avkills
Jul 14, 02:35 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid. 2 Optical drives is fine by me, although I am good with just one. But the post above about a Blu-Ray drive would make having 2 logical, one is Blue-ray, other is DVD/CD +/- RW.
-mark
-mark
jeremy.king
Jun 15, 09:58 AM
My wife walked into store about an hour ago. Reserved a 16GB and a 32GB without issue. We were offered store credit for trade-ins but don't have to decide until we purchase, and $20 accessory credit as well. We were informed that we may not get them on launch day, but we would have them by 6/28 at the latest. I'm fine with this, and so far I'm pleased with Radio Shack.
Folke Sonin
Jun 12, 09:55 PM
I went to my local radio shack tonight to find out about the pre order process. The store manager showed me their internal website where from June 24th to July 15th they were guaranteeing 100$ for any iPhone 3G in excellent condition and at least 200$ for any iPhone 3GS in excellent condition. As of today my iPhone 3G with 8 GB of flash was appraised for 118$. So on June 24th I might loose 18$ :-) You should go to Radio Shack and ask for the manager. She or he will be able to tell you what they can do.
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
AidenShaw
Sep 15, 06:40 AM
And of course, NT started as a reimplementation of VMS for a failed Intel RISC CPU...
A cancelled Digital RISC CPU.
Although, some of the ideas for the cancelled CPU ended up in the Alpha chips.
A cancelled Digital RISC CPU.
Although, some of the ideas for the cancelled CPU ended up in the Alpha chips.
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:38 PM
So if the new iMacs are using 64-bit merom or conroe chips, what is the likelihood of them offering 4Mb of RAM?
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
And if they did, is the RAM likely to cost any more than it does for the current iMacs, due to the no of slots?I think you mean 4GB of RAM. The likelyhood of Apple offering it is ZERO. If they did, it would be offered for two to three times what you could buy it from a third party.
2GB sticks are still too expensive. See the G5 Quad prices for 2GB sticks:
Non ECC is $4700 for 8 sticks $587.50 each or $1175 per pair
ECC is $10,300 for 8 sticks or $1287.50 each or $2575 per pair
These prices are not in the class that an iMac buyer would want to consider paying.
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.
srxtr
Mar 31, 03:57 PM
Please, enlighten us, how does fragmentation bite Android's ass when it is the #1 smartphone OS. Regardless what you think, Android and iOS are by far the most successful OS in the last 5 years.
Android is a good OS, and even better when the phone it comes in is offered for free.
Free phones are usually hard to beat. I'm sure the iOS would win if the iPhone came free with contract.
Android is a good OS, and even better when the phone it comes in is offered for free.
Free phones are usually hard to beat. I'm sure the iOS would win if the iPhone came free with contract.
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:48 PM
The First Commercial GUI
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Oh!
kevin garnett dunking the ball
Kevin Garnett: The Man.
Boston#39;s Kevin Garnett dunks
Kevin Garnett Kevin Garnett #5
dunk over Kevin Garnett
Kevin Garnett dunks the
Kevin Garnett had 19 points
Kevin Garnett throws down a
Kevin Garnett of the Celtics
kevin garnett dunking on
Dunks On Kevin Garnett
http://img62.imageshack.us/img62/5659/star1vg.gif
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/7892/leopardpreviewdesktop4.jpghttp://img714.imageshack.us/img714/5733/xerox8010star.gif
Oh!
kresh
Sep 19, 11:34 AM
The thing is Apple is shooting itself in the foot because it knows that all the Prosumers research enough that they know there is better available. Apple is losing alot of sales by not being prepared. I would think that Apple would get 2nd priority to Dell on shipments so they should have a good stock of C2D.
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
Where's your proof that Apple is losing a lot of sales by not being prepared?
If everone that ever visited MacRumors got mad and purchased a Dell, that would not be a lot.
Are you just making this up?
swingerofbirch
Aug 26, 07:39 PM
I hope they use Conroe in the iMac over Merom. Conroe is faster than Merom at cheaper prices. But it would mean more hardware tweaking that plopping a Merom in there.
andrewm
Aug 23, 11:07 AM
I did...:D
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
Most agreed. I'm using an iBook G4 right now, but I'd practically sell my kidneys (both of 'em!) to convert it to a MacBook Pro.
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.
DIE POWER PC...DIE!!!
Most agreed. I'm using an iBook G4 right now, but I'd practically sell my kidneys (both of 'em!) to convert it to a MacBook Pro.
Let us continue to pray for a speedy death to the Macintosh PowerPC computer.
PODshady
Nov 28, 10:24 PM
I think they'll be a long way off getting money from every iPod sold. For a start its such an illogical thing to ask for (Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope), plus I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
If the labels were to go to Apple and demand a royalty on every iPod and threatening to pull their catalogue if they didn't get it, they would actually come off worse than Apple in terms of lost revenue and it's because of this I reckon they haven't a chance...
I agree
SPUY767
Jul 27, 03:38 PM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
NJRonbo
Jun 14, 03:59 PM
Okay here's the deal....
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
None of the Radio Shack stores in our area
know anything yet because there is a conference
call within the hour.
Let me explain...
