Young Spade
May 5, 05:38 AM
You have to realize one thing. Without market share, company like Apple can not make profit.
Apple raked in 6 billion dollars in the first quarter of Q1. That's three months. Oh, by 6 billion I meant in gross. I think that's more than Microsoft made... not sure though.
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/18/apple-reports-record-1q-2011-6-billion-profit-on-26-74-billion-in-revenue/
Market share =/= profit.
Apple raked in 6 billion dollars in the first quarter of Q1. That's three months. Oh, by 6 billion I meant in gross. I think that's more than Microsoft made... not sure though.
http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/18/apple-reports-record-1q-2011-6-billion-profit-on-26-74-billion-in-revenue/
Market share =/= profit.
Alvi
Apr 14, 07:43 AM
Apple TV or iPod Nano
MacRumors
Jul 24, 08:29 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
A recently published patent application from Apple entitled "Proximity detector in handheld device" describes an interesting technology for potential use in the next generation of iPod devices.
Readers should realize that Apple while continues to publish patents on technologies that never make it into shipping products, the concepts described in this patent were referenced (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060615101812.shtml) by Hon Hai chariman Terry Gou in June 2006:
Apple is about to unveil the next generation of iPod, the best-selling music player in the U.S., using a "none-touch" concept, Gou said without elaborating
At the time the "none-touch" description was speculated to be an audio-interface, but this recent patent describes:
A method for initiating floating controls on an electronic device, the method comprising: detecting the presence of an object above and spaced away from a surface of the electronic device; and displaying a particular graphical user interface element on a display of the electronic device when the object is detected above the surface of the electronic device.
Essentially, as users point their fingers towards the screen, the appropriate controls would appear on the screen - such as a scroll wheel. Example images (http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:Gesture11.png) show the scroll wheel appearing and disappearing based on the user interaction. Meanwhile, the user's intentions are interpreted based on Gestures - which have previously been described (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060202070007.shtml).
A recently published patent application from Apple entitled "Proximity detector in handheld device" describes an interesting technology for potential use in the next generation of iPod devices.
Readers should realize that Apple while continues to publish patents on technologies that never make it into shipping products, the concepts described in this patent were referenced (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060615101812.shtml) by Hon Hai chariman Terry Gou in June 2006:
Apple is about to unveil the next generation of iPod, the best-selling music player in the U.S., using a "none-touch" concept, Gou said without elaborating
At the time the "none-touch" description was speculated to be an audio-interface, but this recent patent describes:
A method for initiating floating controls on an electronic device, the method comprising: detecting the presence of an object above and spaced away from a surface of the electronic device; and displaying a particular graphical user interface element on a display of the electronic device when the object is detected above the surface of the electronic device.
Essentially, as users point their fingers towards the screen, the appropriate controls would appear on the screen - such as a scroll wheel. Example images (http://guides.macrumors.com/Image:Gesture11.png) show the scroll wheel appearing and disappearing based on the user interaction. Meanwhile, the user's intentions are interpreted based on Gestures - which have previously been described (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/02/20060202070007.shtml).
bluebomberman
Jul 10, 05:00 PM
As for being harsh, it seems like every time a thread on subject gets started, someone says Pages is only really suitable for newsletters, and not for "serious" writing. I find that most of the people who say this haven't gotten much past the template selection window. They see all those newsletter and flier templates and assume that this all Pages is good for. They've probably never created a template of their own and so are missing one of Pages' most powerful features.
Part of the problem is the way they market it. There was such an emphasis on templates and graphic-intensive stuff when it was first demoed in MacWorld 2005 that it's hard to think it can be a good word processor. My first thought was how it looked 100x better than Microsoft Publisher.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
Part of the problem is the way they market it. There was such an emphasis on templates and graphic-intensive stuff when it was first demoed in MacWorld 2005 that it's hard to think it can be a good word processor. My first thought was how it looked 100x better than Microsoft Publisher.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
playaj82
Aug 15, 01:44 PM
I'm still waiting for a 3-D way of exploring the finder.
Something similar to the movie Hackers
Core Animation, just one more step in that direction
Something similar to the movie Hackers
Core Animation, just one more step in that direction
fcortese
Apr 10, 11:10 AM
Another abandoned farm house from yesterday:
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9384/elkpark2252011040911244.jpg
http://img850.imageshack.us/img850/9384/elkpark2252011040911244.jpg
rovex
Apr 28, 03:07 AM
lol. you have a huge boulder on your shoulder.
I think that has already been established, getting personal when I didn't even quote or made reference to him.
I think that has already been established, getting personal when I didn't even quote or made reference to him.
.jpg "cheryl cole tattoo on hand.")
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
N3rds
Apr 24, 02:37 PM
they don't even mention that it is a WHITE iPhone...
I feel like that is more interesting than the fact that it is a T-mobile phone...
I feel like that is more interesting than the fact that it is a T-mobile phone...
