faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:54 AM
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704123204576283580249161342.html
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
Ah, I see. I wasn't checking the WSJ, only Macrumors.
matticus008
Nov 29, 06:13 AM
One wonders why it hasn't been used in a Court of Law.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Not really, though. There are countless ways of maneuvering around any such royalties, from framing it as an access toll to a deposit or anything in between. This added cost doesn't actually get you anywhere in litigation, most importantly because it in no way stipulates between you, the customer, and the label.
What's also interesting is that if this fee is added they have now unwittingly legimized the stolen music.
Far from it. Each tax payer contributes to fund their local DMV, and yet their services aren't free. The state collects a tax on car sales, which goes in most cases to road improvement, police departments, and the DMV (along with a truly bizarre array of other causes), but it's only part of the cost. You also pay taxes to a general fund, which is distributed to agencies and services you may never use (or even be aware of). Contributing some money cannot be construed as contributing sufficient money here.
You also pay for car insurance which protects you in the event of an accident; intentionally putting yourself in an accident is insurance fraud. There's no such thing as "music fraud" (at least in this construction), but the result is a sort of piracy insurance policy for the label. Naturally, though, the labels claim such exorbitant losses and damages from piracy that even $1 per iPod would hardly dent that figure.
If this went into effect, I would have a defense in court when I downloaded the entire Universal Label Catalog (All Their Music) off the net.
If only it worked that way...
Just to be clear, this whole idea of collecting on music players is nothing short of outrageous. But it doesn't have the legal implications or weight that have been popularized here. They CAN have their cake and eat it, too, and they know it. That's why it's important for me to ensure that these false notions don't become ingrained as part of the Internet groupthink--when you step back into the real world, you'll be equally screwed, with or without this fee.
Reach9
Apr 11, 03:47 PM
No I am not kidding. You seem to be a spec whore. If those are the best phones in the market why do multiple iPhone and Blackberry devices outsell the best android phone ALWAYS?
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
I seem to be a spec whore? That's a degrading word, do you rinse your dirty mouth? or I guess your vocabulary is too limited to use other words?
But no i'm not "spec-centralized", i'm not talking about outselling. But if you want to talk about outselling.. The Thunderbolt is outselling the iPhone 4 on Verizon: http://iphone.tmcnet.com/topics/iphone/articles/160082-htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-verizon-wireless.htm
But i could care less what outsells. i'm talking about a user experience as a smartphone, and the iPhone does not deliver, where as Android OS does.
"Like I said, the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone out there" -- That is your opinion, and i frankly disagree. There are much better smartphones out there.
Can you explain why you think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone out there?
Currently, the best combination looks like Android OS phone + iPod Touch.
It sounds like you're a true fanboy!
So a 50" SD tv is better than a 42" High Def tv?
Wow, way to generalize. We're talking about phones. There's a huge difference between a 4" and a 3.5". Personally, Apple should have increased the screen size and then increased the resolution.
People keep wanting to point to these android spec whore of the month models, but they don't offer a superior experience... It is just silly.
Like I said,t he iPhone 4 is stil the best smartphone out there.
The thunderbolt doesn't even come close to outselling the iPhone just on Verizon.
I seem to be a spec whore? That's a degrading word, do you rinse your dirty mouth? or I guess your vocabulary is too limited to use other words?
But no i'm not "spec-centralized", i'm not talking about outselling. But if you want to talk about outselling.. The Thunderbolt is outselling the iPhone 4 on Verizon: http://iphone.tmcnet.com/topics/iphone/articles/160082-htc-thunderbolt-outselling-iphone-4-verizon-wireless.htm
But i could care less what outsells. i'm talking about a user experience as a smartphone, and the iPhone does not deliver, where as Android OS does.
"Like I said, the iPhone 4 is still the best smartphone out there" -- That is your opinion, and i frankly disagree. There are much better smartphones out there.
Can you explain why you think the iPhone 4 is the best smartphone out there?
Currently, the best combination looks like Android OS phone + iPod Touch.
It sounds like you're a true fanboy!
