Eidorian
May 3, 11:51 AM
Thunderbolt is DisplayPort 1.1a - DisplayPort 1.2 has daisy chain and much more bandwidth than a TB channel.I recall this being a complaint about Thunderbolt.
peharri
Sep 14, 09:19 AM
Oh great, not this again.
BTW iPhone is not an Apple trademark. Doesn't make much difference, I'm sure Apple wouldn't call it the iPhone anyway, but iPhone is owned by Teledex, who are an IP telephony manufacturer.
Apple could do us a few favours and publicly announce it will never, ever, sell an Apple phone, just so this speculation ceases. Every time this rumour surfaces, Apple's chances of dominating the cellphone-MP3 player market through neutral licensing agreements becomes a little less likely.
Of course, they could be that stupid. As people run from MP3 players to MP3 phones, Apple releases a phone, doesn't license the technology to the dominant players, and it's share of the market drops from 75% to 3-5%. At which point nobody cares about iTunes any more, and the labels, fed up of the refusals to offer tiered pricing and other gripes, walk away. Buh-bye Apple as a major multimedia force.
BTW iPhone is not an Apple trademark. Doesn't make much difference, I'm sure Apple wouldn't call it the iPhone anyway, but iPhone is owned by Teledex, who are an IP telephony manufacturer.
Apple could do us a few favours and publicly announce it will never, ever, sell an Apple phone, just so this speculation ceases. Every time this rumour surfaces, Apple's chances of dominating the cellphone-MP3 player market through neutral licensing agreements becomes a little less likely.
Of course, they could be that stupid. As people run from MP3 players to MP3 phones, Apple releases a phone, doesn't license the technology to the dominant players, and it's share of the market drops from 75% to 3-5%. At which point nobody cares about iTunes any more, and the labels, fed up of the refusals to offer tiered pricing and other gripes, walk away. Buh-bye Apple as a major multimedia force.
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:07 PM
What about the Container Store, which is trademarked? Seems like the difference is whether or not the term is in common use before the trademark is filed.
I'm not disagreeing with you, but can you, (or anyone,) provide a link to something showing "Container Store" is TMed?
Update;
I can find "The Container Store" but not "Container Store"
I'm not disagreeing with you, but can you, (or anyone,) provide a link to something showing "Container Store" is TMed?
Update;
I can find "The Container Store" but not "Container Store"
andiwm2003
Aug 28, 12:08 PM
not that it really matters. but they stole apples thunder.
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
and since steve compared osx to windows and the mac pro to dell and made lot's of fun about both they'd better stay on top of the game.
The Phazer
Apr 20, 11:17 AM
Sigh. While the risk is very slight (I don't care about government access - they already have access to the carrier's records with a court order, but in theory this information is useful to a thief - say to identify the home address of a user to flag the home of someone who owned an iPhone and hence is probably worth breaking into their house or even identifying good times to do so given they're out most of the time at work etc), it's far from good that it's there.
Not least because writing a huge log of this data is silly and pointless and is using up system requirements by doing so. I would assume that the the file has been left in due to nothing more than incompetence (Android doesn't seem to do this sort of tracking, it's not mandatory on the device itself), but if so it is very odd that nobody has noticed this while trying to optimise the code.
So Apple either left in a bad privacy risk on purpose or audited the code badly for both security and performance. Neither of those options is very palatable.
Not least because writing a huge log of this data is silly and pointless and is using up system requirements by doing so. I would assume that the the file has been left in due to nothing more than incompetence (Android doesn't seem to do this sort of tracking, it's not mandatory on the device itself), but if so it is very odd that nobody has noticed this while trying to optimise the code.
So Apple either left in a bad privacy risk on purpose or audited the code badly for both security and performance. Neither of those options is very palatable.
zephonic
Apr 30, 05:04 PM
I wish they'd make top spec available for the smaller display model. I need the horsepower but not the 27".
I know I know, not gonna happen...
I know I know, not gonna happen...
mrkramer
Apr 25, 01:33 AM
Is the story even plausible?
sadly yes it is, I know some people who act similarly to the OP.
sadly yes it is, I know some people who act similarly to the OP.
-Garry-
Oct 12, 06:03 PM
This will be part of the (RED) campaign.
More information over here at MySpace ... http://www.myspace.com/joinred
More information over here at MySpace ... http://www.myspace.com/joinred
ezekielrage_99
Sep 10, 08:38 PM
Face it the Conroe Mac is coming.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Sounds kind of feasible for a single CPU "Mac" Conroe system and it would fit nicely into the Apple product line up. I think a Conroe system would appeal nicely to prosumers and gamers.
iMac 24" - $1999
Mac Pro (downgraded to 2.0 Ghz) + 23" - 3198
That is a $1k price gap.
A high quality midtower would fit perfectly. They have another chip to differentiate the product matrix. It is coming!
