cjscribe
Apr 14, 09:01 AM
So am I the only one left with the original iPhone? Had it since Sep 2006. Was going to wait for the 5, but I'll just get a white 4 in a few weeks. I'm happy.
I am in the same boat as you. I think you and I are the only people in the planet that has the original iphone. Not sure if I will get the white4 or wait for the 5.
I am in the same boat as you. I think you and I are the only people in the planet that has the original iphone. Not sure if I will get the white4 or wait for the 5.
Vulpinemac
Apr 28, 01:12 PM
I'm honestly surprised by a lot of you. The whole "no single android phone outsells the iPhone!" argument, is foolish and weak. It's a platform war. You basically get ONE CHOICE with the iPhone. Now it's a great choice, but of course it's going to be a top seller as a result. There are so many good Android choices out there that a single model isn't going to dwarf the others. Since there are, you know, options? As a platform it seems iOS is getting whooped on. Does that not register, or are people that much in denial?
Now myself, I like my iPhone, but come on...in this case we are talking about platforms...So weird...
No, it's not a war; the only people who consider it a war are the people who will do anything to prove Apple isn't an innovative and in many ways cutting edge company. Competition? Yes. Competition is good. But if you really look, the majority of Android phones available on the open market sell for less than $100 and most of those sell for less than $50. So for Apple to offer its older model in the same price range is only leveling the field and proving that it's not just Android, but the price that is driving Android's sales so fast. Compete in the same ball fields at the same pricing and you see that Apple picks up many of those people who claimed they couldn't afford one or didn't want to switch to a different provider.
Now myself, I like my iPhone, but come on...in this case we are talking about platforms...So weird...
No, it's not a war; the only people who consider it a war are the people who will do anything to prove Apple isn't an innovative and in many ways cutting edge company. Competition? Yes. Competition is good. But if you really look, the majority of Android phones available on the open market sell for less than $100 and most of those sell for less than $50. So for Apple to offer its older model in the same price range is only leveling the field and proving that it's not just Android, but the price that is driving Android's sales so fast. Compete in the same ball fields at the same pricing and you see that Apple picks up many of those people who claimed they couldn't afford one or didn't want to switch to a different provider.
AppleFreek
May 3, 08:43 AM
Excellent news!
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
Do you want to buy 4 iMac 27''? Really nice :rolleyes:, but why??
And also, a couple of Time Capsules? What are you planning to do with a computer?
I'm looking to spend some grant money and 4 x 27" iMacs and a couple 2 TB Time Capsules sounds like a great idea!
Do you want to buy 4 iMac 27''? Really nice :rolleyes:, but why??
And also, a couple of Time Capsules? What are you planning to do with a computer?
Mherm88
May 3, 08:30 AM
You can add on a 115GB SSD from OWC. FAST turnaround.
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/SSD
Too expensive, plus I'd rather do it myself
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/SSD
Too expensive, plus I'd rather do it myself
NATO
Apr 12, 09:43 AM
TheRegister seems to reckon it's not due until 2012:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/12/iphone_delay/
danny_w
Nov 4, 07:06 PM
All I want is for my divorce to be final so that I can marry my sweety. ;) She's already the very best Christmas present ever!
Eldiablojoe
Apr 25, 09:36 PM
Hey Hey Hey, what gives? :confused::p
Moyank24's vote for me especially hurts me- you cut me deeply :( When people were voting for you and momentum was gaining against you, I made sure to mention that YOU were a cleared Villager in the last game when I was Seer.
NathanMuir, I understand. When I was WW in the game two games back, I think I killed you off. Sorry about that. I guess you carry a grudge, lol!
* Never mind, questions deleted- I just re-read the OP *
Just to be spiteful, I'm going to vote for NathanMuir, simply because he is voting for me. Neener Neener!!
Moyank24's vote for me especially hurts me- you cut me deeply :( When people were voting for you and momentum was gaining against you, I made sure to mention that YOU were a cleared Villager in the last game when I was Seer.
NathanMuir, I understand. When I was WW in the game two games back, I think I killed you off. Sorry about that. I guess you carry a grudge, lol!
