trex67
Mar 23, 10:08 AM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I currently have 34,000+ songs in my iTunes Library, just north of 205GB. I'd buy a 220GB in a heartbeat. I realize not everyone needs that much space, but I currently have to swap out older material (usually live albums and alternate versions) whenever I get a new album (I tend to buy or rip a couple of new albums a week.) And I do indeed listen to everything on my iPod at least occasionally. New albums get a solid two or three day rotation, but most of the time I have it on shuffle. I don't consider this a problem, I just really love music, and variety is important to me.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I currently have 34,000+ songs in my iTunes Library, just north of 205GB. I'd buy a 220GB in a heartbeat. I realize not everyone needs that much space, but I currently have to swap out older material (usually live albums and alternate versions) whenever I get a new album (I tend to buy or rip a couple of new albums a week.) And I do indeed listen to everything on my iPod at least occasionally. New albums get a solid two or three day rotation, but most of the time I have it on shuffle. I don't consider this a problem, I just really love music, and variety is important to me.
isgoed
Aug 25, 07:30 AM
and will feature the 965 graphics chipset which frankly is a very nice and inexpenisve graphics solution.Oh as a side note. The 965 chipset which features the GMA 3000 or GMA X3000 will indeed have more features (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=2837), but preliminary benchmarks (http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pconline.com.cn%2Fmarket%2Fsh%2Fshoppingguide%2Fchangshang%2F0608%2F844 892.html&langpair=zh-CN%7Cen&hl=en&ie=UTF8) show it performing even worse than the GMA 950.
Edit: And you may be quite right on your prediction of the 965 chipset. Due to a design flaw (http://digitimes.com/mobos/a20060731A5025.html) in the integrated graphics subsystem (GMA X3000/3000) the availability of the chips has been delayed to mid August, making them just in time for new Mini's in September.
Edit: And you may be quite right on your prediction of the 965 chipset. Due to a design flaw (http://digitimes.com/mobos/a20060731A5025.html) in the integrated graphics subsystem (GMA X3000/3000) the availability of the chips has been delayed to mid August, making them just in time for new Mini's in September.
logandzwon
Sep 14, 02:01 PM
...my iPhone 4 still gets the best reception of any phone I've ever owned, regardless of how I hold it or whether or not it has a case on it...
same here
same here
After G
Aug 25, 02:38 AM
I think the 64 bitness isn't really necessary for a Mac mini. You're not going to shoehorn >4 GB of memory into two slots, unless memory manufacturers are going to change their minds which I don't think will happen just yet.
The 20% increase in performance only applies to media and content creation. I guess that would be good for a HTPC, but Word won't run any faster. (Tt may start faster though).
There is no reason for Yonah owners to upgrade just yet. It's really more of a nice bonus for those people who could wait until now to get a computer.
Apple prices were lower before because the stagnant tech demanded it. For all we know, the $599 could be the maximum on Apple's profit curve.
The 20% increase in performance only applies to media and content creation. I guess that would be good for a HTPC, but Word won't run any faster. (Tt may start faster though).
There is no reason for Yonah owners to upgrade just yet. It's really more of a nice bonus for those people who could wait until now to get a computer.
Apple prices were lower before because the stagnant tech demanded it. For all we know, the $599 could be the maximum on Apple's profit curve.
ccunning
Jul 14, 11:28 AM
I just saw this and though it was pretty interesting:
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Sony also introduced their own small-format 90.0 � 94.0 mm disk, similar to the others but somewhat simpler in construction than the AmDisk. The first computer to use this format was the HP-150 of 1983, and Sony also used them fairly widely on their line of MSX computers. Other than this the format suffered from a similar fate as the other new formats; the 5�-inch format simply had too much market share. Things changed dramatically in 1984 when Apple Computer selected the format for their new Macintosh computers. By 1989 the 3�-inch was outselling the 5�-inch.
Here is the source:
Sony's 3.5" Floppy Disk (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floppy_drive#The_3.C2.BD-inch_microfloppy_diskette)
Peterkro
Mar 21, 05:50 PM
Oh dear this is getting serious the French have called up the philosophers including Bernard-Henri Levy.:eek:
In case you don't think Daffy is targeting civilians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfydO-Z-D0M
In case you don't think Daffy is targeting civilians:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KfydO-Z-D0M
Lord Blackadder
Feb 22, 07:06 PM
I'm not a big fan of GM on the whole, but credit where credit is due, as the company considers selling a diesel-engined version (http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/02/general_motors_considers_at_di.html) of the Chevy Cruze in the US.
In Europe, Australia and Asia, where GM already sells diesel versions of the Cruze, the diesel is the most fuel-efficient offering. Based on European versions of the car, an American diesel Cruze would probably get about 37 miles per gallon city/48 highway. That would give the Cruze similar mileage numbers to Toyota's Prius hybrid.
"That number probably would be achievable," said Mike Omotoso, an analyst in Detroit with survey and research group J.D. Power & Associates.
Omotoso said bringing a diesel Cruze to North America in a year makes some sense. The Cruze will be facing tough competition at that time from Ford's upcoming electric Focus and potential hybrid versions of the Honda Civic and Hyundai Elantra. So a diesel with great fuel economy could get a lot of attention.
"Volkswagen has been very successful with their diesel engine in the Jetta," Omotoso said. "It's about time that someone provided them with some competition."
EDIT: Another news article (http://rumors.automobilemag.com/diesel-rumor-2013-chevrolet-cruze-turbo-diesel-4-20279.html) about the Cruze diesel from Automobile Magazine.
The only real argument against doing it is the cost of federalizing the engine plus the lingering (and ridiculous) diesel-hate that automakers are convinced most Americans harbor. But considering that a) the diesel version of the Cruze already exists in other markets, and b) the car equals the Prius' fuel economy numbers, the case for selling it here is pretty strong IMO.
Perhaps a successful diesel Cruze will convince GM to put a diesel engine in the Volt, further improving that car's fuel economy? I think the US is ripe for a more wholehearted embrace of the diesel engine in passenger cars and light trucks.
In Europe, Australia and Asia, where GM already sells diesel versions of the Cruze, the diesel is the most fuel-efficient offering. Based on European versions of the car, an American diesel Cruze would probably get about 37 miles per gallon city/48 highway. That would give the Cruze similar mileage numbers to Toyota's Prius hybrid.
"That number probably would be achievable," said Mike Omotoso, an analyst in Detroit with survey and research group J.D. Power & Associates.
Omotoso said bringing a diesel Cruze to North America in a year makes some sense. The Cruze will be facing tough competition at that time from Ford's upcoming electric Focus and potential hybrid versions of the Honda Civic and Hyundai Elantra. So a diesel with great fuel economy could get a lot of attention.
"Volkswagen has been very successful with their diesel engine in the Jetta," Omotoso said. "It's about time that someone provided them with some competition."
EDIT: Another news article (http://rumors.automobilemag.com/diesel-rumor-2013-chevrolet-cruze-turbo-diesel-4-20279.html) about the Cruze diesel from Automobile Magazine.
The only real argument against doing it is the cost of federalizing the engine plus the lingering (and ridiculous) diesel-hate that automakers are convinced most Americans harbor. But considering that a) the diesel version of the Cruze already exists in other markets, and b) the car equals the Prius' fuel economy numbers, the case for selling it here is pretty strong IMO.
Perhaps a successful diesel Cruze will convince GM to put a diesel engine in the Volt, further improving that car's fuel economy? I think the US is ripe for a more wholehearted embrace of the diesel engine in passenger cars and light trucks.
easy4lif
Jul 18, 09:16 AM
I don't mind renting movies so long as its a model like netflix. Anything I really want to keep, I'm going to get on DVD and encode myself. but if its the latest releases maybe wtch once to see if I want to buy.
obeygiant
Mar 22, 12:46 PM
Wasn't sure, so had to ask. :)
It's such a weird notion, that people can choose their sexual orientation. But then, I don't believe that's what many really believe when they say it... instead, I get the vibe that what they mean to say is 'why can't you just closet yourself and act straight?'.
Its also a weird notion that sexual orientation is a black and white issue. People gay or straight have sex with others contrary to their orientation all the time. Skin is skin, and the brain, the biggest sex organ in the human body, can be trained and retrained in a million different ways. Whatever turns you on is what turns you on.
It's such a weird notion, that people can choose their sexual orientation. But then, I don't believe that's what many really believe when they say it... instead, I get the vibe that what they mean to say is 'why can't you just closet yourself and act straight?'.
Its also a weird notion that sexual orientation is a black and white issue. People gay or straight have sex with others contrary to their orientation all the time. Skin is skin, and the brain, the biggest sex organ in the human body, can be trained and retrained in a million different ways. Whatever turns you on is what turns you on.
Hattig
Sep 1, 03:06 PM
Excellent, if it turns out to be true ... IF Apple include either upgradable graphics (nVidia's MXM "Mobile PCI-Express Module") in the iMac OR they release a small-tower/big-cube 'Mac' with a PCIe x16 slot.
If the current iMac prices drop then I'll have to point my parents towards one - they were previously interested in the Mac Mini, but they also need to buy a new monitor, and they don't need gaming or a massive display - the low end 17" would be ideal, maybe the 20".
Whilst I'm not upgrading my main system until next year, it will be good to see what products I'll have to choose from. I know I want my next desktop to be able to run Mac OS X as well as Windows (for games), therefore it needs a graphics card powerful enough for the display resolution, but it needs to be a Mac. Right now the only option is the Mac Pro, but I don't need 4 cores or 8 FBDIMMs or 4 drive bays.
If the current iMac prices drop then I'll have to point my parents towards one - they were previously interested in the Mac Mini, but they also need to buy a new monitor, and they don't need gaming or a massive display - the low end 17" would be ideal, maybe the 20".
Whilst I'm not upgrading my main system until next year, it will be good to see what products I'll have to choose from. I know I want my next desktop to be able to run Mac OS X as well as Windows (for games), therefore it needs a graphics card powerful enough for the display resolution, but it needs to be a Mac. Right now the only option is the Mac Pro, but I don't need 4 cores or 8 FBDIMMs or 4 drive bays.
imac_japan
May 1, 08:04 AM
latin is dead ! Long live Apple
Gem�tlichkeit
Apr 26, 02:16 PM
If you guys can't differentiate between the use of "application" or "program" and "app store" vs "appstore" then I'm clearly wasting my time haha.
hogo
Sep 15, 06:16 AM
and who cares...
corywoolf
Sep 6, 03:23 PM
Lowest line? The mini and macbook still both have slower processors than the MBP's.
Apple's cheapest computer= Mac Mini. Also, I was comparing that to my less then 6 month old 1.83 Ghz MBP.
Apple's cheapest computer= Mac Mini. Also, I was comparing that to my less then 6 month old 1.83 Ghz MBP.
milo
Aug 29, 09:02 AM
Incredibly underwhelming.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:58 PM
how long is the keynote?
They last about an hour to 2 hours
They last about an hour to 2 hours
SciFrog
Apr 1, 12:45 PM
No kernel panics here, but I noticed some a3 core units being send back early, usually in the first 10%, it started before 10.6.3
Angrisano
Sep 6, 07:40 PM
I'm a bit disappointed by this latest update as well. I'm still waiting for a headless Mac that will support my 19 inch dual monitors for under $2K. I recently built a nice Shuttle mini PC (not much bigger than the mini) with a P4 3ghz processor, 2gb ram, 250gb hard drive, 256mb graphics card and Litescribe DVD burner all for under $500.
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
Now I don't expect to pay so little for so much when buying a Mac. In fact I'm willing to pay double for the same specs. The trouble is, right now in Apple's line up you simply can't do it. Where is our mid-range expandable tower? I don't need all the power of the quad Xeon and my pocketbook doesn't need to pay that price.
I just want a decent middle of the road, expandable Mac for around $1K. I can build two really nice PCs for this price. Why can't I get one Mac?
SteveKnobs
Apr 3, 01:29 AM
Perhaps if you spent more time educating yourself and less time convincing yourself that a flawed product is acceptable, you would learn something. Try googling the issue.
Based on the way you write, however, I am going to guess that you won't take the time to do so.
Some people are just not interested in facing the truth.
The way I write? This has anything to do with anything?
And again, the "evidence" you keep suggesting exists does not represent what is actually the case. Even within this thread, there are several people telling you they have no issues with their device. I don't have any issues either.
I hate to use the well known argument we often see on these forums, but you will almost always hear from the people who have issues with their products.
You will almost never see threads or comments from people that don't really have a reason to exclaim to the world that their device is perfect. Thus, we see an inflation of negative threads as compared to positive threads, and ignorant people take this to mean there is a wide-spread and critical flaw with all of the devices. Also, the negative comment is more distinctive, and thus more memorable than the positive one- again adding to the illusion you seem to be buying into.
Based on the way you write, however, I am going to guess that you won't take the time to do so.
Some people are just not interested in facing the truth.
The way I write? This has anything to do with anything?
And again, the "evidence" you keep suggesting exists does not represent what is actually the case. Even within this thread, there are several people telling you they have no issues with their device. I don't have any issues either.
I hate to use the well known argument we often see on these forums, but you will almost always hear from the people who have issues with their products.
You will almost never see threads or comments from people that don't really have a reason to exclaim to the world that their device is perfect. Thus, we see an inflation of negative threads as compared to positive threads, and ignorant people take this to mean there is a wide-spread and critical flaw with all of the devices. Also, the negative comment is more distinctive, and thus more memorable than the positive one- again adding to the illusion you seem to be buying into.
SciFrog
Nov 18, 05:25 PM
It is almost becoming that unless you do bigadv units, why bother...
The top end iMac now gets as much as 7 times the top previous generation iMac...
The top end iMac now gets as much as 7 times the top previous generation iMac...
Homy
Jan 5, 04:31 PM
I dont get why people are saying we will get updates to MacBook Pros/iMacs, what will they be updated with?. The Core 2 Duo chips are still the newest chips from intel. Santa Rosa is yet to debut.
I dont see any updates to them im afraid at MWSF. Maybe we'll see the ultrathin MBP but i highly doubt it...The GPU Radeon X1600 in iMac is one year old now. It was launched Oct 5, 2005 by ATI. It would be a minor but yet important update.
I dont see any updates to them im afraid at MWSF. Maybe we'll see the ultrathin MBP but i highly doubt it...The GPU Radeon X1600 in iMac is one year old now. It was launched Oct 5, 2005 by ATI. It would be a minor but yet important update.
AppliedVisual
Nov 17, 12:37 PM
It's not the future... these kind of over-architected solutions never win. I predict CPUs, memory and memory controllers will become more tightly integrated over time, not less. FB-DIMM will be gone is a few years.
FB-DIMMs aren't going to disappear anytime soon -- not in the next few years anyway. There currently is nothing better or more reliable for installing 16GB or more in a system without dividing up RAM into multiple, independent banks and controllers, often on a per-CPU base (as is done on current NUMA, AMD Opteron and other offerings from Sun, IBM, etc..).
Probably won't see FB-DIMM style RAM on systems like the iMac anytime soon, no need for it. But for now, it's what makes the most sense for Mac Pro and Xserve.
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.
FB-DIMMs aren't going to disappear anytime soon -- not in the next few years anyway. There currently is nothing better or more reliable for installing 16GB or more in a system without dividing up RAM into multiple, independent banks and controllers, often on a per-CPU base (as is done on current NUMA, AMD Opteron and other offerings from Sun, IBM, etc..).
Probably won't see FB-DIMM style RAM on systems like the iMac anytime soon, no need for it. But for now, it's what makes the most sense for Mac Pro and Xserve.
IMO, what Apple really needs is a system between the Mac Pro and iMac. A smaller tower or cube style system with a single Kentsfield or Clovertown CPU with 2 or 3 PCI-E slots, two HDD bays, optical bay and using cheaper, more conventional RAM - like up to 8GB DDR2. Apple is ignoring an entire segment of the market and it seems like they're trying to use the small difference in price between a maxed-out 24" iMac and a relatively low-end Mac Pro as justification for nothing in the middle.
rasmasyean
Mar 27, 11:56 PM
There is no such thing as a European Command run by Europeans, any more than there is an African Command run by an African. They are both branches of the US military command. Your comment that "even" the European Command was run by an American was foolish in the extreme.
So now that I pwned you you still try to twist words to get weasle your way out.
Scroll up and this is what I said:
"He even says that European Command is headed by a US Admiral."
That's a lot different than:
"Even the European Command was run by an American"
In other words...it's NOT handed over to NATO.
Why don't you just face it. The US blows crap up and all of the "NATO" nations expect the US to handle the brunt of the decisions AND the work behind the scenes and that YOUR nation shoots 2 tomahawks and takes credit for the "massive assault" even though it hurts your pride to believe so or some crap! :D
You see, beneath all of that hippie exterior of yours, you are secretly a warmonger, you just don't like it when most of the damage is done by the US instead of by someone more close to home! I knew it! ;)
So now that I pwned you you still try to twist words to get weasle your way out.
Scroll up and this is what I said:
"He even says that European Command is headed by a US Admiral."
That's a lot different than:
"Even the European Command was run by an American"
In other words...it's NOT handed over to NATO.
Why don't you just face it. The US blows crap up and all of the "NATO" nations expect the US to handle the brunt of the decisions AND the work behind the scenes and that YOUR nation shoots 2 tomahawks and takes credit for the "massive assault" even though it hurts your pride to believe so or some crap! :D
You see, beneath all of that hippie exterior of yours, you are secretly a warmonger, you just don't like it when most of the damage is done by the US instead of by someone more close to home! I knew it! ;)
Decker
Mar 22, 05:56 PM
Oh, wait, I see. Voyager.
Yes with a Whiplash Audio Elite SCSCag Viablue LOD.
Yes with a Whiplash Audio Elite SCSCag Viablue LOD.