carlos700
Aug 7, 04:56 PM
The NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT is cool with me. It is actually based on the same chip the GeForce 7600 GT is, just with 4 Pixel Pipelines disabled. It should have been called the GeForce 7600 LE since it is closer to the 7600 than it is to the other 7300s, but whatever...
Nuvi
Nov 16, 02:09 PM
It doesn't appear to be too good at dealing with Time Machine back ups (http://recoveringphysicist.com/17/did-sophos-free-a-v-for-mac-kill-my-time-machine-backups). Tread with caution.
The issue is if you have virus or malware in your TM .sparsebundle and you try to get rid of it by deleting the file. First of all back up with virus or malware in it doesn't sound that great so one should transfer the important files from backup and start fresh with malware free backup. However, SAV shouldn't allow user to choose delete / disinfect if the problem is found on TM backup. It seems that Sophos is taking this issue very seriously and replying to users questions in general on their forums.
Anyway, I've been running SAV in one of my Mac's since they released the free home edition and I have to say I haven't noticed any negative side effects. One big no no for me would be speed impact but in all honestly I haven't noticed anything. I do work in Final Cur Pro so any slowdown on tape captures would be easily noticed (dropped frames especially on uncompressed video).
The issue is if you have virus or malware in your TM .sparsebundle and you try to get rid of it by deleting the file. First of all back up with virus or malware in it doesn't sound that great so one should transfer the important files from backup and start fresh with malware free backup. However, SAV shouldn't allow user to choose delete / disinfect if the problem is found on TM backup. It seems that Sophos is taking this issue very seriously and replying to users questions in general on their forums.
Anyway, I've been running SAV in one of my Mac's since they released the free home edition and I have to say I haven't noticed any negative side effects. One big no no for me would be speed impact but in all honestly I haven't noticed anything. I do work in Final Cur Pro so any slowdown on tape captures would be easily noticed (dropped frames especially on uncompressed video).
MrCrowbar
Nov 23, 11:40 AM
You own Apple do you? My! You've kept a very low profile!
OMG STEVE IS HERE!!!
Besides that he probably is, good one geese. :p
OMG STEVE IS HERE!!!
Besides that he probably is, good one geese. :p
munkery
Nov 9, 03:39 PM
At present the Mac has few threats, those that are in the wild at the moment generally rely on social engineering as opposed to vulnerabilities in the software, however, what we have to remember is that there have been a number of vulernabilities in iOS that have been exploited in order to jailbreak iOS devices (these vulnerabilities in many cases are also common to OSX as they spring from the same codebase), these exploits do provide the ability to gain root access to OSX and hence provide an avenue to install software (without the users knowledge) that could be used to cause the theft or destruction of data.
iOS is 32bit. Many security mitigations in 32bit processes can often be defeated via bruteforce. Snow Leopard is mostly 64bit. 64bit processes have more security mitigations and have not yet been exploited. So, that is why many iOS exploits do not show up in OS X.
The initial hole from Jailbreakme (http://exploiting.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/unpatched-apple-os-x-atsserver-cff-charstrings-index-sign-mismatch-the-jailbreakme-bug-in-osx/) is still not patched. This is the initial arbitrary code execution (patched for iOS) prior to privilege escalation (already patched for iOS not present in OS X) so alone it does not provide root. Interestingly, it only effects Mac OS 10.5.x which contains much more 32 bit.
This vulnerability could be used by a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code, by enticing the user of Mac OS X v10.5.x to view or download a PDF document containing a embedded malicious CFF font (Compact Font Format [1]). Apple Mac OSX 10.6 is not affected by this vulnerability, upgrading to this version is highly recommed when possible.
iOS is 32bit. Many security mitigations in 32bit processes can often be defeated via bruteforce. Snow Leopard is mostly 64bit. 64bit processes have more security mitigations and have not yet been exploited. So, that is why many iOS exploits do not show up in OS X.
The initial hole from Jailbreakme (http://exploiting.wordpress.com/2010/11/09/unpatched-apple-os-x-atsserver-cff-charstrings-index-sign-mismatch-the-jailbreakme-bug-in-osx/) is still not patched. This is the initial arbitrary code execution (patched for iOS) prior to privilege escalation (already patched for iOS not present in OS X) so alone it does not provide root. Interestingly, it only effects Mac OS 10.5.x which contains much more 32 bit.
This vulnerability could be used by a remote attacker to execute arbitrary code, by enticing the user of Mac OS X v10.5.x to view or download a PDF document containing a embedded malicious CFF font (Compact Font Format [1]). Apple Mac OSX 10.6 is not affected by this vulnerability, upgrading to this version is highly recommed when possible.
RichardBeer
Mar 30, 09:11 PM
Any word on the updated OpenGL support?
KnightWRX
Apr 10, 06:56 PM
Really.
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
Sure, everyone likes a budget surplus.
