DotCom2
Mar 28, 11:04 AM
This is all making sense to me now.
When they said that a white iPhone 4 would come out in the Spring. I thought to myself, why in the world would they release a white iP4 this late in the cycle when the iPhone 5 would be out in just a couple more months???
Why you ask? BECAUSE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE AN IPHONE 5 THIS YEAR!
THAT'S WHY!
OMG!
I'm on a 3GS and have been waiting for iP5 to upgrade! :mad::mad::mad:
When they said that a white iPhone 4 would come out in the Spring. I thought to myself, why in the world would they release a white iP4 this late in the cycle when the iPhone 5 would be out in just a couple more months???
Why you ask? BECAUSE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE AN IPHONE 5 THIS YEAR!
THAT'S WHY!
OMG!
I'm on a 3GS and have been waiting for iP5 to upgrade! :mad::mad::mad:
iStudentUK
May 3, 06:36 AM
<aside>
Ah yes, the 20-oz English pint vs. the 16-oz American one. :D
And near-beer at that!! :p
</aside>
When I went to Switzerland they sold beer in litre glasses. That was a good trip! :D
Just wish they did proper ale not just lager!
Ah yes, the 20-oz English pint vs. the 16-oz American one. :D
And near-beer at that!! :p
</aside>
When I went to Switzerland they sold beer in litre glasses. That was a good trip! :D
Just wish they did proper ale not just lager!
Andronicus
Apr 18, 02:50 PM
Release the hounds
balamw
Apr 10, 06:20 PM
Finally, humour.
My calculator has been stuck on 58008 (http://www.cafepress.com/boobylicious3) for years. :p Or maybe it was just saying 07734?
B
My calculator has been stuck on 58008 (http://www.cafepress.com/boobylicious3) for years. :p Or maybe it was just saying 07734?
B
macman4291
Jul 24, 12:39 AM
No. Processors Are Soldered In MacBooks and MacBook Pros So No Upgrades Are Possible.
The way you do the upgrade is by selling your current model and buying the next one. It's called rolling over your Mac for the next one. Some of us here have done it numerous times. It's not hard to get a good price for your used Mac. By doing this at the beginning of every update, it only cost you a few hundred dollars to move up each time.
Would it be worth it rolling over my 17 in macbook pro, w/ a 2.16 core duo to a macbook pro w/ merom chip and other new attributes. Would there be a significant difference in speed , ect. that would make it worth it. , and if so, what would i do about my registered applecare protection plan?
The way you do the upgrade is by selling your current model and buying the next one. It's called rolling over your Mac for the next one. Some of us here have done it numerous times. It's not hard to get a good price for your used Mac. By doing this at the beginning of every update, it only cost you a few hundred dollars to move up each time.
Would it be worth it rolling over my 17 in macbook pro, w/ a 2.16 core duo to a macbook pro w/ merom chip and other new attributes. Would there be a significant difference in speed , ect. that would make it worth it. , and if so, what would i do about my registered applecare protection plan?
ebuc
Jul 21, 05:16 PM
If Intel really can start shipping merom by early August (and we see another manufacturer or two ship such laptops), then WWDC would be a perfectly fine place to introduce new MacBook Pros. But I doubt they'll be ready that early.
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually.
The iBooks got a big case revision when they moved into the Intel MacBook world, the MacBook-Pros-that-look-like-PowerBooks should, too.
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually.
The iBooks got a big case revision when they moved into the Intel MacBook world, the MacBook-Pros-that-look-like-PowerBooks should, too.
adbe
Apr 5, 02:17 PM
Companies have a right then to make money on it and Apple cannot actively try to cut off the ability of another company to make money off the Iphone legally, its called restraint of trade, a federal law.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
tonyoramos1
Apr 24, 01:48 PM
@KnightWRX
Glad we agree, but who would ever purchase an ACD? Buying an overpriced, inferiorly performing, glare-crazy Apple display device is the height of Apple brainwashing.
It says a lot that my education college professors owned several back when they were $3000, yet complained about budget cuts. You know the study: Mac users are statistically hippy liberal douches. Like VW Bug owners.
