netdog
Aug 6, 06:57 AM
Whats the normal run of events?
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
Strong analysis. I agree. I think there will also be a big surprise in the Leopard talk, if not more than one!
3 split up segments and then one more thing
Here is what i reckon
1) Intel transition
blah blah blah, it has been quick, painless developers, developers developers. Everyone has been receptive except $#%#@@! Adobe
Intel keep giving us the chips
today we update MBP and iMac to core 2 duo
2)Talking about tranistion there are 2 products which haven't yet been transistioned
PowerMac > Mac Pro
Xserve > Xserve? Mac Serve?
Mac Pro has 3 configs
Best - Dual Xeon, 1GB 500GB 256X1800 $3299
Better - Core 2 Duo 2.93ghz 1GB 500gb 256mb X1600 $2499
Good - Core 2 Duo 2.6 1GB 250gb 256mb X1600 $1999
Xserves - All Xeons, dah
3) Leopard talk
4) One more thing
Candidates: iPhone, iPod, New Screens (may be intro'd with Mac Pro's) what ever else there could be
Strong analysis. I agree. I think there will also be a big surprise in the Leopard talk, if not more than one!
tpavur
Apr 21, 05:19 PM
The current case size is perfect imo. I know Apple likes their products to be as small and quiet as possible but you have to wonder if heat will be an issue with two six core processors in such a small case.
exactly, not to mention throwing in a decent GPU and several HDD's
exactly, not to mention throwing in a decent GPU and several HDD's
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 08:58 PM
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.
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20060727comp.htm
"Intel Corporation today unveiled 10 Intel� Core� 2 Duo and Intel� Core� 2 Extreme processors for consumer and business desktop and laptop PCs..."
The article later goes on to show the advantages of the Mobile PC Processor.
Merom is officially announced. They just don't say Merom.
http://www.intel.com/pressroom/archive/releases/20060727comp.htm
"Intel Corporation today unveiled 10 Intel� Core� 2 Duo and Intel� Core� 2 Extreme processors for consumer and business desktop and laptop PCs..."
The article later goes on to show the advantages of the Mobile PC Processor.
Merom is officially announced. They just don't say Merom.
virus1
Nov 24, 11:36 AM
hahahaa... ROFL...
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
ChickenSwartz
Sep 16, 11:38 AM
Congratulations! You have just provided a second independent source of unnatural delay proving Apple is already manufacturing Merom C2D MBPs and that 17" models will ship behind 15" models by a week Monday October 2.
I tihnk this is even better than the first reported unnatural delay. To take almost an entire month form order to delivery is crazy! Apple better have a damn good reason to delay for so long...and I think they do!
I tihnk this is even better than the first reported unnatural delay. To take almost an entire month form order to delivery is crazy! Apple better have a damn good reason to delay for so long...and I think they do!
McGiord
May 6, 07:13 AM
Who thinks that what happens locally is what only matters is still 'living' in medieval times.
Your so beloved Apple products are produced using mm and fractions of them, and then their specs are "translated" to the proper local units for marketing and local people understanding.
We all live in the same planet, but we are so different.
Like nowadays communicating in English is the common international language, some centuries/years ago was Latin, or French, Portuguese, Spanish, German, Mongol, Chinese, etc...
Similarly with the units of measurement, depending on the region they will become popular or the well known standard that most of the people understand and agrees upon using by default.
Having a clear communication is a key for progress, and even two people think they are speaking in the same language they understand two different things.
What units are used in the Olympic games?
Formula 1 ?
So when you travel it doesn't matter? How many liters of beer are you buying?
How high that building or mountain is?
How far places are?
How much fuel will you need? How much money will you need?
What the temperature is where you are going?
If you do poorly with this basic things, how do you handle currency conversions, when you buy things? You are missing a lit of good things that are out there waiting for you, just because you want to stick with your localized thinking.
Your so beloved Apple products are produced using mm and fractions of them, and then their specs are "translated" to the proper local units for marketing and local people understanding.
We all live in the same planet, but we are so different.
Like nowadays communicating in English is the common international language, some centuries/years ago was Latin, or French, Portuguese, Spanish, German, Mongol, Chinese, etc...
Similarly with the units of measurement, depending on the region they will become popular or the well known standard that most of the people understand and agrees upon using by default.
Having a clear communication is a key for progress, and even two people think they are speaking in the same language they understand two different things.
What units are used in the Olympic games?
Formula 1 ?
So when you travel it doesn't matter? How many liters of beer are you buying?
How high that building or mountain is?