So a 50" SD tv is better than a 42" High Def tv?
Wow, way to generalize. We're talking about phones. There's a huge difference between a 4" and a 3.5". Personally, Apple should have increased the screen size and then increased the resolution.
Multimedia
Aug 26, 11:54 PM
Expect new Merom-based macs, and a new iPod, on September 18th.Please Sustantiate Your Reasoning Why You Think September 18th. :confused: Three more weeks of anxiety ridden torture! :eek:
LanPhantom
Mar 31, 02:35 PM
The biggest advantage always given for Android over iOS is that it's "open source." Well, clearly that's not the case anymore. So, I can't think of any other reason to use Android over iOS, or even Windows 7. It looks like junk, and it's just a cheap ripoff of iOS.
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
I've been wanting to say this for a very long time. Google's OS has no advantage over iOS. You could even say it has a disadvantage. Having to create a vanilla code base that needs to function on multiple pieces of hardware is complex, more complexity creates weaker system.
But here's my point. The ONLY ONLY reason why Android market share is anywhere near what it is today is because of the Buy One Get One options at most phone retailers. iOS has NEVER done that and hopefully never will. If you didn't care about the phone or service but needed two "Newer Smart Phones" one for you and one for your wife, why not go with the "Blah Blah" model from Verizon where if I buy one today I get the second for free (two year agreement and activation fees required).
Market share means nothing. This platform is doomed unless Google reins it in and get control over it. If they do, providers will be less willing to work with them, if they don't, by by Android.
My Two Cents.
-LanPhantom
bdkennedy1
Aug 7, 04:09 PM
heh... they give MS so much crap for photocopying, but if anything, this is more or less taking a page out of MS's book with System Restore. Granted, it looks like it will be better, but still, MS had this kind of thing first.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
I wouldn't say this was copying. A way to backup and restore your files is just common sense. Even if Microsoft didn't have a restore feature, Apple would have come up with it anyway.
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 10:42 PM
Even if that were true, so what? Apple Records was not a competitor of Apple Computer. Trademark law allows multiple companies to have the same trademark so long as they don't sell the same type of products in the same location. This is why you can have a 100 companies like "AAA Locksmith, AAA Laundry," etc. Or you can have "Hollywood Video" in Michigan being totally different than "Hollywood Video" everywhere else [interesting story that. I may have the state wrong.]
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
Only truly "famous" marks (e.g. Coke, McDonalds, etc.) which can be "diluted" by use with other types of products are protected against this sort of thing.
But App Store is like Coke, right? Of course it's ok if Apple does it. They've becoming one of the most hypocritical companies on the planet. Maybe Steve suffers from extreme paranoia?
CaoCao
Mar 1, 04:11 PM
You know how stupid that argument is? You are comparing physical defects to a different mental state. Physiologically, gay people are not any bit different from straight people. (IE one identical twin gay, one not cases...)
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
Here is a much closer analog to your view:
"I hate you for liking the color yellow. Your views are sick and your practice of having yellow things in your home is sick and wrong and immoral. A three thousand year old book written by some uneducated shepperds told me that people who like the color yellow are going to burn in Hell because someone hates them."
Do you see just how stupid this whole thing is?
Well my other options were paedophilia, incest, bestiality etc.
Your analogy does not make sense because I do not hate homosexuals.
I made it quite clearly. If you don't get it, I can't help you any further.
Good to hear. Can we now assume you support marriage rights for gay people?
You have made it quite clear you suffer from a dearth of cogency.
That is their problem, not yours.
You could say the same about the Catholic church. My link was specifically in reply to being asked for evidence - actually proof - that Plato was a homosexual. As for supporting bad stuff, the US Constitution was once quite content to support slavery and the subordination of women, and so were many of the founding fathers, both of the early church and the USA.
What absolute bollocks! Homosexuality does not need treatment, since it is not a disease.
Ah, let us define slavery, does: "slavery is the condition of involuntary servitude in which a human being is regarded as no more than the property of another, as being without basic human rights; in other words, as a thing rather than a person" work for you?
