macguy78
Mar 25, 12:32 AM
Does anyone know if Target is price matching or is expected to be following suit with their own reduced prices? I have a hefty credit with Target that I would very much enjoy using on purchasing the original ipad at the new verizon price.
King Cobra
Sep 15, 01:07 PM
>I'm sorry about that double post it won't let me delete them
Heh. Someone else had that problem. You have to be one of us, muhahahahaha! :eek:
>I personally feel that OS X and the whole Mac experience is worth the difference for a computer that will without a doubt whip the pants off that Dell and continue to do it after it the Dell is dead and gone.
I think Gatelaid may suffer first: Sleep forever standing up, like a cow. :D
OS X absolutely *kills* all the other OSs, as most of us know (especially with 10.2). You won't see that with a Windoze update. Upgrading to ME is sort of a 50:50 deal, whether you upgrade successfully, or upgrade in heck. And constant Windoze upgrades come in the fashion of "kill a bug/get one free". But as long as you don't have upgrader cards or such with your Mac, OS 10.2 really doesn't need so many updates, except for add-ons and stuff.
Heh. Someone else had that problem. You have to be one of us, muhahahahaha! :eek:
>I personally feel that OS X and the whole Mac experience is worth the difference for a computer that will without a doubt whip the pants off that Dell and continue to do it after it the Dell is dead and gone.
I think Gatelaid may suffer first: Sleep forever standing up, like a cow. :D
OS X absolutely *kills* all the other OSs, as most of us know (especially with 10.2). You won't see that with a Windoze update. Upgrading to ME is sort of a 50:50 deal, whether you upgrade successfully, or upgrade in heck. And constant Windoze upgrades come in the fashion of "kill a bug/get one free". But as long as you don't have upgrader cards or such with your Mac, OS 10.2 really doesn't need so many updates, except for add-ons and stuff.
MacBandit
Sep 14, 01:21 AM
Originally posted by King Cobra
verbose, do you ever give newbies a break with typos these days? :rolleyes: :D
Great posts, guys. Well worth reading. But I think some of you need to take a closer look at WHY MHz/GHz doesn't matter as much.
First of all, the Px does not have the Velocity Engine, and OS 10.1/2 uses it. There is a dramatic performance over the G4 (and especially later G3s) with 10.2, as the operating system is now more effeciant. Also, OS X takes advantage of dual processors to a certain degree (maybe an extra 50 percent or so). Finally, when you take a look at the new PowerMacs, you are looking at 4MB of L3 Cache (w/ dual 1.25GHz). The Px don't seem to have that (if any). So, basically, that would bring a 64-bit system (in terms of the P4) to about 4 or 5GHz right there.
Now, take a look at the PC. Sure, the PC has incredible boot time, is great for playing games, and has a quick OS. However, the P4 lacks the necessity of an effecient L1 Cache. I do not see how 4Kb will provide enough memory for the complex operations tha Macs can handle. So, instead of a 4.7GHz, you're looking at, maybe, 3.x or 4GHz, assuming, with this new chip, the L1 cache has remained unchanged.
First of all what do you consider great boot times? Not that this matters a lot. I have a new Dual Ghz/DDR and it starts from cold boot to login in screen in 27secs with 10.2 and from login to operating finder is nearly instantaneous.
Second of all as I have stated before the true reason Mhz doesn't matter is because something like %98 of all computer users are not power users these are the people that will go buy a new computer tomorrow and if there is a 2.8Ghz computer sitting next to a 800Mhz computer they couldn't care they're going to buy the cheap one. They don't even care how much ram it has. I know this because I went computer shopping with my boss for work(yes for a PC). He wanted my help. Well little help I was he bought the cheapest computer he could get with 64MB of Ram I suggested we upgrade it later and he agreed well that was 2 years ago still it sits with 64MB of RAM in it. Oh and I might add it still has all the stickers on the front of it. These people don't care about this stuff all it's used for is mail and the occasional websearch and most people are like this.
verbose, do you ever give newbies a break with typos these days? :rolleyes: :D
Great posts, guys. Well worth reading. But I think some of you need to take a closer look at WHY MHz/GHz doesn't matter as much.
First of all, the Px does not have the Velocity Engine, and OS 10.1/2 uses it. There is a dramatic performance over the G4 (and especially later G3s) with 10.2, as the operating system is now more effeciant. Also, OS X takes advantage of dual processors to a certain degree (maybe an extra 50 percent or so). Finally, when you take a look at the new PowerMacs, you are looking at 4MB of L3 Cache (w/ dual 1.25GHz). The Px don't seem to have that (if any). So, basically, that would bring a 64-bit system (in terms of the P4) to about 4 or 5GHz right there.
Now, take a look at the PC. Sure, the PC has incredible boot time, is great for playing games, and has a quick OS. However, the P4 lacks the necessity of an effecient L1 Cache. I do not see how 4Kb will provide enough memory for the complex operations tha Macs can handle. So, instead of a 4.7GHz, you're looking at, maybe, 3.x or 4GHz, assuming, with this new chip, the L1 cache has remained unchanged.
First of all what do you consider great boot times? Not that this matters a lot. I have a new Dual Ghz/DDR and it starts from cold boot to login in screen in 27secs with 10.2 and from login to operating finder is nearly instantaneous.