Glad we agree, but who would ever purchase an ACD? Buying an overpriced, inferiorly performing, glare-crazy Apple display device is the height of Apple brainwashing.
It says a lot that my education college professors owned several back when they were $3000, yet complained about budget cuts. You know the study: Mac users are statistically hippy liberal douches. Like VW Bug owners.
Jape
Nov 18, 05:06 PM
You are correct! We will be releasing our car kit sometime in December. It works with any iPhone GPS app, so you are not limited to just use ours! =)
Some features include:
I also performed in quot;Beauty
Gaston
Beauty and the Beast
Walt Disney#39;s Beauty and the
The Beauty and the Beast:
Some features include:
nuckinfutz
May 7, 10:12 AM
It's naive to assume that Apple won't use MobileMe data in the future to serve you ads
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
It's illogical to think they will. Apple sees iAds as a way for developers to deliver free or $.99 apps on the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad without going broke. iAds are not something that Apple wants to push beyond their mobile offering and app store. They have no history looking to leverage advertising.
Well we must think that they're building the NC datacenter for a reason. Initially I thought it was an average sized datacenter but it is in fact humongous (5x larger than their California datacenter) so clearly they have BIG cloud plans.
Given the [lack of acceptable] performance of the current service, all of these things are just going to be painful to use. If they can devote some more bandwidth to them, I could see it being a hit.
It's illogical to think they will. Apple sees iAds as a way for developers to deliver free or $.99 apps on the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad without going broke. iAds are not something that Apple wants to push beyond their mobile offering and app store. They have no history looking to leverage advertising.
Well we must think that they're building the NC datacenter for a reason. Initially I thought it was an average sized datacenter but it is in fact humongous (5x larger than their California datacenter) so clearly they have BIG cloud plans.
RalfTheDog
Apr 7, 12:07 PM
Apple is anticompetitive and should be shut down. By producing products customers want when others in the industry can't, they are forcing the competition out of business.
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
mlrproducts
Aug 11, 09:34 AM
Yes but remember Leopard is not going to be only 64-bit, it will run 32-bit and 64-bit applications side by side.
And also that it won't be out til January or later... plenty of time (closer to the 1st of the year) for them to upgrade..
And also that it won't be out til January or later... plenty of time (closer to the 1st of the year) for them to upgrade..
codyc815
Apr 26, 04:51 PM
you guys are still in denial.
the fact is...most people dont want an iphone. the reports says it and the sales numbers proves it. its not about the limit availability of the iphone or contract issues...its just doesn't appeal to most people.
That's why, although they're not the main OS used, they are the number one phone supplier
the fact is...most people dont want an iphone. the reports says it and the sales numbers proves it. its not about the limit availability of the iphone or contract issues...its just doesn't appeal to most people.
That's why, although they're not the main OS used, they are the number one phone supplier
mcrain
Apr 14, 04:25 PM
It's time to raise the capital gains rate and make it progressively tied to income taxes.
Or just treat all income as ordinary income and eliminate all the preferential treatment certain forms of income enjoy. Eliminate capital gain, business, gift and estate taxes, and treat all income from all sources as ordinary income and tax accordingly.
Beast middot; Hugh Jackman in
laura, Beauty
Gaston! Beauty and the Beast!
look like Gaston in Beauty
Staring Gaston, Beauty and the
Or just treat all income as ordinary income and eliminate all the preferential treatment certain forms of income enjoy. Eliminate capital gain, business, gift and estate taxes, and treat all income from all sources as ordinary income and tax accordingly.
dontwalkhand
Apr 20, 01:18 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone : Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
I am happy for this, this means when my upgrade happens, iPhone 6 will be a HUGE one :-)
I am happy for this, this means when my upgrade happens, iPhone 6 will be a HUGE one :-)
unlinked
Apr 25, 11:14 AM
Correct, and that's why Steve is telling the truth unlike the trolls pretending this is an Apple conspiracy. That file is stuck on your hard disk and goes nowhere. Delete it and you don't even have that (as I did months ago when this story first broke). I tried the mapping tool and it won't work on my machine because consolidated.db cannot be found. Yet my iPhone works just fine, and Location Services works fine too.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
So the database exists for no reason at all? Sounds somewhat unlikely to me.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
So the database exists for no reason at all? Sounds somewhat unlikely to me.
jaxstate
Aug 4, 08:38 AM
How do you know this. Are you some type of design tester for intel?
