Spoony
Apr 26, 02:58 PM
Apple should offer all current blackberry subscribers 50 bucks off an iphone for a 6 month window and take RIMMS % of the pie.
That would really make it a two horse race with Windows and whoever else under 10%.
That would really make it a two horse race with Windows and whoever else under 10%.
islanders
Jul 23, 10:33 PM
We may see a drop in the MB at the end of a production run.
$1099 is very reasonable, esp if it is a quality product�
at that price consumers are going to evaluate features, longevity�
although I think it is a valid point to consider pricing for consumer end.
$1099 is very reasonable, esp if it is a quality product�
at that price consumers are going to evaluate features, longevity�
although I think it is a valid point to consider pricing for consumer end.
MorphingDragon
Apr 22, 05:09 PM
The server market is the backbone of the business market. Macs will be niche in enterprise as long as the backbone isn't there, and stronger than last time.
I'm going to have to disagree with that. Apple can be a great contender in the enterprise market without even touching server space.
There's plenty of client side areas Apple can compete in. God knows any of the current "Enterprise" companies aren't going to deliver a well polished client side, especially in the Mobile space.
If you need a "Certified Engineer" and $10k worth of training to set up your software, you're doing something wrong.
I'm going to have to disagree with that. Apple can be a great contender in the enterprise market without even touching server space.
There's plenty of client side areas Apple can compete in. God knows any of the current "Enterprise" companies aren't going to deliver a well polished client side, especially in the Mobile space.
If you need a "Certified Engineer" and $10k worth of training to set up your software, you're doing something wrong.
snberk103
May 5, 09:23 PM
Fine, but prove to me it's because of the metric system.
I don't know that it does.... I was merely rebutting the point that learning the Imperial measures gave US kids a competitive edge.
I don't know that it does.... I was merely rebutting the point that learning the Imperial measures gave US kids a competitive edge.

sauer228
May 6, 05:24 AM
Should I upgrade now or wait for the ARM update?
I keed I keed.
I keed I keed.
twoodcc
Aug 3, 12:35 PM
I see that you misunderstood the context of the 2.33Ghz but you are still incorrect. You can buy a 2.33Ghz Yonah today, its called the T2700. I know there are not any T2700's in a MBP but Apple could have done so if they wanted.
Now, back to your 1.67X Battery life�
Straight from a "Merom vs. Yonah" AnandTech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=15) released earlier today:
:)
thank you for the news :) just backs up what i was saying earlier even more :)
Now, back to your 1.67X Battery life�
Straight from a "Merom vs. Yonah" AnandTech article (http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808&p=15) released earlier today:
:)
thank you for the news :) just backs up what i was saying earlier even more :)
pack
Apr 7, 12:32 PM
Wow. I think you missed the point. At 1199, the MacbookPRO should have a discrete option...hell, POS HP's at 600.00 do.
Oh, and please spare me the snarky "well then enjoy your HP! Har har har" comment.
No you have no point. 1199 vs 1799.00 one costs significantly more money. You can't have everything, all the build quality and all the features some things have to be omitted. There are trade offs. That is one. Those potential customers that don't want it buy a crappy 600 dollar hp laptop. Macbook pros aren't considered the best laptop in the industry because they are missing features and cost too much despite what you'd like to believe.
PS enjoy your ****** 600 dollar HP laptop
Oh, and please spare me the snarky "well then enjoy your HP! Har har har" comment.
No you have no point. 1199 vs 1799.00 one costs significantly more money. You can't have everything, all the build quality and all the features some things have to be omitted. There are trade offs. That is one. Those potential customers that don't want it buy a crappy 600 dollar hp laptop. Macbook pros aren't considered the best laptop in the industry because they are missing features and cost too much despite what you'd like to believe.
PS enjoy your ****** 600 dollar HP laptop
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 :-)
iHotu
Aug 7, 05:00 PM
I bet they will still have a nice selection
SteveW928
Mar 26, 11:51 PM
I think the fall iPad 3 rumors are just bunk. I suppose by then there might be some processor bumps available and such, but I'm really doubting we'll see an update for a year. The whole 'Retina' display buzz for the iPad is just silly IMO. The biggest thing would be IF (and a big if) Apple were to make some kind of new material for the body to lighten things up even more... but again, I don't see that as such a big deal. Better cameras? I suppose that could be a reason for a new model... but why in the fall? Sorry, that rumor just doesn't make sense.
iApples
Apr 10, 01:58 AM
I inputed it exactly like this in my calculator and I got 2. So...