* Never mind, questions deleted- I just re-read the OP *
Just to be spiteful, I'm going to vote for NathanMuir, simply because he is voting for me. Neener Neener!!
DTphonehome
Jul 21, 12:35 PM
Not surprising given that Gateway's market share numbers come directly from the extremely low margin, low end systems they are dumping on the market. In other words they have higher volumes but they are making next to nothing (for some nearly selling at a loss) in order to get those volumes.
...basically the stock market knows that Gateway is not a very safe bet...
Which is exactly why Dell is taking a beating today (down 12%). Their margins are so low that any downturn in sales has a devastating effect on their profits. Apple has much larger margins (as they don't sell $300 computers), so they can afford a small downturn in sales (which isn't happening now anyway).
...basically the stock market knows that Gateway is not a very safe bet...
Which is exactly why Dell is taking a beating today (down 12%). Their margins are so low that any downturn in sales has a devastating effect on their profits. Apple has much larger margins (as they don't sell $300 computers), so they can afford a small downturn in sales (which isn't happening now anyway).
Eidorian
Jul 24, 02:46 PM
*head explodes*
'bout time!
'bout time!
Don't panic
Apr 28, 12:36 PM
And Annie Oakley is so much cooler than being a stupid sandwich maker...
this is hard to dispute... :)
although in fairness, a sandwich maker was/will be an important character of this adventure
edit: at this point you should consider a temporary change of avatar
this is hard to dispute... :)
although in fairness, a sandwich maker was/will be an important character of this adventure
edit: at this point you should consider a temporary change of avatar
foodle
Apr 14, 12:57 PM
A sure way to tell when a technology is running out of steam and nearing saturation is when the big new thing is a different colored case. Just look at Dell laptops or the iPod line. Not a good sign from Apple.
goobot
May 4, 08:54 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
The rep is just lazy and didn't want to give a real answer.
The rep is just lazy and didn't want to give a real answer.
Moyank24
Dec 29, 11:10 AM
People can sign up and pay to watch her eat online. Her website says her favourite food is sushi.
Anyone who would pay for such a thing may be even more disturbed than she is.
Gross
Anyone who would pay for such a thing may be even more disturbed than she is.
Gross
daneoni
Apr 13, 08:18 PM
Couldn't care less.
Anaemik
Apr 11, 08:18 PM
Are there any hard drives that can even unleash 1.25 GBps? :)
Not yet, but assuming that there won't be within a reasonable timeframe seems silly. Why on earth would you want a new standard that we're going to have to live with for the next 10-20 yrs that has its bandwidth saturated almost on day of release? Also, I think that looking at this as *just* another way of connecting external drives is to be massively missing the big picture with Thunderbolt. Finally, Thunderbolt is capable of much more than 1.25GBps. I believe in theory it can eventually scale to 100Gbps over optical.
Not yet, but assuming that there won't be within a reasonable timeframe seems silly. Why on earth would you want a new standard that we're going to have to live with for the next 10-20 yrs that has its bandwidth saturated almost on day of release? Also, I think that looking at this as *just* another way of connecting external drives is to be massively missing the big picture with Thunderbolt. Finally, Thunderbolt is capable of much more than 1.25GBps. I believe in theory it can eventually scale to 100Gbps over optical.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 30, 07:31 PM
Eldiablojoe can be our token blonde in the afterlife?
See, and you thought the goofy "newb" questions were just an act. They aren't, lol.
See, and you thought the goofy "newb" questions were just an act. They aren't, lol.
SchneiderMan
Sep 14, 05:43 PM
Not if you go to clubs that play Linkin Park.
Or if you like Linkin Park, for that matter.
I rarely go to clubs.
I pre-ordered Iron Man 2 in Blu-ray 3-disc edition.
http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/7910/screenshot20100914at345.png
Or if you like Linkin Park, for that matter.
I rarely go to clubs.
I pre-ordered Iron Man 2 in Blu-ray 3-disc edition.
http://img137.imageshack.us/img137/7910/screenshot20100914at345.png
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
ebow
Oct 24, 07:55 AM
We've alreaddy seen threads entitled "Waiting for Santa Rosa" though, I think this will be a never ending cycle under intel. :(
Intel just needs to start working on a line of chips codenamed Godot now. :rolleyes: :D
Would anyone happen to know if they changed the case design.