How far places are?
How much fuel will you need? How much money will you need?
What the temperature is where you are going?
If you do poorly with this basic things, how do you handle currency conversions, when you buy things? You are missing a lit of good things that are out there waiting for you, just because you want to stick with your localized thinking.
kingtj
Mar 31, 08:01 AM
Well, first off? I don't think you have to be a socialist to agree that a better society can't be created completely on the profit motive? I've always held the belief that there's a constant need for charities and donations to good causes. Church groups and non-profit organizations provide much of the real assistance needed by people in need in the U.S. -- despite that happening in a non-socialist system. The less your government imposes taxes on you, the more disposable income you have to be able to freely make a choice to donate to the relief effort in Japan, or to "Habitat for Humanity", next time they build a house for someone in need, or ??
By contrast, a lot of our government mandated aid programs wind up causing people to develop a sense of entitlement. Obviously, they usually do a lot of good too -- but I question the efficiency. When charity is done at a local level (like someone's local church), the people involved in the program get to know the recipients personally. There's also the whole "guilt factor" involved, where some people are a little embarrassed to ask for a hand-out. They'll do it if they really need to, but it's also a motivator to do everything they can to try to better their situation so they're not stuck doing it perpetually. With federal govt. based programs, the money invisibly flows right into a checking account or onto a debit card - so it's "painless".
The 'fair' wages and high standard of living the US enjoyed in the past came in large part from exports, ie participation in the global market. The same global market, driven by capitalism, that now demands a reverse in your fortunes because you can no longer compete... the rest of us have no interest in buying US products if they're not competitive, and without our markets your businesses, even those as successful as Apple, wouldn't survive or benefit the US economy as much as they do.
Globalisation isn't a race to the bottom, it's resulting in a fairer distribution of the wealth around the world, driven by nothing more than the free market; it was never a God given right that the US should enjoy a higher standard of living than anyone else.
Ironically I say this as a socialist who believes a better society can't be entirely created from the profit motive - but socialism is apparantly a dirty word in your country too. You're trapped between a rock and a hard place I'd say.
By contrast, a lot of our government mandated aid programs wind up causing people to develop a sense of entitlement. Obviously, they usually do a lot of good too -- but I question the efficiency. When charity is done at a local level (like someone's local church), the people involved in the program get to know the recipients personally. There's also the whole "guilt factor" involved, where some people are a little embarrassed to ask for a hand-out. They'll do it if they really need to, but it's also a motivator to do everything they can to try to better their situation so they're not stuck doing it perpetually. With federal govt. based programs, the money invisibly flows right into a checking account or onto a debit card - so it's "painless".
The 'fair' wages and high standard of living the US enjoyed in the past came in large part from exports, ie participation in the global market. The same global market, driven by capitalism, that now demands a reverse in your fortunes because you can no longer compete... the rest of us have no interest in buying US products if they're not competitive, and without our markets your businesses, even those as successful as Apple, wouldn't survive or benefit the US economy as much as they do.
Globalisation isn't a race to the bottom, it's resulting in a fairer distribution of the wealth around the world, driven by nothing more than the free market; it was never a God given right that the US should enjoy a higher standard of living than anyone else.
Ironically I say this as a socialist who believes a better society can't be entirely created from the profit motive - but socialism is apparantly a dirty word in your country too. You're trapped between a rock and a hard place I'd say.
BRLawyer
Nov 28, 04:31 PM
How do you define a REAL tablet?
A thing the size of a notebook, with an open screen for handwriting...not just like a PDA or vPod.
A thing the size of a notebook, with an open screen for handwriting...not just like a PDA or vPod.
grahamperrin
Nov 17, 04:04 PM
sounds more like a internet security and windows virus detector then a mac AV.
ESET Cybersecurity for Mac
http://www.eset.com/home/cybersecurity-for-mac
�*unless I'm missing something, no on-access scanning
ESET NOD32 Antivirus 4 Business Edition for Mac OS X FAQ
http://kb.eset.com/esetkb/index?page=content&id=SOLN2504
mentions ESET Cybersecurity (Home Edition) for Mac OS X
I'm not looking at the ESET stuff in detail but at a glance, the product range is confusing.
ESET Cybersecurity for Mac
http://www.eset.com/home/cybersecurity-for-mac
�*unless I'm missing something, no on-access scanning
ESET NOD32 Antivirus 4 Business Edition for Mac OS X FAQ
http://kb.eset.com/esetkb/index?page=content&id=SOLN2504
mentions ESET Cybersecurity (Home Edition) for Mac OS X
I'm not looking at the ESET stuff in detail but at a glance, the product range is confusing.