I tend to see it as the government holding on to it for me so I don't spend it and get to then use it as disposable income. ;)
So the government has use of your money all year, and you're OK with that?? :confused:
Sure, everyone likes a budget surplus.
I tend to see it as the government holding on to it for me so I don't spend it and get to then use it as disposable income. ;)
MadDog31
Mar 26, 10:26 PM
I just don't understand the thought of an iPad 3 this fall. Unless they're trying to line up iPad updates with iPod updates, I don't see how this is possible or even really needed. I like the timing of the current releases. It offsets any updates of iPhones and iPods because they all have different release times.
Having iOS 5 this fall does make sense, honestly.
Having iOS 5 this fall does make sense, honestly.
ikir
Apr 20, 04:47 AM
Apple copying the power of the HTC Sensation. They should also concentrate on the IOS because its a joke compared to other new smartphone operating systems.
Troll time? Calling iOS a joke is a joke itself. Feel free to spam here, nice signature lol!
Troll time? Calling iOS a joke is a joke itself. Feel free to spam here, nice signature lol!
-aggie-
May 4, 12:35 PM
What happens when mscriv and a hooker spend the night together? In the morning each of them says: "120 dollars, please."
heisetax
Aug 4, 09:09 AM
Isn't that what Rosetta is for :p :D
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
aricher
Jul 30, 09:27 AM
Also, I have a hard time believing that there is a " tech-unsavvy" photographer doing any work for Apple. Sounds a bit bogus to me.
I used to work as a photo studio manager back in the early/mid 90s. We shot a ton of new products for Motorola back then including one of the first ever small flip phones - the StarTac. The photographer was asked to sign an NDA but the stylist, caterer and me were not. First thing I did when I got out of the shoot that day was tell all my teck-savvy friends about this cool new phone from Moto - but at least I snagged a polaroid to prove it.
That said, this "leak" feels bogus to me as well. I guess we'll see soon enough.
I used to work as a photo studio manager back in the early/mid 90s. We shot a ton of new products for Motorola back then including one of the first ever small flip phones - the StarTac. The photographer was asked to sign an NDA but the stylist, caterer and me were not. First thing I did when I got out of the shoot that day was tell all my teck-savvy friends about this cool new phone from Moto - but at least I snagged a polaroid to prove it.
That said, this "leak" feels bogus to me as well. I guess we'll see soon enough.
Renverse
Apr 18, 03:39 PM
You are funny. Do you know that Samsung spends 10 times more than Apple on R&D?
Indeed. Apple spends less on R&D than many of their competitors.
Indeed. Apple spends less on R&D than many of their competitors.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
kavika411
Apr 15, 04:00 PM
the historical record is more than enough to discount the idea that lowering taxes produces net positives for the economy. America experienced its highest growth years when the top tax rate was over 90% and after taxes had been raised in the 90s. Conversely we've seen a decline in our economic fortunes after 10 years of lower and lower tax rates.
Assuming (1) changes in tax policy have immediate effects, and (2) there is no such thing as as normal economic business cycles that overlay tax changes.
Assuming (1) changes in tax policy have immediate effects, and (2) there is no such thing as as normal economic business cycles that overlay tax changes.
Eldiablojoe
May 3, 10:06 PM
I'm okay following DP for the moment. I'm not so sure that the sequence is as pivotal as portrayed. I think it would be an obvious place, the first starting room, to place vital objects, so exploring is a must. I'm not sure I agree that the "Move, Explore" sequence is more advantageous than the "Explore, Move" sequence. Keeping in mind that we get attacked the moment we move into a room, so we would want to explore it after a monster is vanquished.
Now that she's mi esposa, maybe I can get Beatrice to finally make me a sandwich.
PS-- The BLOWjoe joke is not really as funny as you think it is. It's easier to refer to me as either Dante or EDJ.
Now that she's mi esposa, maybe I can get Beatrice to finally make me a sandwich.
PS-- The BLOWjoe joke is not really as funny as you think it is. It's easier to refer to me as either Dante or EDJ.
johnnyturbouk
Apr 25, 06:51 AM
i would love to get a 27" ACD with retina display - once they have started to incorporate OLED
OLED+retina display :D
OLED+retina display :D
princealfie
Nov 26, 05:06 PM
********ing A. It's about time. I can't wait to retire my Toshiba Tablet PC. This would be an awesome thing for my artwork and drawing and sketching if they can get this right. Go Apple iTablet!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 12, 08:54 AM
I wouldn't hold my breath, the Back to School iPod promo has always been a bait to help clear out old inventory. They won't make it available to buy, online or off, until after the promo ends.
This promo isn't to clear out Mac inventory, if anything it is to clear out iPod stock. If they hold back the Merom MBP just so I can't the free iPod I would be pissed and they would hear about it.
This promo isn't to clear out Mac inventory, if anything it is to clear out iPod stock. If they hold back the Merom MBP just so I can't the free iPod I would be pissed and they would hear about it.
can.rules
Apr 5, 03:54 PM
Hmmm, a car company catering to a group largely comprised of teenagers and young adults whom (presumably) have little disposable income? Doesn't sound like the best idea to me personally, but what do I know...
