ChickenSwartz
Aug 6, 08:56 PM
anyone think apple will do anything to commemorate the 5 year anniversary of the ipod in october?
yes
yes
msb3079
Apr 20, 11:11 AM
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
AZREOSpecialist
Apr 26, 03:05 PM
Who cares? I thought this was macrumors not android news...
Stop living in a vacuum.
Stop living in a vacuum.
Benjy91
May 6, 07:58 AM
GL on getting people to start making ARM binaries for windows 8 which only runs on tablets who happen to be extremely unsuccessful. If Microsoft makes an ARM version of windows 8 for tablets only, then windows-based tablets will be even deader than they are already.
On a side note: All current ARM processers are designed for very compact and tight spaces where power efficiency is THE most important thing. Regular laptop/desktop CPUs are not, to the same extent anyway. ARM has yet to show us what it can deliver in that area, so who knows. We'll just have to wait and see.
Windows is making a version of Windows that works on ARM and the regular processors, so ALL the software works for it. They wont be separate versions.
On a side note: All current ARM processers are designed for very compact and tight spaces where power efficiency is THE most important thing. Regular laptop/desktop CPUs are not, to the same extent anyway. ARM has yet to show us what it can deliver in that area, so who knows. We'll just have to wait and see.
Windows is making a version of Windows that works on ARM and the regular processors, so ALL the software works for it. They wont be separate versions.
z3r01
Apr 26, 04:18 PM
This is obvious because iOS is from one company...selling iOS devices. Android is o. Every other device that really isn't any competition if u ask me...every HTC, motorola , are now stocking android that they just got lazy. "oh we just made a quad core with 7 cameras...let's add android...perfect..exactly like an evo"....boring...some say "oh iOS isn't exciting" in earlier posts are wrong...not that I'm a fanboy to iOS..I'm a fanboy to the best I see..and android for a fact isn't...every damn android device has nothing different then just cameras...evo..shift..thunderbolt...droid...it's just stupid...what happened to when cell phones competed for hardware and software?
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 02:38 AM
Oh really? Wow I didn't know that... Sarcasm.
I'm talking about on a calculator. Enter it EXACTLY how it was in the OP and you'll get 288.
Again, I'd like to warn people: this is not always true. Even if you enter it exactly as above, your calculator will not always give you 288. Some will give you two. Some settings may give you two. Don't trust a calculator blindly.
I'm talking about on a calculator. Enter it EXACTLY how it was in the OP and you'll get 288.
Again, I'd like to warn people: this is not always true. Even if you enter it exactly as above, your calculator will not always give you 288. Some will give you two. Some settings may give you two. Don't trust a calculator blindly.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
lilo777
Mar 30, 02:14 PM
So let me understand this. You pay to buy your music, you pay to store it 'in the cloud' and you pay data charges (with ever decreasing unlimited data plans) to listen to it.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.
Obviously you do not consider all possibilities. Some people have unlimited data plans (or do not have time to listen to music to often so even the limited plan could suffice). Combined with free 5GB space, people have to pay nothing. Then there are people for whom hundred bucks is not an issue but convenience is. This World (outside Apple ecosystem) is all about choices. And if not enough people will find this service to be attractive, Amazon will close it. Without your telling them.
This has got to be the stupidest thing I've ever heard of.
Obviously you do not consider all possibilities. Some people have unlimited data plans (or do not have time to listen to music to often so even the limited plan could suffice). Combined with free 5GB space, people have to pay nothing. Then there are people for whom hundred bucks is not an issue but convenience is. This World (outside Apple ecosystem) is all about choices. And if not enough people will find this service to be attractive, Amazon will close it. Without your telling them.
dukebound85
Apr 10, 11:19 AM
Wrong.
Ok then you do not know how to follow the order of operations....ie if you want 2, you have to have another set of parenthesis (so you evaluate 2(9+3) before dividing into 48) or mistakenly think that multiplication somehow supersedes the use of division (which it does not and you then proceed from left to right)
Ok then you do not know how to follow the order of operations....ie if you want 2, you have to have another set of parenthesis (so you evaluate 2(9+3) before dividing into 48) or mistakenly think that multiplication somehow supersedes the use of division (which it does not and you then proceed from left to right)
iJawn108
Jul 23, 02:48 AM
seven months from now, some yutz is going to be saying the same thing about merom.
that will be me with santa rosa. :cool:
that will be me with santa rosa. :cool:
Apple OC
May 2, 07:59 PM
a lb. of butter is still called a lb. of butter here in Canada
Justinf79
Apr 21, 05:38 PM
Hopefully it'll be cheaper as well... :D
balamw
Apr 10, 07:33 PM
Didn't all your methods, whatever they are called, give a priority to do the parenthesis operation first?