You didn't enter it properly then...
You didn't enter it properly then...

MorphingDragon
May 6, 06:13 AM
What uncanny timing-- a couple of days after Intel comes out with their 3D chip thing, sending ARM's share price tumbling to artificially affordable prices, this rumour comes out which, if widely accepted, would boost ARM's share price greatly. Someone could potentially make a lot of money out of this. Especially as Semiaccurate's sources are anonymous, I reckon this rumour should be treated with great scepticism.
I didn't think ARM's stocks would be so volatile.
I didn't think ARM's stocks would be so volatile.
toots66
Nov 22, 05:32 AM
Elsewhere in the world that is mostly how you buy a phone. Phone first, then a carrier. Not the other way around.
Not in the UK it isn't. It's very difficult to get a new contract without a phone. You can buy phones SIM-free but the high initial price puts most people off (if they know about them at all) because the networks here provide most phones 'free' with 12 or 18 month contracts. And most customers expect a new 'free' phone every 12/18 months, even though this will cost them more in the long-term. It's been going on for years and this is unlikely to change until one network breaks ranks but that would put them at a disadvantage.
How would this situation affect an Apple phone? I cannot see Apple changing their software to suit the network and that might rule out a couple of them. The networks have their own systems in place for selling music, at a higher price than iTMS, so any kind of iPod functionality in the phone would probably put them all off. A single network might be interested if they feel that the features in the Apple phone will gain them new customers.
End-users would still be able to buy a phone separately and use their existing SIM of course. But as this is so different to the entrenched practice in the UK, it would have to be a very good device.
Not in the UK it isn't. It's very difficult to get a new contract without a phone. You can buy phones SIM-free but the high initial price puts most people off (if they know about them at all) because the networks here provide most phones 'free' with 12 or 18 month contracts. And most customers expect a new 'free' phone every 12/18 months, even though this will cost them more in the long-term. It's been going on for years and this is unlikely to change until one network breaks ranks but that would put them at a disadvantage.
How would this situation affect an Apple phone? I cannot see Apple changing their software to suit the network and that might rule out a couple of them. The networks have their own systems in place for selling music, at a higher price than iTMS, so any kind of iPod functionality in the phone would probably put them all off. A single network might be interested if they feel that the features in the Apple phone will gain them new customers.
End-users would still be able to buy a phone separately and use their existing SIM of course. But as this is so different to the entrenched practice in the UK, it would have to be a very good device.
justflie
Nov 26, 10:35 AM
Interesting I guess. But is there really a home/consumer market for this? I could see it working for artists and other professionals of that nature, but I know more than a few people that own PC tablets that hardly ever use them as such.
Boomchukalaka
Mar 28, 11:52 AM
Let's not forget that pre-iPhone smart phones were updated every couple of years (hardware wise, maybe some aesthetic changes if anything.) We'd see a refresh at CES, then a couple years after CES it would suddenly be on the shelves, probably with the same CPU, maybe a bit more RAM and the next version of Palm OS / Windows Mobile (Remember those? LOL).
Finally... bad move Apple? Really? You mean like, Apple should have decided to go back in time and prevent the earthquake and tsunami or something? Everyone is debating whether or not this is a "smart move" by Apple. If this is true, they don't have a choice! Supply constraints are supply constraints, there aren't other chip manufacturers without seriously sacrificing the iPhone's performance and reliability, and therefore it's reputation. For those of you unaware, this rumor, if true, is the result of a massive natural disaster that recently occurred in Japan, where a number of iPhone components come from! Yes they are assembled in China, but as the article stated, Chinese manufacturers aren't getting their parts from Japan like they usually do around this time.
It's crazy, people are freaking out talking about abandoning iPhones altogether because heaven forbid anyone wait a couple more months for something! I mean, it's what you want, but instead of waiting you'll "settle" for something else? Am I the only one who sees that flaw in logic? Maybe I'm biased because I didn't plan on being an iPhone 5 customer (no upgrade for another year and a half, so I'll be an iPhone 6 buyer), but I still think this whole conversation is silly. Apple is releasing much faster than anyone else had in the past, maybe not now, but had in the past, and Japan is a little inconvenienced right now, just in case you haven't watched the news.