Mac Mini - Core Duo (yonah) - base entry machine. 2 RAM slots
iMac - Core 2 Duo (Merom) - All in one basic to prosumer models, quiet operation and powerful. 2 RAM Slots
"Mac" - Core 2 Duo (Conroe) - mini tower 1 optical, 2 drives, 2 PCIe, 4 RAM Slots - prosumer to low end workstation.
Mac Pro - Xeon (Woodcrest) - Full tower 2 processors, 8 RAM slots, 4 PCIe, 2 optical, 4 drive bays. - Mid to high end workstation.
Sounds kind of feasible for a single CPU "Mac" Conroe system and it would fit nicely into the Apple product line up. I think a Conroe system would appeal nicely to prosumers and gamers.
Jimmieboy
Aug 31, 04:33 PM
Wahoo! I'm hoping for a couple of things:
1. The mac mini has an upped processor and can support 5.1 channel surround sound
2. Macbooks and macbook pro's to have the memrom
3. iMacs with conroe
4. An ipod update for the video and nano
5. All these rumors of an iphone. Maybe we'll get one maybe we won't? I'm not expecting it to be released on the 12th.
1. The mac mini has an upped processor and can support 5.1 channel surround sound
2. Macbooks and macbook pro's to have the memrom
3. iMacs with conroe
4. An ipod update for the video and nano
5. All these rumors of an iphone. Maybe we'll get one maybe we won't? I'm not expecting it to be released on the 12th.
GGJstudios
Feb 25, 10:16 AM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
The "Market Share Myth" has been around a long time, and it's exactly that: a myth. It's displays ignorance of the facts to say, "When Apple has more market share, they'll be more of a target." 10 or so years ago, Mac had a very small market share, and there were a handful of viruses that ran on Mac OS 9 and earlier. Today, Mac has a much larger market share than ever before (and growing at the rate of a million Macs a month), and the number of viruses in the wild that run on current Macs has not increased, but has declined.... to exactly zero. There has never been a virus in the wild that runs on Mac OS X. That completely nullifies the "market share" argument. The fact is, Macs already DO have a larger market share, not to mention iPhones and other iDevices. Are they immune to threats? Absolutely not. No device is immune. The fact is, at the present time, there are no threats to Mac OS X or iDevices except one: the user.
Sad, but true :(
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
In other words, "My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with facts." You don't feel the need to argue or debate, because you have no facts to support your opinion.
Made a correction to the headline. It should be:
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.;)
Exactly! It's really a matter of greed. McAfee has plenty of work in the Windows world to keep them in business for a very long time. However, they look that the growth and popularity and, yes, market share enjoyed by Apple, and they want a piece of that lucrative pie. But how do they get it, when there's obviously no need for their product? Well, you attempt to create a need, with FUD.
A little reading material: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
The "Market Share Myth" has been around a long time, and it's exactly that: a myth. It's displays ignorance of the facts to say, "When Apple has more market share, they'll be more of a target." 10 or so years ago, Mac had a very small market share, and there were a handful of viruses that ran on Mac OS 9 and earlier. Today, Mac has a much larger market share than ever before (and growing at the rate of a million Macs a month), and the number of viruses in the wild that run on current Macs has not increased, but has declined.... to exactly zero. There has never been a virus in the wild that runs on Mac OS X. That completely nullifies the "market share" argument. The fact is, Macs already DO have a larger market share, not to mention iPhones and other iDevices. Are they immune to threats? Absolutely not. No device is immune. The fact is, at the present time, there are no threats to Mac OS X or iDevices except one: the user.
Sad, but true :(
(And I don't feel the need to argue or debate or say more in this thread to justify this obvious fact.)
In other words, "My mind's made up. Don't confuse me with facts." You don't feel the need to argue or debate, because you have no facts to support your opinion.
Made a correction to the headline. It should be:
McAfee faces obsolescence with increasing Apple popularity.;)
Exactly! It's really a matter of greed. McAfee has plenty of work in the Windows world to keep them in business for a very long time. However, they look that the growth and popularity and, yes, market share enjoyed by Apple, and they want a piece of that lucrative pie. But how do they get it, when there's obviously no need for their product? Well, you attempt to create a need, with FUD.
A little reading material: Mac Virus/Malware Info (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9400648&postcount=4)
NachoGrande
Mar 29, 12:38 PM
Microsoft should work on perfecting windows before starting a mobile OS
They already have. Have you used Windows 7? It's been flawless for me.
They already have. Have you used Windows 7? It's been flawless for me.
HecubusPro
Sep 5, 03:03 PM
I'm really hoping for merom in mbp's and mb's. The wait has been killing me.
Same here. I really want a new C2D MBP, but since all of this info about the iMac, movie store, nano, etc. has been taking the spotlight, the C2D laptop information has come to a near stop.