The apple store is still down�
The 17 inch looks almost affordable, almost.
Store's back up now; the case looks exactly the same aside from the additional FW800 port on the 15-inch model.
The 17-inch model is exactly as affordable as it was, no more, no less (assuming the purchaser's cash/credit situation hasn't changed).
Intel just needs to start working on a line of chips codenamed Godot now. :rolleyes: :D
Would anyone happen to know if they changed the case design.
The apple store is still down�
The 17 inch looks almost affordable, almost.
Store's back up now; the case looks exactly the same aside from the additional FW800 port on the 15-inch model.
The 17-inch model is exactly as affordable as it was, no more, no less (assuming the purchaser's cash/credit situation hasn't changed).
guzhogi
Apr 11, 02:01 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway? In a typical USB 2.0 external hard drive, what is the bottleneck in speed: The speed at which the hard drive spins, or the USB 2.0 connection? If it's the USB, then why do people even care about the RPM of a drive? If it's the RPM, then isn't USB 2.0 fast enough to run a hard drive at its native speed?
Look forward to thunderbolt hub. USB 3.0, esata and a DisplayPort daisy chain.
What he said. You can get adaptors for different things, plus daisy chain multiple devices together. One device may not be able to use the whole TB bandwidth, but if you add a bunch of accessories to the same port, it'll add up. Right now, the only single device that might be able to utilize the whole bandwidth would be a RAID array and other high-end stuff. But as SSDs come more common & speed up, we'll see TB being more useful. This definitely won't happen overnight, no matter how much some of us might hope.
Look forward to thunderbolt hub. USB 3.0, esata and a DisplayPort daisy chain.
What he said. You can get adaptors for different things, plus daisy chain multiple devices together. One device may not be able to use the whole TB bandwidth, but if you add a bunch of accessories to the same port, it'll add up. Right now, the only single device that might be able to utilize the whole bandwidth would be a RAID array and other high-end stuff. But as SSDs come more common & speed up, we'll see TB being more useful. This definitely won't happen overnight, no matter how much some of us might hope.
iApples
May 1, 11:51 PM
Does this mean the US is going to stop pumping their oil? Or was that not part of the deal? ...
daneoni
May 1, 10:13 PM
So the figure head who has had little to nothing to do with Al-Queada (a leaderless brand name of extremists at this point) since 9/11 is dead. Woo hoo. Meanwhile, terrorism in the world has only increased since the "war on terror" (something that was predicted and well known by US planners when gearing up for it).
Time to start the USA chants. :rolleyes:
Anyone with a clue knows these.
Still a significant blow to have the 'figure head' taken out regardless.
Time to start the USA chants. :rolleyes:
Anyone with a clue knows these.
Still a significant blow to have the 'figure head' taken out regardless.
DMann
Oct 1, 11:53 PM
Don't believe everything you read on the web, this is 100% not true. If Apple was in the business of limiting devices sales to the US market, Verizon would have been a great option. Fortunately, or unfortunately, (depending on how you look at it) GSM is essentially the global standard for 2G, so AT&T or T-mobile would have been the only possible carriers for the iPhonePerhaps you meant not 100% true. I have heard, from multiple sources, that Verizon wanted more influence on the design of the phone, layout of the OS, and structure of apps and distribution, as well as a larger share of profit. If you have information which suggests otherwise, please do tell. As stated before, a GSM carrier makes more sense for a global phone. Now, with its proven success, perhaps Verizon would be more willing to make some concessions for marketing the iPhone in the USA, as this would greatly relieve the bandwidth burden AT&T is currently experiencing.
macbook123
Apr 26, 10:31 PM
As much as I wish it would happen, I doubt Apple has fully internalized that the glossy glass screens were a horrendous design decision. I bet is it'll be two more years until they will be forever phased out, along with the enormous black bezels on the majority of products. But Apple is typically slow in realizing their mistakes, no surprise given their successes.