Also, on Apple's hardware being outdated when it hit the shelves. It always had. I had a 1GHz phone when Apple released there 600 and something MHz iPhone (first gen). It finally hit near 1GHz (but not quite) with the iPhone 4, when there were ALREADY 1GHz phones out for a while (Droid Incredible, etc.) The software trumps the hardware, it's efficient enough it "feels" fast, that's why people buy iPhones, not because the hardware numbers are higher than on the competition.
+1 - possibly the smartest comment posted here
The effects of the earthquake and tsunami and power supply problems in Japan now will affect manufacturing across many industries, steel, automotive, and electronic component production chiefly among them. Apple will not be the only company to experience these issue.
Finally... bad move Apple? Really? You mean like, Apple should have decided to go back in time and prevent the earthquake and tsunami or something? Everyone is debating whether or not this is a "smart move" by Apple. If this is true, they don't have a choice! Supply constraints are supply constraints, there aren't other chip manufacturers without seriously sacrificing the iPhone's performance and reliability, and therefore it's reputation. For those of you unaware, this rumor, if true, is the result of a massive natural disaster that recently occurred in Japan, where a number of iPhone components come from! Yes they are assembled in China, but as the article stated, Chinese manufacturers aren't getting their parts from Japan like they usually do around this time.
It's crazy, people are freaking out talking about abandoning iPhones altogether because heaven forbid anyone wait a couple more months for something! I mean, it's what you want, but instead of waiting you'll "settle" for something else? Am I the only one who sees that flaw in logic? Maybe I'm biased because I didn't plan on being an iPhone 5 customer (no upgrade for another year and a half, so I'll be an iPhone 6 buyer), but I still think this whole conversation is silly. Apple is releasing much faster than anyone else had in the past, maybe not now, but had in the past, and Japan is a little inconvenienced right now, just in case you haven't watched the news.
Also, on Apple's hardware being outdated when it hit the shelves. It always had. I had a 1GHz phone when Apple released there 600 and something MHz iPhone (first gen). It finally hit near 1GHz (but not quite) with the iPhone 4, when there were ALREADY 1GHz phones out for a while (Droid Incredible, etc.) The software trumps the hardware, it's efficient enough it "feels" fast, that's why people buy iPhones, not because the hardware numbers are higher than on the competition.
+1 - possibly the smartest comment posted here
The effects of the earthquake and tsunami and power supply problems in Japan now will affect manufacturing across many industries, steel, automotive, and electronic component production chiefly among them. Apple will not be the only company to experience these issue.
tripjammer
Apr 20, 09:45 AM
will only upgrade if the coolest features of iOS 5 can't be run on 3GS...otherwise, i'll wait another year for iPhone 6.
Why would you hold on to an old Iphone when you can sell it for at least $150 or more? I know people who sold their Iphone 3Gs right after the Iphone 4 came out for close to $300. We will all be able to do the same when the Iphone 5 comes out...sell you old Iphone 4 and get the Iphone 5. ATT usually lets you upgrade every year.
And September is only 2 months later than usual...
Why would you hold on to an old Iphone when you can sell it for at least $150 or more? I know people who sold their Iphone 3Gs right after the Iphone 4 came out for close to $300. We will all be able to do the same when the Iphone 5 comes out...sell you old Iphone 4 and get the Iphone 5. ATT usually lets you upgrade every year.
And September is only 2 months later than usual...
HiRez
May 4, 05:57 PM
cons: what if i want to format the hard drive and restart from scratch? or even just archive and install? what if i completely replace my hard drive? what if i want to sell my mac and get a new one, would i retain the license or would the buyer get it? how would they reinstall the OS after I wipe the hard drive? how long is this going to take to download? will we be able and authorized to burn our own install DVDs from the downloaded software?