Called another RS store in the area. Was told
that they don't know anything about iPhone preorders
tomorrow simply because they are all due for a
conference call within the hour from corporate to
discuss what the procedure will be.
So, perhaps you store already got the news.
I will say this. The woman at the second RS
store took down my phone number and said she
would personally call me later today to give me
all the details.
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.
BRLawyer
Aug 20, 02:02 PM
Freescale? Where does Freescale have a 64 -bit spot on their road map? (I want to know) Could this be.. really? Freescale? Now there's a twist I for one, did not see
Are they still around? I thought their business was all about embedded procs for cars and radios... :rolleyes:
Are they still around? I thought their business was all about embedded procs for cars and radios... :rolleyes:
PCMacUser
Aug 27, 07:39 AM
Yes, and as someone has already pointed out, if the Core2 can do 20% better with the same power, can't you just throttle your new Core2 MBP down 20% and get a laptop with the same performance of your old one with 20% better battery life?
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
It's quite common in the PC laptop world to do exactly that - using the BIOS to drop the default clock speed and/or voltage of the CPU to extend battery life. But that requires a BIOS which Apples don't have. Perhaps it can be done another way...
Talk about not seeing the forest through the trees. :rolleyes:
It's quite common in the PC laptop world to do exactly that - using the BIOS to drop the default clock speed and/or voltage of the CPU to extend battery life. But that requires a BIOS which Apples don't have. Perhaps it can be done another way...
generik
Sep 19, 02:45 AM
Check out the surveys of tens of thousands of computer users at Consumer Reports. Apple's laptop reliability is within 1% of the best in the industry, and in the desktop department, Apple is by far the most reliable; some PCs are nearly twice as likely to need repairs as Macs. Rumor sites are hardly the best place to look for computer reliability data...
Ok... I suppose you like to put that much stock into Consumer Reports published by unbiased organisations! Now please excuse me, I need to place my order for some Snake Oil to take advantage of this "Buy 1 get 1 free" promotion on TV :rolleyes:
I don't really believe in all those reports, to date I have owned countless PCs (actually a lot of Thinkpads) and never once have I gotten a DOA, but yet there was actually one champion who got 5 DOAs in a row. Sure it can be argued that forums are hardly the best place to draw your sample, but how can it possibly be SO bad?! When I hardly ever got a single bad PC?
Edit: Oh and by the way, I have dealt with Applecare twice at various times for the last 4 Macs I owned (1 PBG4, 2 Minis, 1 Macbook), I have to say I am not WOWed by Apple's service at all. Likewise if you ask around here you will find that Dell actually gives pretty no quibble service. Perhaps they know what they are selling is crap and hence are not surprised when it goes bad.. who knows... but I'd rather deal with a humble organisation than a "Think different" know-it-all turd.
Ok... I suppose you like to put that much stock into Consumer Reports published by unbiased organisations! Now please excuse me, I need to place my order for some Snake Oil to take advantage of this "Buy 1 get 1 free" promotion on TV :rolleyes:
I don't really believe in all those reports, to date I have owned countless PCs (actually a lot of Thinkpads) and never once have I gotten a DOA, but yet there was actually one champion who got 5 DOAs in a row. Sure it can be argued that forums are hardly the best place to draw your sample, but how can it possibly be SO bad?! When I hardly ever got a single bad PC?
Edit: Oh and by the way, I have dealt with Applecare twice at various times for the last 4 Macs I owned (1 PBG4, 2 Minis, 1 Macbook), I have to say I am not WOWed by Apple's service at all. Likewise if you ask around here you will find that Dell actually gives pretty no quibble service. Perhaps they know what they are selling is crap and hence are not surprised when it goes bad.. who knows... but I'd rather deal with a humble organisation than a "Think different" know-it-all turd.
milo
Jul 20, 04:34 PM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
Phat Elvis
Aug 11, 11:21 AM
G5 iPhones next Tuesday.
Just awesome :D .
Just awesome :D .
troop231
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
I agree.
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
But who in their right minds would want to own something called a Playbook? :o
Hugh Hefner of course.. :cool:
Mr. Gates
Jun 8, 11:20 PM
You mean "The Shack"
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
They are pretty much ONLY a phone store now
They lost the Mojo
Boycott them
Silentwave
Jul 15, 01:10 AM
It would be ridiculous if it came with just 512 mb's of ram...
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
I honestly think it'll have 1GB standard- they can save money by not having to bother with FB-DIMM 512s. its cheaper to just get 1 and 2 gig increments.
Steve Jobs-"The New Octa-Core Mac Pro with 512 mb's of ram" It just doesn't fit...
I honestly think it'll have 1GB standard- they can save money by not having to bother with FB-DIMM 512s. its cheaper to just get 1 and 2 gig increments.
jeremy.king
Jun 15, 09:58 AM
My wife walked into store about an hour ago. Reserved a 16GB and a 32GB without issue. We were offered store credit for trade-ins but don't have to decide until we purchase, and $20 accessory credit as well. We were informed that we may not get them on launch day, but we would have them by 6/28 at the latest. I'm fine with this, and so far I'm pleased with Radio Shack.
No comments:
Post a Comment