pudrums
Sep 14, 05:25 AM
Real Racing HD
http://www.ipad-tipps.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/real_racing_hero.jpg
http://www.ipad-tipps.de/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/real_racing_hero.jpg
SevenInchScrew
Sep 14, 12:07 PM
Halo: Reach Legendary Edition
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
saving107
Apr 12, 09:42 AM
No.
Simply because htcSensation is 1.2GHz dual core
and... and... iphone5 will have lesser RAM than htcSensation.
Also, Apple is closed and Google is open.
okthxbai
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
Simply because htcSensation is 1.2GHz dual core
and... and... iphone5 will have lesser RAM than htcSensation.
Also, Apple is closed and Google is open.
okthxbai
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
kiljoy616
Apr 13, 03:22 PM
The iPad has already blown away the "Apple makes overpriced stuff myth" out of the water. If you are still clinging on to this, let it go and find another useful argument.
Most of the products in Apple's line up are competitively priced or more affordable than its competitors...and don't compare iMac's to desktop boxes it's an all-in-one a different form factor.
Apple makes insane profits because their products sell...in extraordinary numbers not because they are overpriced. Fact is if Apple only makes income because of the premium, people will not continue to buy them if they don't work well.
If you want to dispute what I said, try making your own product, design a pretty logo for it and sell it at a premium. See how that works out for you.
Well said, but even if this iVisual was to come out, Apple is not going to bring out just a TV its going to be much more and I can't imagine what that could be. Most people even today just don't have the internet needed to really push something Apple would want to get into when it comes to the TV that is why the Apple TV is still a hobby for Apple.
That said maybe they are looking to see what Google does with their Gigabyte fiber deployment. If we started to see real speeds something like a 4k apple tv could become a reality. Give me that and retianal display and drop all the 3d gimmick, I just don't really care for it.
Most of the products in Apple's line up are competitively priced or more affordable than its competitors...and don't compare iMac's to desktop boxes it's an all-in-one a different form factor.
Apple makes insane profits because their products sell...in extraordinary numbers not because they are overpriced. Fact is if Apple only makes income because of the premium, people will not continue to buy them if they don't work well.
If you want to dispute what I said, try making your own product, design a pretty logo for it and sell it at a premium. See how that works out for you.
Well said, but even if this iVisual was to come out, Apple is not going to bring out just a TV its going to be much more and I can't imagine what that could be. Most people even today just don't have the internet needed to really push something Apple would want to get into when it comes to the TV that is why the Apple TV is still a hobby for Apple.
That said maybe they are looking to see what Google does with their Gigabyte fiber deployment. If we started to see real speeds something like a 4k apple tv could become a reality. Give me that and retianal display and drop all the 3d gimmick, I just don't really care for it.
more...
TroyBoy30
Apr 15, 02:13 PM
battery life is still the same on my 4 as the day i bought it. no loss over night and almost an hour of usage before it drops to 99%
j800r
Apr 26, 12:59 PM
I can't believe you guys could be such hypocrites!
You spend over �1,000 on an Apple computer and complain about a pathetic little �20 a year for a cloud service?? Seriously, if you're THAT cheap I'm surprised you're not joining the Win PC fanboys in saying "Macs are overpriced junk". Seriously, you have to buy your OWN storage space so why do you think Apple would give you theirs for free?? They're a business, not a charity.
If you wanna use the service, pay for it. If you're not interested then don't. But don't start complaining Apple is charging a ridiculously small amount for using THEIR hard drives. It might by called "the cloud" but your data is still stored somewhere, and that somewhere is on Apple's servers. They weren't free for them, so why the hell should they be free for you?
Oh, also, if you're so cheap why not sell your shiny Macs and use the money to buy yourself TWO Win PCs. That way your precious money goes further.
(Apologies to the ones who haven't complained for having to put up with my little rant there, but surely you can see why this irritates me. :\)
You spend over �1,000 on an Apple computer and complain about a pathetic little �20 a year for a cloud service?? Seriously, if you're THAT cheap I'm surprised you're not joining the Win PC fanboys in saying "Macs are overpriced junk". Seriously, you have to buy your OWN storage space so why do you think Apple would give you theirs for free?? They're a business, not a charity.