It is not my assumption, it is the method/explanation given by others
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
It is not my assumption, it is the method/explanation given by others
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
ptysell
Apr 26, 04:17 PM
"Android" makes money? Really? Can you provide me with a link of how much Android makes?
Googles revenue from the entire Android platform is just under 1 billion dollars per yer.
On the other hand Apples revenue is 1.4 billion per quarter for iTunes alone.
Googles revenue from the entire Android platform is just under 1 billion dollars per yer.
On the other hand Apples revenue is 1.4 billion per quarter for iTunes alone.
reflex
Jul 22, 11:10 AM
As soon as core 2 merom comes out every pc notebook will have it.
This is simply not true. Even though Core Duo has been out for about half a year, a lot of pc laptops are still sold with Pentium-M or Celeron-M cpus.
MacBook can keep the Core Duo for a while longer (until November, for example).
This is simply not true. Even though Core Duo has been out for about half a year, a lot of pc laptops are still sold with Pentium-M or Celeron-M cpus.
MacBook can keep the Core Duo for a while longer (until November, for example).
Umbongo
May 6, 08:19 AM
I think they can pull it off. I watched as they went from Motorola 680X0, to PowerPC (which was huge) and then to Intel (hell froze over!) So this happening would not be the least bit surprising or concerning.
The difference is that PowerPC and then Intel processors were performing far better than what else was available. There is no indication that ARM processors are set to out perform what Intel can offer. This whole thread is based on a bit of news written by someone who is known to make things up and get emotional in his reporting, the day after ARM dropped nearly 8% due to news of Intel's next technological step.
The difference is that PowerPC and then Intel processors were performing far better than what else was available. There is no indication that ARM processors are set to out perform what Intel can offer. This whole thread is based on a bit of news written by someone who is known to make things up and get emotional in his reporting, the day after ARM dropped nearly 8% due to news of Intel's next technological step.
doctor-don
Apr 26, 03:00 PM
Where do these survey companies get there data from? I have NEVER been asked any questions about stuff like this. Plus with statistics you can fudge the numbers to represent just about anything.
Interesting. I say the same thing when the news stations announce popularity polls of the President, healthcare reform, etc.
Interesting. I say the same thing when the news stations announce popularity polls of the President, healthcare reform, etc.
ebuc
Jul 21, 05:40 PM
True, but I like my Alu book look - I'd have no problem with a intel powered version. Although marketing being marketing, I'd like to see something new fresh, and awesome too.
BTW ebuc, your sig is nearly exactly what I'm planning on having. Looking at a cube 450 for a home server, and I already have a 20gb iPod. Cubes, insanely great.
<Apple Font>
The All New
Superfast
Doubly-Awesome
Blogging (wtf)
MacBook Pro
A New Look for the Newest Laptop from Apple
</AF>
(Cubes are the greatest. Put a radeon 9000 in there if you can. Mine needs a new hard drive right now, but its been going strong for over 5 years. And, truth be told, this isn't the original hard drive, so I can't really blame Apple!)
BTW ebuc, your sig is nearly exactly what I'm planning on having. Looking at a cube 450 for a home server, and I already have a 20gb iPod. Cubes, insanely great.
<Apple Font>
The All New
Superfast
Doubly-Awesome
Blogging (wtf)
MacBook Pro
A New Look for the Newest Laptop from Apple
</AF>
(Cubes are the greatest. Put a radeon 9000 in there if you can. Mine needs a new hard drive right now, but its been going strong for over 5 years. And, truth be told, this isn't the original hard drive, so I can't really blame Apple!)
carlos700
Aug 2, 07:56 PM
What rock have you been hiding under? Merom!
All I want to see is a new Macbook Pro at the WWDC, couldn't care less about the Mac Pro or Leopard
Go to Intel's website. You will notice they only mention the Intel Core 2 Duo as a desktop processor �not a mobile processor. Merom is not officially announced or it would be listed on their website.