Will we now be forced to wait longer than September. I still doubt it, but the quiet on this front the past week has been alarming to me.
Same here. I really want a new C2D MBP, but since all of this info about the iMac, movie store, nano, etc. has been taking the spotlight, the C2D laptop information has come to a near stop.
Will we now be forced to wait longer than September. I still doubt it, but the quiet on this front the past week has been alarming to me.
tdream
Apr 11, 07:56 AM
If they found it once what's the stop them finding it again when apple update it? They know how to.
maxspivak
Sep 14, 03:46 PM
Why is everyone saying that Aperture 2.0 announcement is too little???
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
Photokina is all about *photo*. Aperture is about digital *photo* workflow. Its workflow features were pretty groundbreaking a year ago. Yes, it was buggy before first update. Yes, it was slow, and still is too some extent. But the features they showed -- autostacking, the loupe, the library -- are *fantastic*. They had a year to improve -- why not hold a big event to show it off!
No one would say that Adobe hosting an event to show new version of Photoshop would be to little, right? Same goes for Apple.
I'm desperately waiting for the update. If AP update (2.0, 1.5 -- whatever) improves speed on new Mac Pros, my order for a MP + AP goes right in. And $3.5K go to pay for it.
scrapple
Apr 28, 03:28 PM
yawn..
they both made billions... who cares.
they both made billions... who cares.
Yamcha
Mar 22, 02:10 PM
I'm hoping we don't see Apple adopting the HD Intel Graphics, cuz they are going to suck as far as gaming goes..
Joshuarocks
Apr 11, 10:44 PM
Well dang, I wouldn't mind paying 3.60 for a years worth of driving for me lol
You'll be paying close to 5 or at 5 by the summer.. keep listening to corporate media - they brainwash the American people into thinking things are getting better.. WRONG, Things are getting worse..
You'll be paying close to 5 or at 5 by the summer.. keep listening to corporate media - they brainwash the American people into thinking things are getting better.. WRONG, Things are getting worse..
iMacZealot
Sep 18, 12:48 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
I think the two of them are hard to compare. In this arguement, I'm not advocatinig CDMA, I'm just trying to show that there's no need to bash them as they are hard to compare.
CDMA and TDMA both get the job done; they divide up bandwidth so that multiple users can use a base station at the same time. They way they do that is just different. That cliche phrase of "comparing apples to oranges" applies to the age old question of GSM vs. CDMA.
I think the two of them are hard to compare. In this arguement, I'm not advocatinig CDMA, I'm just trying to show that there's no need to bash them as they are hard to compare.
CDMA and TDMA both get the job done; they divide up bandwidth so that multiple users can use a base station at the same time. They way they do that is just different. That cliche phrase of "comparing apples to oranges" applies to the age old question of GSM vs. CDMA.
silverblue3
Aug 28, 12:36 PM
Thats a bummer. Any info whether there will be a 7600 GT GPU in these babies? Coz the Alienware comes with them.
Cooknn
Sep 11, 10:10 PM
hoping for downloadable movies to own at either $9.99 or $14.99How many movies a month do you watch?! $14.99 * 10 pays my cable bill with internet included :rolleyes:
OneMammoth
Apr 28, 03:42 PM
Microsoft is DEAD. And so is Google.
GO APPLE!
Wow! Really! No need to be afraid, we can all get along. There is space for everyone here.
GO APPLE!
Wow! Really! No need to be afraid, we can all get along. There is space for everyone here.
DMann
Sep 9, 01:55 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
Wonder how the 24" iMac at 2.33GHz will fare.
MacCentral posted (http://www.macworld.com/2006/09/firstlooks/imacbench/index.php) a first look at the new Core 2 Duo iMac along with some early benchmarks.
The new iMacs which were released on Wednesday (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/09/20060906091309.shtml) incorporate the latest Core 2 Duo processor from Intel. The Core 2 Duo represents the continuation of the Core Duo line which first made its appearance in Apple computers in January. Intel has maintained that the new chips would provide roughly 20% improvement in performance.
MacCentral tested the new 17" 2GHz iMac and 20" 2.16GHz iMac and compared them to the previous 20" 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.66GHz Mac Pro.
The most direct comparison between the two processors comes between the 17" 2GHz Core 2 Duo iMac and the 20" 2GHz Core Duo iMac. The overall score was 10% better in the new model while the individual tests showed gains up to 20%.
Wonder how the 24" iMac at 2.33GHz will fare.
Compile 'em all
Sep 5, 12:35 PM
It'll wind up being a leather case for the Apple Remote (http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/6144003/wo/7Y7flo4AsURz2NOCZS61W2wPnre/1.0.19.1.0.8.25.7.11.3.3).
You heard it here first.
LMAO :D :eek:
You heard it here first.
LMAO :D :eek: