iphone3gss
May 6, 12:14 AM
I can't think of a worse idea!
iRun26.2
Apr 23, 09:58 PM
a retina display on the 13" MBP would be the one thing that would get me to upgrade almost immediately.
Your reaction is nearly identical to mine (although I am interested in seeing a Retina Display on the 11.4" MBA):
Double the pixel density on the 11.4" MBA screen, and I will pay $3k for that computer on the spot (even if I just upgraded to the Sandy Bridge version the week before). The stunning display on the iPhone 4 put them into a class unmatched by their rivals.
I can't wait...even if it still takes years to trickle down to the MBA. Someday all computer screens will have Retina Displays (and we will only see screens where the pixels are visible in a museum). Although I may be dead by then... :)
Your reaction is nearly identical to mine (although I am interested in seeing a Retina Display on the 11.4" MBA):
Double the pixel density on the 11.4" MBA screen, and I will pay $3k for that computer on the spot (even if I just upgraded to the Sandy Bridge version the week before). The stunning display on the iPhone 4 put them into a class unmatched by their rivals.
I can't wait...even if it still takes years to trickle down to the MBA. Someday all computer screens will have Retina Displays (and we will only see screens where the pixels are visible in a museum). Although I may be dead by then... :)
karolynaz
Mar 31, 08:18 AM
Really? In what sick and twisted world are you living? What's so very different in Lion that it's "not true desktop OS"? Launchpad the end of all?
He speaks about inverted scrolling.
P.S. Lietuvos Rytas is better :P
He speaks about inverted scrolling.
P.S. Lietuvos Rytas is better :P
rpenzinger
Apr 21, 02:52 PM
I hope this is true because I'd like to replace my going-on 4 year-old PC with a Mac Pro at some point, but the current case just won't fit in the IKEA wardrobe I'm using as a workstation. It sounds like this new Mac Pro would be smaller than my existing PC. Yea Apple!
Funny to see you are basing a $4000 computer purchase on a $79 piece of crap-KEA furniture - LOL. I'm with you on Yea Apple!
Funny to see you are basing a $4000 computer purchase on a $79 piece of crap-KEA furniture - LOL. I'm with you on Yea Apple!
zelmo
Nov 26, 11:47 AM
I've always thought the tablet PC was cool tech in search of a practical application to take off in popularity.
Using a tablet as remote for your iTV media center? check
Using a tablet to wirelessly surf the web/email? check
Using a tablet as portable music and video player? check
With the right specs and price, Apple could pull this off.
Using a tablet as remote for your iTV media center? check
Using a tablet to wirelessly surf the web/email? check
Using a tablet as portable music and video player? check
With the right specs and price, Apple could pull this off.
QuarterSwede
Apr 10, 06:30 PM
Just gave the problem to my 12 year old brother. Yup, its 288. To all you people who still believe it's 2, I hope you don't deal with math a lot in your careers. It might also be a good idea for you to hire somebody else to do your taxes ;)
It's not surprising that we lose basic math skills that most people really don't need to use on a day to day basis.
It's not surprising that we lose basic math skills that most people really don't need to use on a day to day basis.
bboucher790
Apr 25, 10:29 AM
You're tracking us wrong.
eenu
Aug 11, 03:25 PM
and higher price than MB.
Jesus! How much more expensive do you want it to be! the price diff is already almost £500 from top whitebook to bottom MBP!
Jesus! How much more expensive do you want it to be! the price diff is already almost £500 from top whitebook to bottom MBP!
Ava's Meeshee
Apr 20, 08:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
That doesn't fit in with their UI principles so they won't. Once I too questioned why anyone should expect an OS to be inherently entertaining I had to agree that spending any time making the launch board delight you would be silly and pointless. And why on Earth should a phone have a "desktop"?
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
That doesn't fit in with their UI principles so they won't. Once I too questioned why anyone should expect an OS to be inherently entertaining I had to agree that spending any time making the launch board delight you would be silly and pointless. And why on Earth should a phone have a "desktop"?
Multimedia
Aug 3, 08:55 AM
> btw< the macbook pro im using runs at 2.33Ghz. :DI misunderstood the context. Sorry. It's Steve saying that in the SteveNote. My bad. :) :o
coolcom
Mar 30, 06:09 PM
I'm downloading it as well, but I have no icon on my dock to show me the progress! AppStore said the download had started, but I see no icon. I tried to Redeem my code again, but it said it had already been redeemed. My bandwidth monitor is reporting a solid 600KB/s down though... hopefully it works!
cppguy
May 4, 07:14 PM
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Like Xcode, it isn't an app, it's an installer. When you download the app, it puts the installer under Applications, which you have to run to actually install the product. Apple violates the basic App Store rules by distributing applications that require installation and kernel extensions.
Like Xcode, it isn't an app, it's an installer. When you download the app, it puts the installer under Applications, which you have to run to actually install the product. Apple violates the basic App Store rules by distributing applications that require installation and kernel extensions.
Don't panic
May 5, 09:11 PM
Maybe there is a special secret door in that closet. Or maybe it's the Lair and we win!
i would settle for a level treasure ;)
i would settle for a level treasure ;)
Eidorian
Jul 22, 11:04 AM
Nearly the entire line of majot Apple products is in need of an update.
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
Consultant
Apr 26, 02:51 PM
Too bad Android makers are basically giving them away to gain market share.
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
And doesn't Nokia still making more money on ovi than Google's android store?
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
princealfie
Apr 6, 05:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
The Samsung Galaxy Tab is an awesome device. I really enjoy it. The Xoom is extremely impressive and for me, moves beyond the iPad first generation I own. I am going Xoom I suspect with the WiFi version.
The Samsung Galaxy Tab is an awesome device. I really enjoy it. The Xoom is extremely impressive and for me, moves beyond the iPad first generation I own. I am going Xoom I suspect with the WiFi version.
George Knighton
Nov 2, 08:51 PM
well I installed this on both of my MacBook Airs, One is my Wife's. It found 0 on mine, but found 4 trojans on my wife's, all associated with Java. It pointed them out to me and when I found the file it pointed out, the software deleted the file for me. Not bad for free. Thanks Sophos, didn't know those were there.
Java is what I've been afraid of. I might give this a try.
Java is what I've been afraid of. I might give this a try.
wovel
Apr 7, 12:00 PM
They can have my screen. It only bleeds on the edges. Still enough real estate for a seven inch model.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
Let's see a picture of you holding your iPad 2 demonstrating this :)
I don't understand, Apple can't let RIM have 12 panels? When they sell off those 12 units, Apple can let them have 12 more.
They need to make display models as well. They need 1012 to cover the display models and the 12 that will sell.
I see the short sighted Apple pom-pom shakers are once again giddy with excitement. The juvenile remarks are embarrassing.
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
Strategic planning does not make a monopoly, you appear to have no concept of what a monopoly actually is.
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
They want Apple to fall, since no one can do it in the free market, they want government intervention. They might have a point if they were engaged in anti-competitive behaviors like Microsoft did. Like telling PC manufacturers all of theirs products had to come with only Windows pre-installed. Buying capacity that is not even sufficient to meet demand is in no way anti-competitive.
I suspect THIS is why HP chose to use a 9.7" 4:3 display on their TouchPad tablet. When all of Asia is stamping out iPad screens it would be a lot easier for HP to acquire iPad panels, using the manufacturer's economies of scale, than to have them manufacture different panels alongside iPad panels.
HP and Amazon are the only ones that have any hope of competing anyway. Everyone else would just be wasting Apple's panels.
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Corporations tend to act in the best interest of theirs owners. It is actually a requirement for corporate officers in public companies. Having said that, Apple is the most customer focused company in the mobile device market. Sales show this and so does every independent customer satisfaction survey performed in the past few years.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
iPad 3 to be a small update like iPad 2? I wouldn't doubt it with the lack of competition.
This is just silly. They mad a 9x leap in graphics performance in less then 12 months without a single credible competitor.
ticman
Nov 20, 11:43 AM
Received same response STATING THAT their eta is still 12/2 and they will shop same day they receive. Guess I will sit tight for now.
Renverse
May 6, 06:35 AM
I can only see the Macbook Air and maybe the Mac Mini move to ARM. ARM Processors are not ANYWHERE fast enough to meet the current Quadcore i-Processors on the speed.
twoodcc
Aug 3, 11:17 PM
Yeah... this seems to favor a Paris release...
i think you might be right (even though i hope your wrong)
i think you might be right (even though i hope your wrong)
xraydoc
May 6, 12:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_8 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E401 Safari/6533.18.5)
And go through the whole ARM-native app vs. Rosetta mk. II emulation thing again, with transitional machines that never live up to their full potential? Unless ARM can compete with the resources of Intel and their 3D 22nm chip fab technologies, I think it'll be a rough transition giving us several years worth of under-performing Mac hardware.
Can't see using an ARM processor for Final Cut Pro by 2014.
And go through the whole ARM-native app vs. Rosetta mk. II emulation thing again, with transitional machines that never live up to their full potential? Unless ARM can compete with the resources of Intel and their 3D 22nm chip fab technologies, I think it'll be a rough transition giving us several years worth of under-performing Mac hardware.
Can't see using an ARM processor for Final Cut Pro by 2014.
jlseattle
Apr 5, 04:09 PM
The "i" overlords have spoken! "Take it down" (in an classic star trek superior being voice).