All I want to see is a new Macbook Pro at the WWDC, couldn't care less about the Mac Pro or Leopard
Go to Intel's website. You will notice they only mention the Intel Core 2 Duo as a desktop processor �not a mobile processor. Merom is not officially announced or it would be listed on their website.
JTR7
Mar 28, 10:50 AM
I find this hard to believe.
Apple must have realized it now has to fight for market share in the smartphone market.
A 2-year contract doesn't stop iPhone 4 users from moving to the iPhone 5. Many people are on 2 year contracts, but are also on family plans. It's not unheard of for a parent to use an upgrade and hand their old phone down to a kid. Small businesses get 18 month upgrades from AT&T. Let's not forget the 3GS users and anyone whose iPhone 4 has broken.
It's a huge mistake not to update the phone. If only incremental, it's free profit for Apple. In many ways, iPhones (and Apple products in general) are status symbols. People buy the latest not out of need for improved specs, but rather for the ability to say "Look at my new Apple gadget". And while I do love the Retina Display and the 720p recording, to be honest, the fact that there was a new form factor-easily identifying me as having the new phone on launch day-was a part of the reason I ditched my 3GS for the new iPhone 4.
Apple must have realized it now has to fight for market share in the smartphone market.
A 2-year contract doesn't stop iPhone 4 users from moving to the iPhone 5. Many people are on 2 year contracts, but are also on family plans. It's not unheard of for a parent to use an upgrade and hand their old phone down to a kid. Small businesses get 18 month upgrades from AT&T. Let's not forget the 3GS users and anyone whose iPhone 4 has broken.
It's a huge mistake not to update the phone. If only incremental, it's free profit for Apple. In many ways, iPhones (and Apple products in general) are status symbols. People buy the latest not out of need for improved specs, but rather for the ability to say "Look at my new Apple gadget". And while I do love the Retina Display and the 720p recording, to be honest, the fact that there was a new form factor-easily identifying me as having the new phone on launch day-was a part of the reason I ditched my 3GS for the new iPhone 4.
-aggie-
May 3, 09:56 PM
Read your OP. I'm on an iPhone right now.
Frak it. I have skilz:
Battles will be simple. Say, our Hero has 2 HP and 1 AP, and our Monster has 1 HP and 1 AP. At the end of the fight, the Monster will be dead, and our Hero will have 1 HP and 1 AP. That's all there is to it.
Frak it. I have skilz:
Battles will be simple. Say, our Hero has 2 HP and 1 AP, and our Monster has 1 HP and 1 AP. At the end of the fight, the Monster will be dead, and our Hero will have 1 HP and 1 AP. That's all there is to it.
Cougarcat
Apr 23, 04:43 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ?
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
dukebound85
Apr 10, 12:14 PM
I agree with I student UK using the constraints of / makes it rather ambiguos (did I spell that right) as I originally read it. I believed the 2(9+3) to be in the denominator in which case the answer is clearly 2
You can't assume that 2(9+3) is under the denominator
They way it is explicitly written is interpreted to be (48/2)*(9+3)
You can't assume that 2(9+3) is under the denominator
They way it is explicitly written is interpreted to be (48/2)*(9+3)
bradc
Aug 7, 03:15 PM
Just ordered my Mac Pro!! :D
Quad 3Ghz, 4GB ram, 250GB HD + 500 GB HD, X1900 XT 512MB, Bluetooth+Airport, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1 Superdrive (holding out for BluRay) 30" ACD... $8264.23 :eek:
Estimated Ship Time... 3- 5 Weeks :eek: :eek:
This is gonna be good.
I went Quad 3Ghz, 1GB Ram, 160GB HD, X1900XT, Bluetooth and Fibre-Channel, 2-Superdrives. Then I'll buy more RAM and a bigger hd when it gets here. I am sooooooooo pumped!
Quad 3Ghz, 4GB ram, 250GB HD + 500 GB HD, X1900 XT 512MB, Bluetooth+Airport, wireless keyboard and mouse, 1 Superdrive (holding out for BluRay) 30" ACD... $8264.23 :eek:
Estimated Ship Time... 3- 5 Weeks :eek: :eek:
This is gonna be good.
I went Quad 3Ghz, 1GB Ram, 160GB HD, X1900XT, Bluetooth and Fibre-Channel, 2-Superdrives. Then I'll buy more RAM and a bigger hd when it gets here. I am sooooooooo pumped!