Why not? Whether gays are treated equally under the Constitution has absolutely nothing to do with how you feel about them. Whether you grant them the human dignity of being treated equally has absolutely nothing to do with your Catholic dogma. You are making excuses.
Another red herring: nobody is asking you to be a caregiver, simply to stop pontificating about something you clearly know very little about. You are simply broadcasting your prejudices to no useful effect: you are not going to make anyone heterosexual by trashing their feelings and their very nature, you are just going to add to their discomfiture.
What a pity you did not learn from her to keep your own counsel.
Feeble. Do you pontificate about sky-diving too?
I have read many of Plato's dialogues, in Greek, and studied - and continue to study - Ancient Greek culture in depth. Your Dr Gould is bringing his own prejudices to the table. He should know better.
Homosexual friendship. Right.
But they are treated equal, any gay man can marry a woman and any lesbian woman can marry a man just as any heterosexual man can marry a woman and any heterosexual woman can marry a man
@CoCo & Bill: Please, just stop arguing with bogus reasons. The Catholic Church has everything wrong and upside down and only to control its followers. You two are a perfect example thereof.
CoCo, heterosexuality is not the norm, at least not outside our social understanding. In ancient Greece and Rome, sexuality wasn't even up for discussion. You followed a certain social conduct and explored your sexuality as you saw fit and didn't question it or that of others. When Christianity started taking over the laws and moral standards, they made it so they could control everything people do. Your reasoning comes from the same source as those who wrote the medical journals that condemn homosexuality as a mental illness. They did so out of fear of the unknown - the very essence th the Catholic Church uses to control its followers.
And Bill, please go out and live a little. Get a nice girlfriend and explore your and her sexuality a little and see how much more relaxed your attitude about the world can be. There's more to life than waiting for God's instructions. He certainly wouldn't want you to waste your life on such trivial things like analyzing other people's sexuality.
You two need to expand your world view and accept that there are plenty of things that make you uncomfortable, but there is no reason to condemn them so exhaustingly. You cannot reverse progress and you certainly cannot control the lives of other people.
There are plenty of folks in Northern Africa that can vouch for that.
Nay, the Romans and Greeks failed, they are retrogress
cgc
Jul 21, 03:20 PM
All I will say is that you are not a typical user. You are not even close to typical.
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
OK. So maybe you need ten thousand cores and three million gigabytes of RAM. Don't think for an instant that the majority of the world shares your requirements.
It must take a lot of cores to RIP DVDs and seed them...:confused:
amin
Sep 13, 03:13 PM
The MP is so overkill for my needs right now, I wonder if I'd even notice the difference. I think I'll wait for 32 cores before I update!
Westside guy
Aug 11, 02:27 PM
Hmm... maybe I stand corrected on this - see paragraph three (or four, if you count bullet points as a paragrapn).
T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular and Acquire California/Nevada Network and Spectrum (http://www.t-mobile.com/company/PressReleases_Article.aspx?assetName=Prs_Prs_20040525&title=T-Mobile%20USA%20to%20End%20Network%20Venture%20with%20Cingular%20and%20Acquire%20California/Nevada%20Network%20and%20Spectrum)
I was curious; so I went into my V600's network settings and found a Cingular network. I registered with it, and was able to make a call.
I don't understand why this isn't automatic though. I don't always have coverage at times when my Cingular-using office mate does.
T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular and Acquire California/Nevada Network and Spectrum (http://www.t-mobile.com/company/PressReleases_Article.aspx?assetName=Prs_Prs_20040525&title=T-Mobile%20USA%20to%20End%20Network%20Venture%20with%20Cingular%20and%20Acquire%20California/Nevada%20Network%20and%20Spectrum)
I was curious; so I went into my V600's network settings and found a Cingular network. I registered with it, and was able to make a call.
I don't understand why this isn't automatic though. I don't always have coverage at times when my Cingular-using office mate does.
Unspeaked
Nov 29, 11:10 AM
You posted a list of artist people will start to illegally copy if Universal starts to tax iPods....
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
Hey, what they do with the list is their business...
All I was doing was letting the thread know the breadth of Universal's stable!
;)
mwswami
Jul 22, 09:53 AM
(Cloverton or Clovertown?)
It's Clovertown.
Here is a link to description of the Intel Core Microarchitecture (http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/) on Intel.com. Search for Clovertown.
It's Clovertown.
Here is a link to description of the Intel Core Microarchitecture (http://www.intel.com/technology/architecture/coremicro/) on Intel.com. Search for Clovertown.
charlituna
Apr 11, 10:00 PM
This is bunk. Apple will not miss Christmas.
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
Dear Steve.
I read on macrumors.com that the new iPhone won't be ready for Christmas. What should we do.
-- Santa.
Dear Santa.
Move Christmas.
-- Steve
borisadmin
Jul 28, 08:00 AM
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
Thanks heaps gnasher729, that's exactly the kind of perspective I was looking for! I'll wait until WWDC to see if there's a bump, but I need to upgrade my PB G4 12" because the optical drive has broken, so I think I'll get a Macbook then regardless.
Thanks heaps gnasher729, that's exactly the kind of perspective I was looking for! I'll wait until WWDC to see if there's a bump, but I need to upgrade my PB G4 12" because the optical drive has broken, so I think I'll get a Macbook then regardless.
balamw
Apr 6, 04:22 PM
He's still using that 2,000,000 Tabs "shipped", adding it to iPads sold in the same period, and finding the Tab's number is 30% of the total. Very..."smooth", could I say?
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
These would be the very same Tabs I see pallets of at Costco, while everyone else is sold out of iPad 2s. Got it.
B
mactoday
Apr 6, 10:49 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Actually there is Core i7 2657M at 1.6Ghz 2 Cores with HT (4 threads) with turbo up to 2.4Ghz. TDP 17Watt. Looks better chip for top model 13" MacBook Air. Don't you think so? :)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/02/11/094654-mba.jpg
As reported by Fudzilla (http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/22323-new-17w-core-i7-king-brand-is-2657m) and HardMac (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2011/04/06/intel-to-launch-sandy-bridge-chips-that-could-be-found-in-the-new-macbook-air), Intel is about to launch its next generation Sandy Bridge ultra low voltage CPUs suitable for the MacBook Air.
Due to the MacBook Air's thin form factor, it has required the use of particularly low power CPUs from Intel. Apple has stuck with Core 2 Duo processors with a maximum Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 10-17W. Apple is believed to have continued to use this older processor design in order to keep NVIDIA's graphics chips powering their ultracompact notebook. Due to licensing disputes (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/01/10/nvidia-and-intel-settle-nvidia-still-prohibited-from-building-chipsets-for-newest-intel-processors/), NVIDIA was prohibited from building newer chipsets that supported Intel's newest processors.
With the release of Sandy Bridge, Intel upgraded the performance of their integrated graphics chipset. This was good enough (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/24/apple-launches-macbook-pros-with-thunderbolt-quad-core-cpus-amd-gpus/) for Apple to offer in their latest 13" MacBook Pros, so we expect it will be good enough for the upcoming MacBook Airs as well. Apple had been previously rumored (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/02/11/macbook-air-sandy-bridge-update-in-june/) to be introducing the "Sandy Bridge" MacBook Airs this June.
HardMac pinpoints the Core i5 2537M (17W) as the possible chip to be used, at least in the 13" model:Meanwhile, the current 11" MacBook air uses an even lower power (10W) processor, but it's not clear how much power savings is offered by removing the need for the NVIDIA graphics chipset, as the Intel solution is integrated within the processor itself.
