j-traxx
Apr 8, 06:02 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
no apple stores in the state of south dakota. but we got bb
no apple stores in the state of south dakota. but we got bb
Roessnakhan
Mar 22, 12:57 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
The iPad isn't exactly a name to write home about either. Then, neither is TouchPad, Xoom, or Galaxy Tab.
wizz0bang
Jul 20, 09:57 AM
Bring on the multi-core GPUs! :)
seany916
Aug 27, 10:30 AM
Hecubus Pro,
I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan )
That was funny! :D :p
I was distraught, and, as a huge gamer (not fat, just a video game fan )
That was funny! :D :p
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 07:39 PM
Nice to meet you Jersey.
Are the gift cards good indefinitely?
Are the gift cards good indefinitely?
andrewsd
Mar 31, 02:27 PM
Say What I thought a closed system was bad..hahahhaahahahah
pika2000
Mar 26, 01:01 AM
Sandy Bridge iMac + Lion. ;)
bibbz
Jun 11, 12:01 PM
My DM told me we can open anytime we want to no later than 8am. I have a best buy and ATT corporate store directly accross the street from me. Im waiting for them to announce when they are opening and ill be open 1 hr before them if they open at 6am, im openening at 5am.
coolbreeze
Apr 7, 11:30 PM
You people don't know the facts and are jumping to conclusions. You need to realize that this is a RUMOR site....
Share the facts then sir.
We are reacting to a rumor on a rumor site.
:confused:
AppleBestBuy? (applebb)?
Share the facts then sir.
We are reacting to a rumor on a rumor site.
:confused:
AppleBestBuy? (applebb)?
peharri
Jul 14, 03:11 PM
Some of this makes sense, some of it not.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
I think AppleInsider is right about the case. With the exception of the MacBook, whose design has been rumoured for years and clearly was something Apple would have done even had this been the "iBook G5", Apple has made it a point with all of their Intelizations to use the same case as the predecessor, as if to say "It's business as usual, all we've changed is the processor." So from that point of view, the PowerMac G5 case being, more or less, the Mac Pro case, makes a lot of sense.
Two optical drives? No, sorry, not seeing the reasoning. The reasons given so far don't add up:
- copying DVDs - you can't legally copy 99% of DVDs anyway, if there was no need for twin CD drives, why would there suddenly be for DVDs?
- burning two at once - few people need this, and it's a great sales opportunity for a Firewire external burner anyway. Hell, why stop at TWO?
- Blu-ray - not unless they're really screwed up BR and drives with BR will be incompatible with existing media or something.
Against this, you have the confusion generated by a Mac with two optical drives. I have a Mac with two optical drives (an in-built combo drive, and a FW DVD burner), and it's not terribly elegant. It's fine when reading disks (obviously), but writing them generates some confusion. How sure am I that I'm burning to the right drive? I'm not saying you can't do it, I'm just saying this would be unbelievably un-Mac like. It'd be like the next version of iTunes coming with a menu at the top of its window.
It's also kind of easy to see where this rumour might have originated, in some garbled communication where the rumourmonger says "Two optical drive formats", or "Two bays", or "Multiple media readers" (hey, why not put an SD/CF/MS reader on the front? Pretty much everyone uses them these days, especially the prosumer-market Apple is after. Bet there are more people who'd use an SD card reader than a Firewire port.)
I've been wrong before, but I'm going to go for a traditional PowerMac G5 enclosure, and a single optical drive which may, or may not, support Blu-ray in some shape or form.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:39 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
Evangelion
Aug 18, 05:50 AM
Not likely to happen.
Maybe, maybe not. Fact remains that the liquid-cooling in the G5 Quad is very complex beast. And more complex things get, the more likely they are to break.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
A whole 9 months? Those systems are supposed to last for years.
Maybe, maybe not. Fact remains that the liquid-cooling in the G5 Quad is very complex beast. And more complex things get, the more likely they are to break.
There are minimal to no reports of problems with the Quad G5 cooling system. I've run 3 of these for nearly 9 months with no problems.
A whole 9 months? Those systems are supposed to last for years.
ConnorTurnbull
Apr 25, 01:37 PM
They cant lose this surely?
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
Even Android stores your location in the exact same way iOS does.
What are you talking about? This is Apple. When they do something wrong, it's ten times worse than if one of their competitors had done it!
udontsurf9
Jun 23, 09:02 AM
got my call here in houston, tx. They said it'll be ready at 8:30 Thursday morning
Scottsdale
Apr 6, 11:59 AM
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but the Windows numbers don't correspond to OS X numbers.
Are you smoking something? Sure the IGP used in SB 13" MBP might get some fudged numbers by those who report for Apple, but you think the ULV SB IGP is going to even compare to the 320m on any level??? Huh? You are far smarter than that.
A lot of people using the 13" MBP in comparison when there are almost no similaries.
I don't believe a ULV CPU gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe this CPU in the story gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe Apple is dumb enough to ruin the MBA brand AGAIN with Intel's IGP at this time. I don't believe that what Apple does in the 13" MBP has any correlation with the MBA because the IGP is different. I believe when Apple and Nvidia said Apple will use the Nvidia chipset and GPU for a long time they were specifically citing the MBA, as it make no sense for the MBA to be so challenged as to get such an inferior design leading to tragic real world results.
In 2012 the MBA will get an update when it actually makes sense. People waiting for a ULV SB chip in the 13" MBA will be waiting a long time. People waiting or expecting SB IGP to even compare in ULV variants will be waiting forever as they cannot match the Nvidia offering with the underclocked IGP.
This story is ridiculous as written.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but the Windows numbers don't correspond to OS X numbers.
Are you smoking something? Sure the IGP used in SB 13" MBP might get some fudged numbers by those who report for Apple, but you think the ULV SB IGP is going to even compare to the 320m on any level??? Huh? You are far smarter than that.
A lot of people using the 13" MBP in comparison when there are almost no similaries.
I don't believe a ULV CPU gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe this CPU in the story gets used in the 13" MBA. I don't believe Apple is dumb enough to ruin the MBA brand AGAIN with Intel's IGP at this time. I don't believe that what Apple does in the 13" MBP has any correlation with the MBA because the IGP is different. I believe when Apple and Nvidia said Apple will use the Nvidia chipset and GPU for a long time they were specifically citing the MBA, as it make no sense for the MBA to be so challenged as to get such an inferior design leading to tragic real world results.
In 2012 the MBA will get an update when it actually makes sense. People waiting for a ULV SB chip in the 13" MBA will be waiting a long time. People waiting or expecting SB IGP to even compare in ULV variants will be waiting forever as they cannot match the Nvidia offering with the underclocked IGP.
This story is ridiculous as written.
DeathChill
Aug 7, 10:18 PM
Running the preview now... some nice developer level stuff that I cannot ebelish on however beyond what was talked about in the keynote.
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
troop231
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
guet
Aug 12, 06:28 AM
I've never paid for a phone up til now (as is the case with most UK residents I'd assume) so it would be an impressive feat if Apple can persuade people in this type of marketplace to actually put their hands in their pockets for a phone.
I'd pay a couple of hundred pounds for an iPod, so I'd definitely pay that for an iPod which happened to be a phone, pda, gps combo. Millions of iPod/pda users are the market for this kind of device, so it's not the entire phone market, but a good slice of it.
I'd pay a couple of hundred pounds for an iPod, so I'd definitely pay that for an iPod which happened to be a phone, pda, gps combo. Millions of iPod/pda users are the market for this kind of device, so it's not the entire phone market, but a good slice of it.
MacSync
Aug 25, 03:14 PM
Ahh did any one see this?
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/23/apple.tops.pc.mag.survey/
Hmm. I've had a G5 DP worked on lately and had great support.
*Edit Nevermind, they are linking the PC mag story too.
http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/08/23/apple.tops.pc.mag.survey/
Hmm. I've had a G5 DP worked on lately and had great support.
*Edit Nevermind, they are linking the PC mag story too.
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:53 PM
Very nice, indeed... (of course, i expect that Apple release something much more beautiful than waht you did :D :p :D)
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
kdarling
Apr 6, 03:01 PM
But he then said after how well it would work on the phone, they put the tablet project on the shelf and focused on the phone as it was more important. Which means it was a tablet and no just a touch screen device in the beginning.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
Sure, it could've been a full tablet. It just didn't have iOS, is my point.
People misremember a lot. You know how it goes: a story always gets better as time goes by :)
For example, in the later tablet version we are told that seeing kinetic scrolling on the demo made him want for Apple to build a touch phone:
“I had this idea about having a glass display, a multitouch display you could type on with your fingers. I asked our folks: could we come up with a multitouch display that we could type on? And six months later, they came back with this prototype display. And I gave it to one of our really brilliant UI guys and he called me back a few weeks later and had intertial scrolling working and I thought, ‘my God, we can build a phone with this!’ So we put the tablet on the shelf… and we went to work on the iPhone.”
Yet, years before in one of the first iPhone articles in we were told that kinetic scrolling came later on:
"At one point, Mr. Jobs got a call from one of the iPhone engineers with an idea: Why not allow iPhone users to navigate through both song collections and contacts stored on the device by simply flicking their fingers up and down across the surface of the touch-screen? The engineer gave Mr. Jobs a demonstration of the technology, and the Apple chief executive signed off on it immediately, according to a person familiar with the process."
I'd love one day for a definitive history to come out, so we can know the full timing, and also credit those unsung engineers who actually invented it all.
MacsRgr8
Aug 5, 04:02 PM
Me excited too! :)
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
I've made plans with some ex-colleagues to follow the event live using the text-based coverage made available.
Let me thank MacRumors : Live already!
It'll be 6 pm over here, so we'll be ready with some pizzas and cokes! ;)
Then once I get home a couple of hours later, I can watch the stream! :cool:
antster94
Mar 22, 12:44 PM
Competition is good.
leekohler
Feb 28, 09:45 PM
Correct I have no idea what causes homosexuality, neither do scientists.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.
I wanted to know what he expected from me, he doesn't necessarily have to know the cause(s). I don't remember saying you could not live with the person you love. Also one can not infer what "that" means from your paragraph.
I seem to recall you agreeing with this post:
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere tool.
Some may say, "I have sex with my girlfriend to show her that I love her." If I had a girlfriend, I would hope I would love her enough to protect her from the physical and psychological risks that come with non-marital sex. The best way for me to do that is for my hypothetical girlfriend and me to be celibate before marriage.
Sacramentally same-sex "marriage" isn't marriage. Neither is merely civil marriage of any sort. If I understand what the Catholic Church's teachings about marriage merely civil, it teaches non-sacramental marriage, whether same-sex or opposite-sex, is legal fornication.
And by "living with" I mean having sex and having a family as well.