If you wanna use the service, pay for it. If you're not interested then don't. But don't start complaining Apple is charging a ridiculously small amount for using THEIR hard drives. It might by called "the cloud" but your data is still stored somewhere, and that somewhere is on Apple's servers. They weren't free for them, so why the hell should they be free for you?
Oh, also, if you're so cheap why not sell your shiny Macs and use the money to buy yourself TWO Win PCs. That way your precious money goes further.
(Apologies to the ones who haven't complained for having to put up with my little rant there, but surely you can see why this irritates me. :\)
more...
Tragedies
Apr 11, 06:24 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5069/5609027791_0ed9da9750.jpg
lifeofart
Jul 12, 06:02 PM
You know, that's a good idea.
Here I was so caught up in the idea of getting it to be a final version, I didn't even think of that. Let the machines that are designed to do this do the work....
(I'm not even going to dignify the other snide poster with a response :rolleyes: )
I'm sorry if my comment came off as being snide.
But it really bothers me when people post how wonderful an app is and how useful it is and how it completely replaces a much more expensive app. When in reality it is only a simple consumer level product.
Others read this forum and buy Pages thinking that they can eliminate the use of Word. Then they find out that it really isn't that compatible with Word files. If you email a windows user a .doc file exported from pages, 7 times out of 10 they have problems with it.
Most pro printshops, publishers, law firms etc. only except word .doc files. Almost all law firms require a revision history. Collaboration tools are useally also required. Word handles this expertly. Plus it has table of contents tools, book publishing tools, bibliography tools, direct faxing,multitudes of custom templates, VB programing hooks, etc. etc. None of this has an equivalent in Pages.
I'm glad you found a solution to your problem and I am glad that Pages satisfies your needs for word processing. Maybe someday it will move out of the "consumer" ranks and into the "Pro" ranks when more functionality is added. Apple seems to know the niche that they are addressing very well.
Here I was so caught up in the idea of getting it to be a final version, I didn't even think of that. Let the machines that are designed to do this do the work....
(I'm not even going to dignify the other snide poster with a response :rolleyes: )
I'm sorry if my comment came off as being snide.
But it really bothers me when people post how wonderful an app is and how useful it is and how it completely replaces a much more expensive app. When in reality it is only a simple consumer level product.
Others read this forum and buy Pages thinking that they can eliminate the use of Word. Then they find out that it really isn't that compatible with Word files. If you email a windows user a .doc file exported from pages, 7 times out of 10 they have problems with it.
Most pro printshops, publishers, law firms etc. only except word .doc files. Almost all law firms require a revision history. Collaboration tools are useally also required. Word handles this expertly. Plus it has table of contents tools, book publishing tools, bibliography tools, direct faxing,multitudes of custom templates, VB programing hooks, etc. etc. None of this has an equivalent in Pages.
I'm glad you found a solution to your problem and I am glad that Pages satisfies your needs for word processing. Maybe someday it will move out of the "consumer" ranks and into the "Pro" ranks when more functionality is added. Apple seems to know the niche that they are addressing very well.
more...
3N16MA
May 3, 11:59 PM
OR another reason: Apple decided to go verizon exclusive and ATT is shunned.
That sounds like a very solid business decisions. I predict Apple making billions with that move.
That sounds like a very solid business decisions. I predict Apple making billions with that move.
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 11:10 AM
Of all the things that iPhone needs soon, LTE is not one of them.
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
It's already available to 110 Americans. It will reach over half of the US by year's end thanks to Verizon. When you look at AT&T's 3G penetration at the time of the iPhone 3G launch, it's actually not that far off.
The real issue is having a radio that allows for decent battery life. Even if they can consolidate it into 1 chip, that doesn't mean Apple will be pleased with its battery performance enough to include it in their phones.
My understanding of the MDM9615 is that it's a powerhouse.
The next generation MDM9615 will support LTE (FDD and TDD), DC-HSPA+, EV-DO Rev-B and TD-SCDMA
Basically, that means it supports LTE, super high speed 3G HSPA+ (think T-mobile's 42 mbps) and EV-DO Rev-B (CDMA). That means it should be a worldphone chip, and it's also fabbed on the brand new 28nm process, which means it will be as low power as one could expect. That makes it an excellent candidate for the 2012 iPhone 6.
The MDM9615 and MDM8215 are designed to pair up with the WTR1605 radio frequency IC and PM8018 power management IC to provide a highly integrated chipset solution. The WTR1605 will be Qualcomm’s first Radio Transceiver in Wafer Level Package and will be a highly integrated radio transceiver with multi-mode (LTE FDD, LTE TDD, CDMA, WCDMA, TD-SCDMA, GSM) and multi-band support.
TD-SCDMA is the CDMA variant they use in China. Outside of penta-band GSM (which I don't know if this offers, and I don't see why it wouldn't since the current iPhone Gobi chip offers it), this radio can be used on every damn carrier out there in the world essentially.
source (http://www.qualcomm.com/news/releases/2011/02/14/qualcomm-introduces-28nm-mass-market-ltedc-hspa-chipsets-mobile-broadband-0)
more...
mikeschmeee
Apr 14, 07:28 PM
Behind the scenes....
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5187/5620100939_a0ef9a7b2b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5620100939/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5187/5620100939_a0ef9a7b2b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5620100939/)
steveh
Apr 12, 02:23 PM
Wouldn't matter anyway if you were using a ThunderBolt external hard drive. Very few mechanical hard drives can even reach 1Gbps-2Gbps. You'll need several of the fastest SSDs in RAID to even reach ThunderBolt speeds.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
This week, mostly. In a year or three?
Don't forget that ThunderBolt can support USB x, as well as several other connection standards, including DisplayPort, hence any display connection standard that you can drive through it.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
This week, mostly. In a year or three?
Don't forget that ThunderBolt can support USB x, as well as several other connection standards, including DisplayPort, hence any display connection standard that you can drive through it.
more...
SuperCachetes
Dec 30, 11:23 PM
<snip>
You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
<snip>
^^^^ All of that.
A huge problem (no pun intended) in America is the gigantic portions masquerading as meals in fast-food and casual restaurants. Some of the dishes available at very popular chains are absolutely ridiculous in size. Yet we buy them because they are a "good value." And let's face it - more often than not, we make a pretty good run at finishing off our plates, don't we? Unfortunately, that's just continuing the validation of the portion sizes...
I'm 6'-1" and 210# and when I go to a burger joint now, I usually get the kid's meal. I can't imagine going back to Jack's "Ultimate Cheeseburger" which in all honesty I used to love. :(
You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
<snip>
^^^^ All of that.
A huge problem (no pun intended) in America is the gigantic portions masquerading as meals in fast-food and casual restaurants. Some of the dishes available at very popular chains are absolutely ridiculous in size. Yet we buy them because they are a "good value." And let's face it - more often than not, we make a pretty good run at finishing off our plates, don't we? Unfortunately, that's just continuing the validation of the portion sizes...
I'm 6'-1" and 210# and when I go to a burger joint now, I usually get the kid's meal. I can't imagine going back to Jack's "Ultimate Cheeseburger" which in all honesty I used to love. :(
enda1
Jul 26, 05:58 PM
Of course I read the damn thing. Is it not clear from the report that the invention really is the proximity detector. Synaptics or whatever they are called already have advanced touch devices on the market, thats nothing new. Maybe the software side of things, ie. how to interpert the inputs is novel but really its the ability to "remote control" your ipod without anything but your bare hands.
By the way, just watched Superman Returns there, not too shabby!
By the way, just watched Superman Returns there, not too shabby!
more...
puckhead193
Nov 1, 01:38 PM
I've also come to the conclusion that I *want* a D7000 to replace my extremely old, 6 month old D90 :D
FX4568
Apr 19, 04:54 PM
These are all random/nonsensical figures you've made up FX4568. Outside of gaming, there are prescious few apps that will be affected by a 30% decrease in GPU.
This will be even more true as Apple becomes better at optimising for Grand Central dispatch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch). As an example the new Final Cut Pro X is said to optimise and scale well across all sizes of systems. I'd expect a much faster processor to 'soak up' the GPU drop in this instance.
No. Outside of gaming, a larger proportion of processing is done in the CPU than the GPU, and improving the CPU will yield greater benefits.
You can only really talk for yourself and others in this thread that subscribe to that opinion. What evidence to you have that the majority would notice?
I would expect that most MBA owners aren't hardcore gamers - it's just not that sort of machine. Medium power graphic uses, like productivity apps or watching movies wouldn't be noticeably impacted.