TOYSTER17
Apr 24, 02:54 PM
There are people who think ignorance is acceptable. :rolleyes:
Ignorance is bliss. :rolleyes:
Ignorance is bliss. :rolleyes:
GFLPraxis
Apr 11, 02:45 PM
What's the Matrox product? Please be an external GPU...
UniPro
Mar 11, 12:37 PM
I'll check out the lines around 4. I'm not waiting for more than an hour. If I can't get one today I'll be putting off my purchase for awhile.
chadwick
Jul 25, 08:38 AM
In response to the ebay comment, why are they seemingly so dumb? I wanted to buy a new canon lens recently and i always buy my photography equipment from B&H (probably the most reputable place on the planet) but first i looked on ebay to see if i could get a used one for a lot less. None of the auctions went for significantly less than new at B&H (especially when you factor in shipping) and at least one auction ended of about $30 more than retail. I dont get it! Don't people do ANY research?
pcb
Nov 8, 08:07 PM
Life's no fun if you're not taking risks!... (words from an adrenaline junky :D)
i agree, for the ultimate thrill jump out of a plane sans parachute
i agree, for the ultimate thrill jump out of a plane sans parachute
-aggie-
Apr 16, 07:59 PM
In.
Please make sure all rules are in the OP when Don't panic eventually tries to change everything. Thanks. :)
Please make sure all rules are in the OP when Don't panic eventually tries to change everything. Thanks. :)
crees!
Jul 26, 01:23 PM
Has anybody thought these might all just be preventative filings? It's possible but they better not do this (not release such a product). I WANT this.
TuffLuffJimmy
Apr 24, 01:45 PM
The very least the staff should have done is to have protected the victim as best they could, and stayed with the victim during the seizure. It looks real enough to me, and I've seen plenty.
The sad thing is they are basically trained to not get involved. It's a sad world we live in. If I were that girl I would sue McDonald's for such an inhuman policy, someone should as these sort of policies are just sick.
The sad thing is they are basically trained to not get involved. It's a sad world we live in. If I were that girl I would sue McDonald's for such an inhuman policy, someone should as these sort of policies are just sick.
hexor
Apr 21, 10:38 PM
Not sure why people think Apple is the bully here. Have you not seen the comparison between the Samsung phone and the iPhone? We even have sales people telling customers the Samsung phone is "like an iPhone"..
Legion93
May 1, 11:01 PM
As long as it has Zombies I'm game. Killing Nazi zombies was getting old anyways.
Taliban zombies...
Weapons:
AK-47
C4
RPG-7
Round 1, fight!
Taliban zombies...
Weapons:
AK-47
C4
RPG-7
Round 1, fight!
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
daneoni
Apr 14, 03:01 PM
I remember when iPhone OS updates were 92MB...now its 666.2MB
Marx55
Nov 4, 03:24 AM
VMWare is going to smoke Parallels when it comes out. I can�t wait. I'm still a little bit miffed though that no one has gotten native partition support so we can use the same partition while virtualizing or dual booting.
That native partion support to use virtualization or dual booting would be awesome, having the best of both worlds (Boot Camp & Virtualization). I look forward to it!
That native partion support to use virtualization or dual booting would be awesome, having the best of both worlds (Boot Camp & Virtualization). I look forward to it!
dba7dba
Apr 13, 03:25 PM
You might have inside sources at Apple, because you seem to be too sure that it will cost 2K and would only last for 2 - 3 years.
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
So how much do you think the rumored Apple TV should cost to be wildly successful WHILE maintaining 50% (approx) profit margin?
I remember people not wanting an iPad when the rumors broke out. Same thing.
So how much do you think the rumored Apple TV should cost to be wildly successful WHILE maintaining 50% (approx) profit margin?
mcmlxix
Apr 12, 10:18 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
I agree fully. Other than incremental spec bumps that keep up with the industry and dropping component prices and moving into newer and newer radio technologies, what else is there to cram into the hardware? Sure in the future there will be some new �must include� hardware technology, but it doesn�t exist today.
Apple�s competitive edge (with Mac & iDevices) is in the OSes and apps. The only thing I�m clamoring for in iOS 5 is liberating iDevices from iTunes on a PC/Mac. Sure, people can still use iTunes, but it shouldn�t be the only way. iPads especially should be fully independent devices as they�ll increasingly be the only computer for a large demographic�like my mom.
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
I agree fully. Other than incremental spec bumps that keep up with the industry and dropping component prices and moving into newer and newer radio technologies, what else is there to cram into the hardware? Sure in the future there will be some new �must include� hardware technology, but it doesn�t exist today.
Apple�s competitive edge (with Mac & iDevices) is in the OSes and apps. The only thing I�m clamoring for in iOS 5 is liberating iDevices from iTunes on a PC/Mac. Sure, people can still use iTunes, but it shouldn�t be the only way. iPads especially should be fully independent devices as they�ll increasingly be the only computer for a large demographic�like my mom.