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
What is really going to help merom on the Mac are the SSE units. It has three to yonah's one . Mac OS X makes a lot better use of SIMD units than windows.
The 400 series celerons aren't that slow. They're more or less a Core Solo with a smaller cache.
viperGTS
Mar 26, 10:23 PM
i want what the "reliable sources" are smoking.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
Anonymous Freak
May 6, 12:17 AM
Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Article Link: Apple to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Yeah, but making the prediction "Apple is going to continue their long-standing practice of alternating between GPU vendors by switching to the other one!" is a heck of a lot easier to make than "Apple is going to throw away tons of user goodwill by screwing them through yet another architecture change!"
Just last week, there was a rumor that Apple would have their custom ARM chips fabbed by Intel. That strikes me as a *LOT* more believable than Apple switching away from Intel now.
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
At this point, pure rumor, not even vaporware, as vaporware implies the company has actually announced something.
ARM does have chips that can compete at the very lowest end of x86, such as with the chips presently running Netbooks. But it doesn't have anything even remotely competitive with the mainstream chips. (To use names: They compete with Atom, not with Core.)
Article Link: Apple to Move from Intel to ARM Processors in Future Laptops? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/06/apple-to-move-from-intel-to-arm-processors-in-future-laptops/)
Yeah, but making the prediction "Apple is going to continue their long-standing practice of alternating between GPU vendors by switching to the other one!" is a heck of a lot easier to make than "Apple is going to throw away tons of user goodwill by screwing them through yet another architecture change!"
Just last week, there was a rumor that Apple would have their custom ARM chips fabbed by Intel. That strikes me as a *LOT* more believable than Apple switching away from Intel now.
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
At this point, pure rumor, not even vaporware, as vaporware implies the company has actually announced something.
ARM does have chips that can compete at the very lowest end of x86, such as with the chips presently running Netbooks. But it doesn't have anything even remotely competitive with the mainstream chips. (To use names: They compete with Atom, not with Core.)
marksman
Apr 7, 07:19 PM
I don't know if I buy this whole shortage thing.
If there is such a big shortage, why aren't people/businesses creating more production plants and capitalizing on the demand (which is only getting started from the looks of it). Where there is serious demand there is serious $$$ to be made!
It seems like basic economics to me but I've been wrong before...
There was no production of these screens two years ago. The demand has far outrstripped any expectations anyone would have had 3 years ago. It takes time to get new plants online.
I suspect Apple's long-term contracts with suppliers include future factories and production being brought online to help boost their ability to provide screens. It takes time though.
If there is such a big shortage, why aren't people/businesses creating more production plants and capitalizing on the demand (which is only getting started from the looks of it). Where there is serious demand there is serious $$$ to be made!
It seems like basic economics to me but I've been wrong before...
There was no production of these screens two years ago. The demand has far outrstripped any expectations anyone would have had 3 years ago. It takes time to get new plants online.
I suspect Apple's long-term contracts with suppliers include future factories and production being brought online to help boost their ability to provide screens. It takes time though.
Mac'nCheese
Apr 9, 08:11 PM
It's 2. Deal 288 people.
You are 100% wrong. Ask any elementary school math teacher.
You are 100% wrong. Ask any elementary school math teacher.
adrock
Jul 22, 12:55 AM
Monday is the 24th not the 23rd
mrsir2009
Mar 30, 10:21 PM
Yay Lion is getting closer.
Makosuke
May 6, 05:10 AM
I'm not so much joining in the discussion as publicly recording what I think is going to happen in a few years based not really on this prediction, but the way things are going in general, so that I can point to this post in a few years and either say "I told you so" or "look how clueless I was."
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
I think this prediction is right, at least in general terms, and while to hardcore geeks it may sound like a terrible idea, I doubt it is, and it makes a great deal of sense to Apple. That said, I expect Apple will continue to sell "pro" systems of some sort based on Intel chips for the foreseeable future, to cover the developer/Photoshop-jockey/video-editor market. They're just not going to sell all that many of them.
This is why the ARM transition will not be like the Intel transition (and remember we're not talking about something happening tomorrow):
For one thing, two years is a lot of time at the rate the ARM architecture has been advancing. Predicting anything about how fast the chips will be in 2013 (or how much Intel will have advanced by then) is difficult.
In the quarter the G5 Power Mac first shipped, back in Apple earned $44M on $1.7B in sales, and shipped 787K Macs. In the quarter the first Intel iMacs shipped, in Apple earned $410M on $4.36B, and sold 1.1M Macs.
In the most recent quarter, Apple's profit was $6B--more than their gross in and almost as much as the entire company's gross for all of 2003--on gross income of close to $25B. They sold 3.76M Macs, and more notably 4.69M iPads and well over 20M small-screen iOS devices. They also have something like $65 billion sitting in the bank, which is ridiculous.
Contrast this with Intel, which in the last quarter was doing extremely well, with gross of $12.8B and net of $3.16B. Or, for that matter, IBM, which had revenue of $24B and earnings of $2.9B.
In Apple was a relatively small-time player that got IBM to design a wicked-fast custom desktop CPU. In 2006 they were a somewhat larger company mostly on account of selling a lot of iPods, and weren't in a strong enough position to get IBM to do what they needed with the PPC architecture to the point it could compete with Intel's upcoming Core architecture. Today their Mac business alone is three times what it was then, it's the only segment of the PC industry actually expanding, and the company is HUGE--twice the size of Intel, in terms of financials. Heck, they could buy a controlling stake in Intel based purely on that company's market cap with cash on hand.
Further, of all those 25M+ iOS devices last quarter, every single one was running an ARM processor. While nearly 4 million Macs is nothing to sneeze at, Apple's bread and butter is iOS and ARM-based systems. They know them, they control the whole package, and they have an in-house CPU team for the architecture. One that, based on performance comparisons with the Xoom, is doing its job quite well. They've also managed to sell these devices at prices so low other companies are having serious trouble matching them, while maintaing very healthy profit margins.
As far as Apple is concerned--and with good reason--iOS on ARM is their future. There's no reason to stop selling Macs, but the market for console-style computers is not likely limited to handhelds and tablets--there's almost certainly a lot of demand in the bigger-laptop-with-a-keyboard space as well as large-screen desktops. With the rate of CPU power increase in ARM chips, within a couple of years they're likely to be powerful enough to comfortably handle desktop tasks, particularly considering that the average user really doesn't have any use for anything more than a basic dual-core system--everything else is for pros and bragging rights.
So, by way of prediction, I'd assume that Apple will continue to beef up its in-house ARM team, and once the desktop-grade chips are in place leverage that to replace what we currently think of as consumer Macs with beefier, larger-screen iOS based devices (or perhaps some iOS/MacOS hybrid thing to better handle indirect input, since pointing at a 27" touchscreen is ridiculous for more than a few minutes).
After all, Apple could--and very will might--dump a few billion dollars of their hoard into advancing the ARM architecture in some way that competitors can't match, and/or building out chip fab capabilities to keep prices low and availability high. Intel's entire R&D budget for 2010 was in the range of $6B, AMD's wasn't much over $1B, and Apple likes to control their own destiny, so it's not out of the question if they can hire good enough people.
I also bet that they will keep some "pro" machines--perhaps even those that'll keep the "Mac" moniker--in the lineup, for people who want more traditional workstation software, since there's still a lucrative market for that. These will presumably use Intel chips, but then who knows--even Microsoft is working on a version of Windows for ARM.
And outside the gamer market or the relatively small number of people who need or want a virtualized Windows environment, I seriously doubt most people will care. After all, it hasn't stopped them from lining up to buy iPads, and I have NEVER heard even the most ardent Windows fanboy rant about Windows with the same fervor as a half-dozen non-technical people I know personally who love their iPad.
Geeks and old-school Macheads like myself will wail and moan, and Apple won't care. If they did, the iPad would have run the MacOS.
In related news, Microsoft is in trouble.