Of course, I don't have any figures to back up that belief either. ;)
Well, I wish I had a program to back up such GPU CPU usage, but I do not, so whether you believe my point is up to you.
I have NO idea as of how GCD affects GPU. The only thing that my mind connected the GDP to a GPU is when the GPU has an Open CL, Open CL is like GDP but not quite. GDP can be summarized as "GCD lifts the programmer from the burden of dealing with shared memory, threads, locks and semaphores which usually results in a great amount of pain." GCD does not direct GPU burden into the CPU. If it did, why doesnt Apple further continue on this technology? Wouldn't it be more efficient to Apple to develop this technology so far that GPUs are obsolete and instead of placing GPUs in a system, they could use extra battery? or extra RAM? GDP only takes advantage of multi core systems, but it certainly does not take the burden of GPU.
If it does, I would honestly like to know, as knowledge is always good.
Yea, I see the point where you are coming from. Neither of us know whether or not MBA owners have bought it for mild gaming or not, but hardcore gamers are certainly not in the radar of MBA buyers. But do not confuse hardcore gamers with games that tend to fall in the "hardcores." Almost all games could be run in MBA, of course few of them wont. But as of 90% of games, the 320M will. Again, do I have numbers to back it up? I certainly dont, but there was a chart somewhere that compared over 30 games with 320m and Intel 3000HD used in MBP 13", and the 13" could play less than the 320m ones. Why do I keep up bringing games as GPU comparisons? Because as my lack of knowledge shows, games are the ones that stress the most out of GPUs in my usage.
This will be even more true as Apple becomes better at optimising for Grand Central dispatch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Central_Dispatch). As an example the new Final Cut Pro X is said to optimise and scale well across all sizes of systems. I'd expect a much faster processor to 'soak up' the GPU drop in this instance.
No. Outside of gaming, a larger proportion of processing is done in the CPU than the GPU, and improving the CPU will yield greater benefits.
You can only really talk for yourself and others in this thread that subscribe to that opinion. What evidence to you have that the majority would notice?
I would expect that most MBA owners aren't hardcore gamers - it's just not that sort of machine. Medium power graphic uses, like productivity apps or watching movies wouldn't be noticeably impacted.
Of course, I don't have any figures to back up that belief either. ;)
Well, I wish I had a program to back up such GPU CPU usage, but I do not, so whether you believe my point is up to you.
I have NO idea as of how GCD affects GPU. The only thing that my mind connected the GDP to a GPU is when the GPU has an Open CL, Open CL is like GDP but not quite. GDP can be summarized as "GCD lifts the programmer from the burden of dealing with shared memory, threads, locks and semaphores which usually results in a great amount of pain." GCD does not direct GPU burden into the CPU. If it did, why doesnt Apple further continue on this technology? Wouldn't it be more efficient to Apple to develop this technology so far that GPUs are obsolete and instead of placing GPUs in a system, they could use extra battery? or extra RAM? GDP only takes advantage of multi core systems, but it certainly does not take the burden of GPU.
If it does, I would honestly like to know, as knowledge is always good.
Yea, I see the point where you are coming from. Neither of us know whether or not MBA owners have bought it for mild gaming or not, but hardcore gamers are certainly not in the radar of MBA buyers. But do not confuse hardcore gamers with games that tend to fall in the "hardcores." Almost all games could be run in MBA, of course few of them wont. But as of 90% of games, the 320M will. Again, do I have numbers to back it up? I certainly dont, but there was a chart somewhere that compared over 30 games with 320m and Intel 3000HD used in MBP 13", and the 13" could play less than the 320m ones. Why do I keep up bringing games as GPU comparisons? Because as my lack of knowledge shows, games are the ones that stress the most out of GPUs in my usage.
more...
coolbreeze
Nov 10, 07:07 PM
1 million dollars for pr0n.
Hm.
Hm.
chrmjenkins
Apr 23, 09:42 AM
Perhaps. But it should be noted that at one time Apple didn't have any interest in making different sizes/models of iPods either. Or CDMA phones. Point being, things change.
Those models have very distinct differences. A nano is very different from a touch, which are both different from a shuffle, etc. For each iDevice paradigm, it has clear differences between the other products and market segments.
CDMA is a poor example because it's transparent to the user. It has almost 0 effect on user experience and does not even begin to identify a product category.