It'd be cool for Apple to start building a small, fast SSD "drive" (memory chips) into every Mac, that would be dedicated to the core System, and only the System. Small enough to be inexpensive, large enough to easily accommodate current and future System files, fast enough to be faster than any current hard drive. Make the drive say 32-64 GB, with two partitions. One partition holds the installed System, the other partition is just scratch space for downloaded and uninstalled software, including the System itself. Possibly this partition contains some minimal boot system in order to re-download and install the package from the app store in case the installation gets botched.
It'd be cool for Apple to start building a small, fast SSD "drive" (memory chips) into every Mac, that would be dedicated to the core System, and only the System. Small enough to be inexpensive, large enough to easily accommodate current and future System files, fast enough to be faster than any current hard drive. Make the drive say 32-64 GB, with two partitions. One partition holds the installed System, the other partition is just scratch space for downloaded and uninstalled software, including the System itself. Possibly this partition contains some minimal boot system in order to re-download and install the package from the app store in case the installation gets botched.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
obeygiant
Apr 14, 09:59 AM
I'll bet he moved on to forums where his ideas were more warmly accepted.
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're all in the lifeboat. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
You can always donate to the federal reserve. Don't let me stop you!
On the issues of taxes ... tax me more!
Sure, tax the rich more too.
But every American should be chipping in to solve the issues that we're facing.
We're all in the lifeboat. Everybody pick up a pail and start bailing.
You can always donate to the federal reserve. Don't let me stop you!
daneoni
Aug 2, 11:27 AM
Realistically we're only gonna get Leopard preview (lots of it) and they'll be previewed using the new MacPros sporting woodcrest processors. We'll also get new Cinema Displays probably a new 40" version as well....powered by some SLI type graphics
MAYBE we'll see the MacBook Pros/iMac get the Core 2 Duos as well although i think these will be silently released at the end of August or we see the MacBooks sporting 2.0Ghz core duos as standard with the 15" MBP coming with 2.16 Ghz as standard and the 17" moving up to 2.33 GHz. That is it, no iPods, no iPhones. Those will happen in Apple expo and MWSF respectively.
MAYBE we'll see the MacBook Pros/iMac get the Core 2 Duos as well although i think these will be silently released at the end of August or we see the MacBooks sporting 2.0Ghz core duos as standard with the 15" MBP coming with 2.16 Ghz as standard and the 17" moving up to 2.33 GHz. That is it, no iPods, no iPhones. Those will happen in Apple expo and MWSF respectively.
MacNut
Aug 7, 02:12 PM
Its about time they FINALLY hit 3ghz. This is a big step for Apple.
adrock
Jul 22, 12:55 AM
Monday is the 24th not the 23rd
islanders
Jul 23, 01:12 PM
(i tried to edit this and lost my post!)
FarmerBob
Nov 22, 04:52 AM
Just because Palm thinks it's that hard to make a phone doesn't necessarily mean that Apple would have had the same difficulties.
Apple can't make a proper OS much less a working phone. Get real. They have a ton of really good patents, as per all the latest leaks, but it will be a very long time before we see, if at all, them all together in the iPhone we would expect from Apple.
And Cingular is long out of the picture. They went elsewhere.
Also having been part of the cellular revolution, I know full well that the individual carriers will want the operations software of the "iPhone" contoured to their liking so much that it will defeat the purpose of the piece. Over the years many manufacturers have pulled phones from carriers because the level of bastardization of the phone software that the carrier required messed up the phone so much that the phone maker didn't want to be blamed for an inferior product. In the US there is no such thing as a truly accepted fully operational unlocked unit. Elsewhere in the world that is mostly how you buy a phone. Phone first, then a carrier. Not the other way around.
Apple can't make a proper OS much less a working phone. Get real. They have a ton of really good patents, as per all the latest leaks, but it will be a very long time before we see, if at all, them all together in the iPhone we would expect from Apple.
And Cingular is long out of the picture. They went elsewhere.
Also having been part of the cellular revolution, I know full well that the individual carriers will want the operations software of the "iPhone" contoured to their liking so much that it will defeat the purpose of the piece. Over the years many manufacturers have pulled phones from carriers because the level of bastardization of the phone software that the carrier required messed up the phone so much that the phone maker didn't want to be blamed for an inferior product. In the US there is no such thing as a truly accepted fully operational unlocked unit. Elsewhere in the world that is mostly how you buy a phone. Phone first, then a carrier. Not the other way around.
No comments:
Post a Comment