Article Link: Intel Launching Next Generation MacBook Air Processors (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/06/intel-launching-next-generation-macbook-air-processors/)
Actually there is Core i7 2657M at 1.6Ghz 2 Cores with HT (4 threads) with turbo up to 2.4Ghz. TDP 17Watt. Looks better chip for top model 13" MacBook Air. Don't you think so? :)
bokdol
Aug 18, 09:48 AM
you take everything east of kansas and i will take the western region of the usa
when we have enough money, i can go raid asia and australia/new zealand for old G5s and you can go after europe and the middle east
when we are done we will be rich and could sit on the same oil board as bin laden, dick cheney, and several of the bush family members
and based on who is taller, one of us could be dr. evil and the other one will be mini me
sound good?
damn and i wanted asia... ahh but europe wont be too bad. damn it i am 5'7 so i might end up with the short end of the stick.
when we have enough money, i can go raid asia and australia/new zealand for old G5s and you can go after europe and the middle east
when we are done we will be rich and could sit on the same oil board as bin laden, dick cheney, and several of the bush family members
and based on who is taller, one of us could be dr. evil and the other one will be mini me
sound good?
damn and i wanted asia... ahh but europe wont be too bad. damn it i am 5'7 so i might end up with the short end of the stick.
LethalWolfe
Apr 5, 08:07 PM
As someone who's attended NAB yearly, (and again this year) Apple has not had a presence there since and currently are NOT on the exhibitor list for this years convention. Will take pics if I'm wrong though.
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
The Supermeet is a meet-up of Final Cut Pro User Groups from across the country that coincides with NAB. It is not a part of NAB itself.
Lethal
SevenInchScrew
Dec 8, 12:05 PM
Actually, Sony explained that the damage is not unlocked or progressive as one dives deeper into the game. It's just that as one goes further into the game, one is able to FINALLY collect more premium cars which do have the better damage engine.
This is exactly opposite to what I've read and seen in the game.
This is exactly opposite to what I've read and seen in the game.
marksman
Mar 31, 04:37 PM
no, the question is: "Is this evil?" when google starts rejecting Facebook Android phones, or android versions using Bing and not Google...
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
thats the question.
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
Kranchammer
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
HecubusPro
Aug 26, 04:22 PM
same here! I just hope Sept 5th or sooner:D
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
I would hope within the first few weeks of September at least. I shipments Apple was supposed to receive from overseas will reportedly hit on the 5th of September. After that, it would seem that all Apple has to do is ship products to the resellers and their online warehouses and begin selling them. I'm thinking the merom MBP's will start shipping to coincide with the Paris Expo next month though.
Still, it's getting close. I went ahead and dropped some cash on my first .mac account/software. I just can't wait to start using it on my new merom MPB 2.33ghz 17".:cool:
Silentwave
Jul 15, 05:55 PM
Too many people are complaining about rumored information that isn't even reliable, and most likely incorrect.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.
I agree with you whole-heartedly!
The one question I do have is why is the Mac Pro the last to make this transition, why has it taken so long? Is it simply due to chip availability, is it due to some radical new design, or is it because the Mac Pro is Apple's flagship product and Apple is working long and hard to wedge in some great new technology?
Great new technologies always made their way to the Power Macs first, and then trickled down the line. I have every faith that the Mac Pro will continue this tradition, especially since the Mac Pro will be competing with other high-end Xeon workstations. Apple will need something in the Mac Pro that nobody else has, and it will also need to utilize Intel's fastest chips in order to dispel any notions of the system being weaker than the competition in terms of speed -- this is a dark cloud over the Mac that finally needs to be cleared.
You hit the nail right on the head with the processor availability. Core Duo uses the pentium M architecture and was only in two versions: mobile, codename Yonah with its variants, and a pair of low speed ultra low power server chips- Sossaman- only going up to 2GHz with 2MB L2 and 667 FSB. the other Xeons (Paxville/Dempsey) and high end chips like the Pentium D/Pentium Extreme Edition ( Smithfield/Presler) are all using NetBurst architecutre, which is obsolete and very inefficient plus they are extremely power hungry and hot.The top Pentium Extreme Edition Presler dual core at 3.73GHz was easily outperformed by several of the Conroe cores- I recall one test where it was neck and neck with the 1.83GHz Core 2 Duo.
They wanted the fastest chips possible using the best architecture possible- that is Woodcrest and Conroe with the Core microarchitecture.
I have little doubt that the 3GHz Xeon 5160 will be in the Mac Pros, if not standard, then as a BTO option.