus. As for Gruber, you clearly don't like him, but while he is certainly a fan of Apple he is usually correct.
Despite what the fandroids think, the Android Ecosystem is in a world of hurt. Fragmentation is a much bigger problem then even Jobs said and they have almost no market at all for paid applications today. They will continue to dominate the worthless bottom of the market and nothing else if they do not do something to reign in these manufacturers.
MACRUS
Apr 10, 03:53 AM
It's not like they threatened anyone. They likely went to the organizers and said "We'd like to make a really cool announcement at your event but we'd need most of your presentation and sponsorship space to do it." SuperMeet said sure, Apple paid, and here we are. It's not like the other sponsors didn't get their money back (I'm assuming.)
I am Sorry but I have to say something here. your ignorance amuses me.
I am Sorry but I have to say something here. your ignorance amuses me.
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:43 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
It's safe to say they won't outperform 13" mbp which has the same graphics and a faster processor. Which means the graphics performance will be a step back. And really, is the attitude necessary?
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
It's safe to say they won't outperform 13" mbp which has the same graphics and a faster processor. Which means the graphics performance will be a step back. And really, is the attitude necessary?