Those models have very distinct differences. A nano is very different from a touch, which are both different from a shuffle, etc. For each iDevice paradigm, it has clear differences between the other products and market segments.
CDMA is a poor example because it's transparent to the user. It has almost 0 effect on user experience and does not even begin to identify a product category.
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 04:51 PM
Still not sure where you're getting this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
applemagic123
Apr 23, 07:21 PM
Finally, is all I have to say. People have been unlocking and jaibreaking their iphones ever since 2007 to be on tmobile. Apple is finally catching up with the rest of society. It's absolutely ridiculous it has taken this long for tmobile to have the iphone in the usa.
Mustafa
Jul 25, 09:51 AM
Under System Requirements it doesn't mention Windows. Does this mean......?
eawmp1
Apr 23, 03:36 PM
In general, the staff at most retail and restaurant chains are taught to notify the authorities and not get involved. Violating this policy can and will get you fired at best, or killed at worst.
cuestakid
May 1, 11:52 PM
Your 2nd date appears to be incorrect.
http://www.biography.com/articles/Adolf-Hitler-9340144
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/267992/Adolf-Hitler
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/adolf-hitler-commits-suicide
how so?
http://www.biography.com/articles/Adolf-Hitler-9340144
http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/267992/Adolf-Hitler
http://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/adolf-hitler-commits-suicide
how so?
displaced
Jul 25, 04:32 PM
Well Apple is using Intel parts now that explains the lower quality. They're taking their parts from the same bin now; quality suffers... :mad:
Oh... dear... lord...
The MBP's whine (arguably the biggest problem, barring heat) was caused by either: 1) the inverter for the LCD backlight, or 2) power regulation for the CPU, which (believe it or not) the G-series also required very similar parts. Neither of these components were designed or built by Intel. If you want to blame someone, blame Foxconn/Hon Hai/Asustek/whoever built the system. I'd probably put money on that company also having built PPC systems for Apple at some point.
The heat? Well, again, depending on who you believe regarding the cause, that's either dodgy thermal paste application (blame Asustek/whoever again), or... well, let's say that the Core line are rather toasty no matter who's using it.... but again, for the computing power, the Core is a great piece of work. Before the switch, there was zero chance of us having a laptop with this amount of computational power at *any* heat output.
Wonky 'eject' key on the MBP's? Asustek/whoever again.
The switch to Intel had zero bearing on quality control. QC's performed by the system builder.
Let's look back a bit through the mists of time...
Apple-designed logic boards. Were they somehow sprinkled with the magic fairy-dust of goodness? No. iBook and eMac failures?
Apple-designed chipsets: sub-par USB2 performance, even on the G5.
Apple-designed power systems: G5 chirping.
QC is a problem across the industry. Apple's used to be exemplary (many years ago... I'm talking Pismo/Wallstreet era). Now it's merely average or -- depending on the studies/surveys you believe -- slightly above-average.
Oh... dear... lord...
The MBP's whine (arguably the biggest problem, barring heat) was caused by either: 1) the inverter for the LCD backlight, or 2) power regulation for the CPU, which (believe it or not) the G-series also required very similar parts. Neither of these components were designed or built by Intel. If you want to blame someone, blame Foxconn/Hon Hai/Asustek/whoever built the system. I'd probably put money on that company also having built PPC systems for Apple at some point.
The heat? Well, again, depending on who you believe regarding the cause, that's either dodgy thermal paste application (blame Asustek/whoever again), or... well, let's say that the Core line are rather toasty no matter who's using it.... but again, for the computing power, the Core is a great piece of work. Before the switch, there was zero chance of us having a laptop with this amount of computational power at *any* heat output.
Wonky 'eject' key on the MBP's? Asustek/whoever again.
The switch to Intel had zero bearing on quality control. QC's performed by the system builder.
Let's look back a bit through the mists of time...
Apple-designed logic boards. Were they somehow sprinkled with the magic fairy-dust of goodness? No. iBook and eMac failures?
Apple-designed chipsets: sub-par USB2 performance, even on the G5.
Apple-designed power systems: G5 chirping.
QC is a problem across the industry. Apple's used to be exemplary (many years ago... I'm talking Pismo/Wallstreet era). Now it's merely average or -- depending on the studies/surveys you believe -- slightly above-average.
No comments:
Post a Comment