That actually sounds exactly like the target market for Scions ;)
That actually sounds exactly like the target market for Scions ;)
costmo
Apr 7, 10:01 PM
Seriously? A company with 2 CEO's and 3 COO's is not well structured or well managed. A company who has just downgraded earning expectations for the coming quarter is not well managed. A company whose stock price has crashed by more than 50 % in the last 18 months and is hoping that a new product that has been announced over 8 months ago, yet appears to be rushed to market and as it relies on another product to give it 3G connectivity has neither a product nor is a company with vision.
You assume that the PlayBook and mobile phones compose the entirety of what this company is working on.
Your assumption is wrong.
You assume that the PlayBook and mobile phones compose the entirety of what this company is working on.
Your assumption is wrong.
ssk2
Mar 30, 06:55 AM
I'm not going to give a full critique to Amazon's UI and UX design, but when you look at Apple's UIs and Apple's apps next to these Amazon one's do you not notice a major difference in simplicity, fit and finish, and polish???
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
I'm not saying you can't use the Amazon stuff, but Apple has powerfully demonstrated many times over now for years, that user experience and beautiful design ABSOLUTELY DOES make a big impact!
Take a look at the UI of iBooks, or the new iMovie and Garage Band, or Contacts, or all of the iWork apps on iPad, etc. etc. BEAUTIFUL UIs and very creative, cultural, simplistic and elegant! Also WebOS has some beautiful UI design.
I don't see how Amazon's Cloud UI could be much better. It does follow Apple's UI, but hey, guess what? They're not Apple. Their UI IS very simple, I'd argue elegant and looks functional. As for a UI being 'cultural', you'll have to explain that one...
ChickenSwartz
Aug 3, 07:09 AM
Yeah, what would be the best thing Steve could do Monday is to announce an across the board shift to Core 2 immediately. I don't have the courage to predict this will happen. But it would be the coolest thing in a long time if it does. :cool:
I agree with you it would make the most sense to just do it all at once instead of incrementally - esp since it's only FIVE MONTHS 'til the January 9 SF MacWorld SteveNote where the OctoCore Mac Pro will likely be added above the Quad - maybe even the Leopard release.
I think that would make for an impressive presentation. Steve could say the entire line is now intel and by [whenever] the entire line will be 64-bit. Preview Leopard--Apple's first 64-bit optimized OS.
I think he will want Core 2 in stus ASAP, to stay ahead of the curve. Plus, performance/watt is better <--importatnt to Mr. Jobs.
I agree with you it would make the most sense to just do it all at once instead of incrementally - esp since it's only FIVE MONTHS 'til the January 9 SF MacWorld SteveNote where the OctoCore Mac Pro will likely be added above the Quad - maybe even the Leopard release.
I think that would make for an impressive presentation. Steve could say the entire line is now intel and by [whenever] the entire line will be 64-bit. Preview Leopard--Apple's first 64-bit optimized OS.
I think he will want Core 2 in stus ASAP, to stay ahead of the curve. Plus, performance/watt is better <--importatnt to Mr. Jobs.
zac4mac
Sep 11, 07:13 AM
Seems to me the new 24" iMac is the "Media Player" - My two largest "monitors" are my 23" ACD and a 26" old skool TV. I watch DVDs on the ACD, as I get a little bit more picture and a lot more clarity than on my TV.
Seating accommodations in my office aren't as nice as the living room, but oh well...
Seating accommodations in my office aren't as nice as the living room, but oh well...
KnightWRX
Mar 28, 09:58 AM
Why because it doesn't have a dual core processor, 1GB of RAM ?
Yes, precisely. Android and other handsets are moving to Tegra 2/Orion based platforms with maybe quad core SoCs coming in Fall '11 from nVidia. An A5 equipped iPhone shipping around September would be outdated the minute it hits the shelves as far as hardware is concerned.
With Pocket Legends already reporting that gaming on Android is making them more money than on iOS and this delay in Apple's usual release schedule, it could mean that iOS gaming could lose out to Android and set the pace for future developments, just like what happened to Apple in the 80s with the rise of the PC.
While I doubt we have anything to worry about short term as iOS device owners, if they keep this up in the long term and keep losing ground to Android, it might become a problem.
Yes, precisely. Android and other handsets are moving to Tegra 2/Orion based platforms with maybe quad core SoCs coming in Fall '11 from nVidia. An A5 equipped iPhone shipping around September would be outdated the minute it hits the shelves as far as hardware is concerned.
With Pocket Legends already reporting that gaming on Android is making them more money than on iOS and this delay in Apple's usual release schedule, it could mean that iOS gaming could lose out to Android and set the pace for future developments, just like what happened to Apple in the 80s with the rise of the PC.
While I doubt we have anything to worry about short term as iOS device owners, if they keep this up in the long term and keep losing ground to Android, it might become a problem.