CalBoy
May 5, 02:27 PM
Sorry it took so long to respond to this; I assure you it took only a second to Google (this is just the first result I found):
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 07:36 AM
This wasn't written by hand, it was typed out on a computer. You can save any other arguments you have on the subject, because they don't apply here based on your flawed premise.
To treat this as a programming line or whatever is a simplification. People don't think / they think __ . That is how we should interpret this equation, leading to 288.
To treat this as a programming line or whatever is a simplification. People don't think / they think __ . That is how we should interpret this equation, leading to 288.
EricNau
Nov 26, 10:37 AM
Looks like that 8 pound, 10" iPod might be true after all. :D
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
virus1
Nov 24, 11:36 AM
hahahaa... ROFL...
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
this guy is a fool...
i wonder if creative said the exact same thing back in 2001 reguarding mp3 players?
MacinDoc
Jul 23, 02:00 AM
i think the macbook should get the chips with 2 MB of shared L2 cache,
and the pro's get the chips with 4 MB of shared L2 cache
There will be then a difference between the two models (is having 4mb of shared L2 cache a lot better than 2mb? i have no idea but i presume it is)
or perhaps just let the blackbook have the 2.0ghz chip with 4mb of shared l2 cache to compensate for them charging for colour
...only if the Macbooks also get a price drop, because the Core Duo chips should get a price drop, if Intel even keeps making them.
What everyone keeps forgetting in this discussion, however, is that the Core2 Duo chips will be considerably more energy efficient, reducing heat production and prolonging battery life. Considering that they will be introduced at the same price as the current Core Duo chips, why not use them in the Macbook, at the 2 GHz speed?
Furthermore, transitioning all Macs to 64 bit chips as quickly as possible would also hasten the transition to a true 64 bit system, as developers would have more reason to develop for a 64 bit environment (assuming that OS X 10.5 is truly 64 bit).
and the pro's get the chips with 4 MB of shared L2 cache
There will be then a difference between the two models (is having 4mb of shared L2 cache a lot better than 2mb? i have no idea but i presume it is)
or perhaps just let the blackbook have the 2.0ghz chip with 4mb of shared l2 cache to compensate for them charging for colour
...only if the Macbooks also get a price drop, because the Core Duo chips should get a price drop, if Intel even keeps making them.
What everyone keeps forgetting in this discussion, however, is that the Core2 Duo chips will be considerably more energy efficient, reducing heat production and prolonging battery life. Considering that they will be introduced at the same price as the current Core Duo chips, why not use them in the Macbook, at the 2 GHz speed?
Furthermore, transitioning all Macs to 64 bit chips as quickly as possible would also hasten the transition to a true 64 bit system, as developers would have more reason to develop for a 64 bit environment (assuming that OS X 10.5 is truly 64 bit).
hayesk
Apr 23, 11:08 PM
Wasn't that a big thing from the Leopard announcement?
No. Developers were told to get ready, but with the developer tools, you can see that many still aren't ready, including Apple.
It was never an announced feature for Leopard.
No. Developers were told to get ready, but with the developer tools, you can see that many still aren't ready, including Apple.
It was never an announced feature for Leopard.
gkarris
Mar 26, 10:24 PM
But what's this about an iPad 3? I find that very hard to believe, since Apple clearly said that 2011 will be the Year of the iPad 2.
Probably iPad 2.5 - better cameras in 32, 64, and 128...
Probably iPad 2.5 - better cameras in 32, 64, and 128...
dethmaShine
May 4, 06:03 PM
It'd be cool for Apple to start building a small, fast SSD "drive" (memory chips) into every Mac, that would be dedicated to the core System, and only the System. Small enough to be inexpensive, large enough to easily accommodate current and future System files, fast enough to be faster than any current hard drive. Make the drive say 32 GB, with two partitions. One partition holds the installed System, the other partition is just scratch space for downloaded and uninstalled software, including the System itself. Possibly this partition contains some minimal boot system in order to re-download and install the package from the app store in case the installation gets botched.
I think that has been the idea in the recent disclosures. In my opinion, with the next iMac refresh/redesign, Apple will incorporate a small SSD for system tasks. But I don't think Apple will waste a partition of the expensive and intelligent SSD for just an OS Install.
SSD caching is going to be very important in the future so wasting 4 or 8 gigs of space for no reason sounds a bit stupid to be honest.
But on the same track, Apple could well include the OS in a partition on the HDD itself. Why not? Instead of giving 995.5 GB (out of TB) to users after the OS install, give 990GB. For a user buying more than 500GB of HDD or HDD+SSD combined, it doesn't make much a difference; also make it optional.
I think I did mention this in one of my previous posts that Apple should keep the OS in the HDD itself so there's no need of a disc in most situations.
I think that has been the idea in the recent disclosures. In my opinion, with the next iMac refresh/redesign, Apple will incorporate a small SSD for system tasks. But I don't think Apple will waste a partition of the expensive and intelligent SSD for just an OS Install.
SSD caching is going to be very important in the future so wasting 4 or 8 gigs of space for no reason sounds a bit stupid to be honest.
But on the same track, Apple could well include the OS in a partition on the HDD itself. Why not? Instead of giving 995.5 GB (out of TB) to users after the OS install, give 990GB. For a user buying more than 500GB of HDD or HDD+SSD combined, it doesn't make much a difference; also make it optional.
I think I did mention this in one of my previous posts that Apple should keep the OS in the HDD itself so there's no need of a disc in most situations.
beatybeaty
Apr 26, 03:52 PM
Why do these numbers never make sense to me? Massive iOS device sales, no reports of Android sales, yet -bam - Android takes over the world? I just don't get it...
There are reports like this, then debunked, then a new one, then debunked. What is really going on?
There are reports like this, then debunked, then a new one, then debunked. What is really going on?
TennisandMusic
Apr 5, 01:04 PM
Kind of weird, Apple should not be meddling in that stuff. Way way too domineering.
mvc
Aug 3, 10:45 PM
Who voted negative????? You want it slower, eh? Give the man a G3! No, a 601!
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:11 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I could see iAd playing a role in this decision. Apple
pays for it through ads. Makes sense.
It makes absolutely no sense.
Steve Jobs said iAd was a way to have Free or low cost apps on the app store and still get the developer a little compensation.
How does that translate into a closed cloud service like Mobileme? Apple isn't trying to be Cupertino Google here.
I could see iAd playing a role in this decision. Apple
pays for it through ads. Makes sense.
It makes absolutely no sense.
Steve Jobs said iAd was a way to have Free or low cost apps on the app store and still get the developer a little compensation.
How does that translate into a closed cloud service like Mobileme? Apple isn't trying to be Cupertino Google here.
MonkeyClaw
Nov 30, 09:18 AM
salmon, you hit the nail on the head with that post. A device like that would be amazing, I could totally see myself using it in classes, etc. And though I'm not sure about the $300 price point, but I think its completely doable for under $1000.
KnightWRX
May 6, 07:33 AM
What I really wanted to say is that Google is going to run their datacentres on ARM
There you go again with facts. Citation needed. I think what you want to say here is :
"There was some speculation last year that Google might switch to ARM for their datacenters and servers after an acquisition of an ARM technology company".
There is no way you can state what you are stating as a fact right now. ;)
But the fact that Google bought a company developing ARM processors and also hired engineers from PA Semi that previously worked on Apple's A4 chips
Yes, that is a fact you can state.
means that they ARE going to produce their own ARM chips
Not all acquisitions end up in workable projects. Google does a lot of acquisitions, some of them just end up as IP port-folio fodders, some of them get recycled into products, some of them just get abandonned. Who knows what Google is planning ?
either for their own Android phones or more likely for their datacentres.
How is it more likely for their datacenters, in light of Google's staff saying ARM isn't ready for the datacenter ? I'd say at this point, it's more likely for the Chrome OS based netbooks that will probably never see the light of day officially beyond the Cr48.
There you go again with facts. Citation needed. I think what you want to say here is :
"There was some speculation last year that Google might switch to ARM for their datacenters and servers after an acquisition of an ARM technology company".
There is no way you can state what you are stating as a fact right now. ;)
But the fact that Google bought a company developing ARM processors and also hired engineers from PA Semi that previously worked on Apple's A4 chips
Yes, that is a fact you can state.
means that they ARE going to produce their own ARM chips
Not all acquisitions end up in workable projects. Google does a lot of acquisitions, some of them just end up as IP port-folio fodders, some of them get recycled into products, some of them just get abandonned. Who knows what Google is planning ?
either for their own Android phones or more likely for their datacentres.
How is it more likely for their datacenters, in light of Google's staff saying ARM isn't ready for the datacenter ? I'd say at this point, it's more likely for the Chrome OS based netbooks that will probably never see the light of day officially beyond the Cr48.
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?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar