Stridder44
Aug 3, 10:34 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
The first Core 2 Duo (Merom) benchmarks (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/01/first_core-2_duo_benchmarks/) have already been making the rounds
The "tests" kind of sucked and wasn't that informative. Didn't tell us a whole lot...but either way I hope they get into the MBPs!!
The first Core 2 Duo (Merom) benchmarks (http://www.tgdaily.com/2006/08/01/first_core-2_duo_benchmarks/) have already been making the rounds
The "tests" kind of sucked and wasn't that informative. Didn't tell us a whole lot...but either way I hope they get into the MBPs!!
thankins
Mar 30, 06:47 PM
Can this build be installed/updated over the previous Developer Preview 1 install? Or do I have to do a clean install after each new build?
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
Coolerking
Sep 11, 12:33 PM
I bet ya a Core 2 Duo processor in my new macbook that Apple will be showcasing some more (of the cooler) applications in Leopard. I wouldn't be suprised if they sync up to a new Ipod or Iphone.
You heard it here first.
:cool:
You heard it here first.
:cool:
ehoui
Apr 7, 04:43 PM
Yes, the war just started and things are heating up. I would think the next few years will result in a tablet OS distribution that looks like this:
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
This is the interesting point and I agree largely with your sentiment: the real losers here are not iOS and Android (via their competition with each other). It's the other vendors. WebOS has a chance to participate as a key alternative (with the right execution from HP), but Microsoft is in real jeopardy here of missing the boat (again). I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it. But MS better get on the ball quickly.
iOS - 35%
Android - 40%
WebOS - 20%
RIM - 5%
Apple - 35%
HP - 20%
RIM - 5%
Samsung - 15%
Moto - 10%
LG - 10%
HTC - 5%
Maybe Microsoft will wedge their way in, maybe the percentages will be shifted around a little. But the growth of the tablet market will stabilize or at least stop growing at the rapid pace that it currently enjoys.
This is the interesting point and I agree largely with your sentiment: the real losers here are not iOS and Android (via their competition with each other). It's the other vendors. WebOS has a chance to participate as a key alternative (with the right execution from HP), but Microsoft is in real jeopardy here of missing the boat (again). I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it. But MS better get on the ball quickly.
a.phoenicis
Apr 25, 10:00 AM
I don't think that is the point here. Apple, arguably the greatest and most customer-centric company with the world's best smart phone, the best OS and magical appliances (at least, that is what I'm being told here over and over again) collects location data without your prior knowledge or consent. If you become a member of MacRumors it is your own, deliberate, decision. But I already can see where this is going. Cue the drone-like Apple defenders, I hear them coming ;)
Bzzt. Wrong. Everyone using iOS has already given their consent for tracking by accepting the License Agreement and not globally turning off Location Services. You can't claim you didn't know or give consent when it's on page 2 of the License Agreement of the fracking phone's OS:
Location Data. Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPhone that rely upon location information. To provide and improve these services, where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of your iPhone, and location search queries. The location data and queries collected by Apple are collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data and queries to provide and improve such products and services. You may withdraw this consent at any time by going to the Location Services setting on your iPhone and either turning off the global Location Services setting or turning off the individual location settings of each location-aware application on your iPhone
Bzzt. Wrong. Everyone using iOS has already given their consent for tracking by accepting the License Agreement and not globally turning off Location Services. You can't claim you didn't know or give consent when it's on page 2 of the License Agreement of the fracking phone's OS:
Location Data. Apple and its partners and licensees may provide certain services through your iPhone that rely upon location information. To provide and improve these services, where available, Apple and its partners and licensees may transmit, collect, maintain, process and use your location data, including the real-time geographic location of your iPhone, and location search queries. The location data and queries collected by Apple are collected in a form that does not personally identify you and may be used by Apple and its partners and licensees to provide and improve location-based products and services. By using any location-based services on your iPhone, you agree and consent to Apple's and its partners' and licensees' transmission, collection, maintenance, processing and use of your location data and queries to provide and improve such products and services. You may withdraw this consent at any time by going to the Location Services setting on your iPhone and either turning off the global Location Services setting or turning off the individual location settings of each location-aware application on your iPhone
tobefrnk
Nov 22, 09:22 AM
Ok...and the MSRP for that phone would be 800 bucks with a 10 year contract with cingular.
People need to realize that apple products are somewhat overpriced so I can see a great apple phone with great features but with a contract the phone is going to be extremely expensive.
Nokia already has phones (their N series (http://www.nokia.com/nseries/index.html?lang=en&country=US#product,n93)) capable of 640x480 30fps vid at $800 unlocked. I don't see an Apple Phone with these capabilities being THAT much more and certainly cheaper if Apple is the provider for the phone service as some people are speculating.
People need to realize that apple products are somewhat overpriced so I can see a great apple phone with great features but with a contract the phone is going to be extremely expensive.
Nokia already has phones (their N series (http://www.nokia.com/nseries/index.html?lang=en&country=US#product,n93)) capable of 640x480 30fps vid at $800 unlocked. I don't see an Apple Phone with these capabilities being THAT much more and certainly cheaper if Apple is the provider for the phone service as some people are speculating.
Applejuiced
Mar 26, 11:38 PM
No, they come out with new phones every WEEK, and you actually mean "cheaper and ********". This is not coming from a fanboy, I own and use daily an android device.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
True, they got tons of them comming out.
They might be cheaper but some of them do have better hardware specs but when it comes to the OS and the way it runs everything they sure are crappy and cant compete with the iOS.
I'm going to laugh at all those who say iOS 5 wont be delayed when it actually will be :rolleyes:
I give it by July there will be a new ios out and a new iphone.
Just my guess judging by the last 4 years but we will see how it goes.
Nobody really knows.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
True, they got tons of them comming out.
They might be cheaper but some of them do have better hardware specs but when it comes to the OS and the way it runs everything they sure are crappy and cant compete with the iOS.
I'm going to laugh at all those who say iOS 5 wont be delayed when it actually will be :rolleyes:
I give it by July there will be a new ios out and a new iphone.
Just my guess judging by the last 4 years but we will see how it goes.
Nobody really knows.
dethmaShine
May 4, 03:17 PM
I'm the one that raised the point in the first place! I think I set the context!
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
Exactly. You did set the context but you did fall out your words when you said that MAS download would be a better thing to exploit which in any case, not true.
Just like 'small white car' corrected you, there's nothing worse than an unrestricted Mac OS Install Disk. Simple.
I do. I don't have any need to violate it. I only have one Mac.
All of my computers have a fully licenced copy of Windows XP or 7 on them.
It's great. Good that you don't. Just saying that EULA doesn't hold a candle in practicality and can be easily exploited. I can illegally install the OS on a laptop in front of Apple and they cannot do anything. Not that they care, but even if they did, they couldn't.
cvaldes
Apr 7, 01:33 PM
All Apple did was created a premium brand. Technology was cheap and affordable in the MP3 market. You could pick up an MP3 player for under a $100 bucks until Apple came into the market with its $300 dollar iPod.
And you still can buy MP3 players that are far cheaper than what Apple offers.
Apple did not come to dominate this market with cost competition. They did it by providing a better overall consumer experience. If you judge by specs, you'd buy a Sansa instead of an iPod. However Joe Consumer doesn't care about specs.
And you still can buy MP3 players that are far cheaper than what Apple offers.
Apple did not come to dominate this market with cost competition. They did it by providing a better overall consumer experience. If you judge by specs, you'd buy a Sansa instead of an iPod. However Joe Consumer doesn't care about specs.
thisisahughes
Apr 20, 10:04 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I want A5 chip, 64 GB, white version.
yes.
I want A5 chip, 64 GB, white version.
yes.
Gottis
Apr 26, 02:13 PM
inevitable as android devices are available everywhere and in every price segment. remember, half of all American workers earn $505 or less per week.
Warbrain
Mar 26, 10:25 PM
I highly doubt this is the case. The iPhone still leads the forefront for iOS devices and will receive iOS 5 when it is released. The only way this works is if the release of iPhone 5 is in September and I don't see that happening any time soon.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:18 PM
Could care less either way. Although I'd love Apple to give us more ways to customize our screens for iOS devices, Apple has always protected their UI... it's that consistency that makes Apple devices so clean and easy.
The expression is "couldn't care less" by the way.
The expression is "couldn't care less" by the way.
onigami
May 6, 02:10 AM
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
smoketetsu
May 6, 08:11 AM
Oh this rumor rearing its ugly head again. First of all is intel really stagnating so much that they would want to make this switch?
Also doesn't anyone realize that just because an OS runs on a different architecture that doesn't mean all the apps made for it will suddenly run with 100% compatibility and speed? When I say this I mean that for Windows as well. So Windows 8 is going to have an ARM version. Good luck running Crysis 2 on that (for starters.. just an example).
Also simpler applications may just need a recompile. But there are many others that would need much more than just a simple recompile. There are also many many others that wouldn't get either treatment and simply wont perform well or have good compatibility (or even work at all) for a long long time if ever. I know some developers who probably would laugh at you if you told them it'll just be a simple recompile for them. That kool-aid wasn't true in the transition to x86 either. We still have software that hasn't made the transition that would benefit from it but will simply by orphaned when rosetta is killed off in Lion. I hear people fretting because of that and having to scramble to get x86 versions of that software whether it be through bootcamp or WINE.
Speaking of which; when apple switched to x86 they gained a lot of compatibility benefits that would be dumped if\when they switch to ARM. When going from PPC to x86 I quickly started finding more software becoming available or possible to get going due to the compatibility increase of the new architecture. We would be taking a step or more backwards with ARM. Like for example there was quite a bit of software had intel specific optimizations or functions that became available for use in OS X when updating them to intel or universal binaries... this includes Windows software that ran very well because no actual emulation was involved.
Of course many casual users wouldn't care about any of that.... and there's a lot of front facing iOS software that could be easily ported. Like if an applications's engine is already available for both it's already easy to make a Mac and iOS version of the application. But the whole platform would become a lot less appealing for someone like me. I never used rosetta much as on my Core based Mac it really only worked well for me for the simplest things... like a text application I would use to post to a blog.... some application with 2D graphics.... CPU emulation tends to be dog slow and this is on the currently best performing desktop CPUs.
So you may look forward to this possibly happening but I don't. I guess I could see Apple doing it especially since they seem to be keen on having a post-PC world. But in my opinion they'd more likely dump the Mac altogether and have an iOS dominated future in the cards and if you want a Personal Computer you have to get a non-apple PC.
It's good for a company to keep its options open but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But then again I guess I could see them doing it and waving goodbye to those who don't like it.
Also doesn't anyone realize that just because an OS runs on a different architecture that doesn't mean all the apps made for it will suddenly run with 100% compatibility and speed? When I say this I mean that for Windows as well. So Windows 8 is going to have an ARM version. Good luck running Crysis 2 on that (for starters.. just an example).
Also simpler applications may just need a recompile. But there are many others that would need much more than just a simple recompile. There are also many many others that wouldn't get either treatment and simply wont perform well or have good compatibility (or even work at all) for a long long time if ever. I know some developers who probably would laugh at you if you told them it'll just be a simple recompile for them. That kool-aid wasn't true in the transition to x86 either. We still have software that hasn't made the transition that would benefit from it but will simply by orphaned when rosetta is killed off in Lion. I hear people fretting because of that and having to scramble to get x86 versions of that software whether it be through bootcamp or WINE.
Speaking of which; when apple switched to x86 they gained a lot of compatibility benefits that would be dumped if\when they switch to ARM. When going from PPC to x86 I quickly started finding more software becoming available or possible to get going due to the compatibility increase of the new architecture. We would be taking a step or more backwards with ARM. Like for example there was quite a bit of software had intel specific optimizations or functions that became available for use in OS X when updating them to intel or universal binaries... this includes Windows software that ran very well because no actual emulation was involved.
Of course many casual users wouldn't care about any of that.... and there's a lot of front facing iOS software that could be easily ported. Like if an applications's engine is already available for both it's already easy to make a Mac and iOS version of the application. But the whole platform would become a lot less appealing for someone like me. I never used rosetta much as on my Core based Mac it really only worked well for me for the simplest things... like a text application I would use to post to a blog.... some application with 2D graphics.... CPU emulation tends to be dog slow and this is on the currently best performing desktop CPUs.
So you may look forward to this possibly happening but I don't. I guess I could see Apple doing it especially since they seem to be keen on having a post-PC world. But in my opinion they'd more likely dump the Mac altogether and have an iOS dominated future in the cards and if you want a Personal Computer you have to get a non-apple PC.
It's good for a company to keep its options open but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But then again I guess I could see them doing it and waving goodbye to those who don't like it.
kingtj
Mar 28, 10:02 AM
Apple has been repeatedly bashed for focusing too much on iOS devices, to the detriment of their core computer product line. (They took people off of working on OS X to finish fixing things on the iPad, etc. etc.)
Now, it sounds like they're trying to bring the focus back to the Mac again for a little while, and people are complaining??
Why would you feel a need to get a new cellphone every single year? Contracts tend to run 2 years, discouraging you from upgrading that often anyway. But regardless, all of the recent "smartphones" I've seen are built well enough so they'll easily hold up for a good 2 years of use. All of the things I'd really need to do on a mobile phone will work fine next year, just the way they work this year. Even if you're just hung up on having "the latest thing"? If Apple delays release of the iPhone 5, then the 4 remains the "latest thing" from them for a while longer.
More to the point of the original topic though? I can definitely see why this WWDC would be a critical one, in many ways, to talk about a lot of software changes! Apparently, the Linux community is rapidly switching over their software to the "GPL3" license, which has a lot of "gotchas" in it that try to restrict what commercial businesses can do with the code. Essentially, they're trying to keep companies like Apple from benefiting from their free, open-source projects, and keep them for Linux users instead. The Apache web server is moving to a GPL3 license, for example, as is the gcc compiler and Samba.
Apple has to start moving to alternate products for all of this core functionality and get developers up to speed on the changes, or we're in for a LOT of reduced functionality in future OS X versions.
That's just getting complacent in my opinion, people like myself like changing phones yearly, no new iPhone means no return business, I'll try something else instead, bad move if true.
Now, it sounds like they're trying to bring the focus back to the Mac again for a little while, and people are complaining??
Why would you feel a need to get a new cellphone every single year? Contracts tend to run 2 years, discouraging you from upgrading that often anyway. But regardless, all of the recent "smartphones" I've seen are built well enough so they'll easily hold up for a good 2 years of use. All of the things I'd really need to do on a mobile phone will work fine next year, just the way they work this year. Even if you're just hung up on having "the latest thing"? If Apple delays release of the iPhone 5, then the 4 remains the "latest thing" from them for a while longer.
More to the point of the original topic though? I can definitely see why this WWDC would be a critical one, in many ways, to talk about a lot of software changes! Apparently, the Linux community is rapidly switching over their software to the "GPL3" license, which has a lot of "gotchas" in it that try to restrict what commercial businesses can do with the code. Essentially, they're trying to keep companies like Apple from benefiting from their free, open-source projects, and keep them for Linux users instead. The Apache web server is moving to a GPL3 license, for example, as is the gcc compiler and Samba.
Apple has to start moving to alternate products for all of this core functionality and get developers up to speed on the changes, or we're in for a LOT of reduced functionality in future OS X versions.
That's just getting complacent in my opinion, people like myself like changing phones yearly, no new iPhone means no return business, I'll try something else instead, bad move if true.
ZZ Bottom
Mar 26, 10:09 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Here's to hoping they correct the obvious problems like notifications, poor photo organizational control, a corrected USB voltage, and a simple central file system (I know, not holding my breath).
Yay let us all surrender our privacy to the cloud... Sometimes I feel like the only one that understands the long term implications cloud based computer has when we allow our content and log files on others' servers. Thankfully I know I'm not the only one though.
Here's to hoping they correct the obvious problems like notifications, poor photo organizational control, a corrected USB voltage, and a simple central file system (I know, not holding my breath).
blow45
May 6, 04:56 AM
bs rumour, not in 2 years, no way, in 5 we 'll start talking.
SirHaakon
Mar 30, 12:25 AM
I really do like the concept of having an enormous amount of online storage, immediately accessible from anywhere.. but ultimately I see this as an issue of me having to pay someone else for granting access to things I already own.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
So that storage unit you have filled with couches and tennis rackets and old baseball cards... that should be free as well?
Let's be reasonable here. They have to buy drives (multiple drives, because clearly they need redundancy and backup) to put your music on and they have to pay for the bandwidth to pipe it out to you. I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Do you like paying a fee to your bank when you take out YOUR OWN MONEY from the bank?
No, of course not... but that's different. They aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is. Why should anyone have to pay for that? And before you tell me that digital music is just 1s and 0s too, you're right - and that's why Amazon gives you 5 gigs free. If you want more, obviously there's a cost involved. They can't support millions of customers each wanting a terabyte of storage for nothing.
Remember when television was free? We just had to put up with advertisements, and for that, we got free TV. Now many people pay 79 bucks a month or more to get cable or satellite TV.
Nothing has changed. Over-the-air broadcasts are still available for free. It's called an antenna. They may seem quaint, but Best Buy still sells them. If you want premium content, you pay for it.
Of course companies like Amazon and Apple are not in it for your convenience, they're in it because if everyone eventually has all their files stored online in the cloud, there's TONS and TONS of money to be made- for ever. If I have a computer, phone or music listening device with ample amounts of storage space, these companies don't make any money off of me after I purchase that music from itunes or wherever. (And if I have cds or blu ray movies, they don't make any money on me at all). This cloud concept provides some convenience, but more importantly guarantees a steady flow of income for these companies for many years to come.
Well first of all, if you buy a Blu-ray disc from Amazon, they're still taking their cut. So saying they make "no money at all" from that is inaccurate. But again, they are offering you physical storage space that is available 24/7 from wherever you are. Why would you expect that to be free? That's just a ridiculous mentality. The prices they're asking aren't very expensive, either. How much do you spend on your cable bill every month? Your phone bill? People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free. (Why buy the CD when I can just watch it on YouTube?). Just because something is available somewhere for free doesn't mean it's worthless. Amazon is providing a service. That service comes with a fee. If you don't think it's worth it, don't buy it... but I think your expectations are pretty misplaced.
Flash memory storage capacities are growing yearly.. and prices are continuing to drop. Now companies are starting to ship secure digital cards with capacities of a staggering 128 GB on a tiny compact flash card! Ultimately I think most people will be able to have enormous amounts of files locally on their own phone or portable computer.
Sure they can. That isn't the point of this, though. I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files. But what a pain in the ass it is to share between them all. Do I want to use up 80 gigs of my laptop's internal drive just to take all of my music with me when I travel? Do I want duplicate copies of everything I own on all of these different devices just to make sure the one thing I'm looking for at any particular moment is there no matter what? Good grief, no. Yes of course I will keep A backup of all of my files on a local system - I'm not trusting anything ONLY to the cloud - but now there's a way to access my music (or any other kind of file, for that matter) wherever I go, quickly and easily. Sure, it's not much different than dropbox except that it's cheaper and less complicated. How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips. It makes a lot of sense to me.
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.
shelterpaw
Aug 7, 08:15 PM
Apple's $400 price for 500GB HDs is Absurd. Fry's $99 for 400GB Maxtor SATA/300 on Memorial Day is more reasonable wouldn't you say?
.
It is quite a hight price, but when looking into hard drives keep in mind how loud they are. Apple tends to choose quiet drives and Maxtor tends to make really loud drives. Would be a shame to buy such a lovely machine only to put a bunch of loud and whinig drives in it. silentpcreview.com is a good place to go to see which drives are the best. http://www.silentpcreview.com/
Seagate tends to do a good job of keeping the noise down.
.
It is quite a hight price, but when looking into hard drives keep in mind how loud they are. Apple tends to choose quiet drives and Maxtor tends to make really loud drives. Would be a shame to buy such a lovely machine only to put a bunch of loud and whinig drives in it. silentpcreview.com is a good place to go to see which drives are the best. http://www.silentpcreview.com/
Seagate tends to do a good job of keeping the noise down.
kirk26
Apr 5, 02:04 PM
Only thing more shaky than a JB iPhone is a POS Scion. They deserve each other.
Nothing wrong with a Scion there, buddy. ;)
Nothing wrong with a Scion there, buddy. ;)
Tones2
Mar 28, 11:07 AM
Come on - there will be an iPhone 5 in July. That's the customer expectation and if they did NOT release it then, their stock price would suffer and they would certainly lose market share to the newer phones. They are already somewhat behind newer phones that have much larger screens, faster processors, better cameras, etc - no way they wait until next year or even winter 2011. They will find component supplies and keep on track.
Tony
Tony
iliketyla
Apr 18, 04:54 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
The LG KE850, also known as the LG Prada,[1] is a touchscreen mobile phone made by LG Electronics. It was first announced on December 12, 2006. -
Wikipedia
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
The LG KE850, also known as the LG Prada,[1] is a touchscreen mobile phone made by LG Electronics. It was first announced on December 12, 2006. -
Wikipedia