Second of all as I have stated before the true reason Mhz doesn't matter is because something like %98 of all computer users are not power users these are the people that will go buy a new computer tomorrow and if there is a 2.8Ghz computer sitting next to a 800Mhz computer they couldn't care they're going to buy the cheap one. They don't even care how much ram it has. I know this because I went computer shopping with my boss for work(yes for a PC). He wanted my help. Well little help I was he bought the cheapest computer he could get with 64MB of Ram I suggested we upgrade it later and he agreed well that was 2 years ago still it sits with 64MB of RAM in it. Oh and I might add it still has all the stickers on the front of it. These people don't care about this stuff all it's used for is mail and the occasional websearch and most people are like this.
rasmasyean
May 3, 03:57 PM
The effect of terrorists to the West is enormously magnified by our reaction to them. How many Western deaths have been caused through terrorism in the last 15 years. 5000? Probably less than 200 in the last 5 years.
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
Not all lives are "equal". One life of an important financial worker who perished at WTC might be worth more than 1000 soldiers. That's the order of society. A soldier's life is meant to be sacrificed to protect the worker. Some "warriors" are born to be this way, like army ants. The worker is more important because he makes guns to put into the hands of new soldiers. And of course, as you may have noticed, many of the front line (infantry) consists of would be rejects of society that have been conditioned and given a chance to serve a greater purpose than to become delinquents or menial workers that they would have been. "Unimportant Lives" in the big picture despite what their own families think of them. That's the unwritten rule.
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
How many soldiers have been killed in subsequent wars? Over 7000 (http://icasualties.org/).
How many civilians have been killed in these wars? 100s of thousands.
And how much are we spending on this? What is the 'opportunity cost' of that lost cash - which could have been spent on health care/research/education?
I think we need to learn to ignore the 'short game' of small terrorist outrages and instead concentrate on the 'long game', which the West is undoubtably winning.
Terrorists represent a tiny proportion of radicals, that bubble to the surface of large populations of unhappy, poor and repressed people. Those underlying populations are changing though... all across North Africa and the Arab world people are mobilising to gain democracy, spurred on by the slow liberalising Western influence of open communication technologies and culture. This 'long game' political change is MUCH more significant than OBL's death.
Take away the unhappy cultures that breed terrorists won't completely remove risk - but it will make terrorism more the action of criminals, and less of a 'clash of cultures'. Smart Western political leadership would sell terrorist outrages as 'random acts of criminal radicals' not 'we must go to war with the axis of evil'.
All Obama has to do is decide whether he can afford to stop propping up the US military industrial complex.
Not all lives are "equal". One life of an important financial worker who perished at WTC might be worth more than 1000 soldiers. That's the order of society. A soldier's life is meant to be sacrificed to protect the worker. Some "warriors" are born to be this way, like army ants. The worker is more important because he makes guns to put into the hands of new soldiers. And of course, as you may have noticed, many of the front line (infantry) consists of would be rejects of society that have been conditioned and given a chance to serve a greater purpose than to become delinquents or menial workers that they would have been. "Unimportant Lives" in the big picture despite what their own families think of them. That's the unwritten rule.
In history, war is the driver of innovation...from the measly dart, to the nuclear warhead. Whether we will sustain through it to reap the benefits ourselves may be another story....like Nazi Germany where we stole all their world changing innovations after we collapsed them. Although it may bring disgust to some ppl today, Nazi Germany was one of the greatest economic, technological, and war machines ever devised and Adolf Hitler was one of the most influential and greatest men who ever lived...for his people. He just lost so we don't believe in what he tried to establish.
If there is no war, we would build more capitalistic indulgence crap to make eachother happy and lazy. But in war, we build things that help us survive. Advanced in bomb detection leads to better sensors for medical diagnosis.
Advances in robots leads to better prosthetics and automating.
Advances in field portable displays leads to large LED screens for remote surgery.
Advances in nanotech will potentially change everything we know of as "technology" today.
Many of the above will assist the "cure for cancer", or whatever it is that scares you to death. If you think that during "peacetime", everyone and their mom will devote their lives to "finding the cure", you are sadly mistaken. Humans are lazy...until their life is immediately threatened. War is why we evolved so far past the next "animal".
more...
Bye Bye Baby
Apr 5, 01:28 PM
One wonders what was being said:
"you ********** thief!"
"You maniacal self-centred b**tard!"
And two cafe lattes please. No fat.
"you ********** thief!"
"You maniacal self-centred b**tard!"
And two cafe lattes please. No fat.
markjs
May 4, 06:35 AM
I am a confirmed PC user, you might call me a PC biggot because I will defend my PC preference to the death. Primarily I like the PC because of it's gaming ability, combined with internet access, and the fact I could afford it and am able to build and upgrade it myself cheaply while still buying high quality parts. My PC is a modest:
Athlon XP 1700+
ECS K7S5A Mainboard
512MB PC2100
SB Live Value
Onboard Lan
ATI Radeon 8500LE 64MB
Realtek PCI NIC
Western Digital 40GB and 20GB 7200RPM ATA 100 hard disks
Running Windows XP Professional Service pack 1
What I am getting at by this post, is why are Mac people so biggoted against the PC. Another guy made a post somewhere else about how maybe one in fifteen PC users is anti Mac, but more like one in two Mac users is anti PC. What can a Mac user do that I can't? I do audio and video editing on my PC, I can't think of anything a Mac can do my computer can't (and I'll wager I'll do anything cheaper, and being poor that's a serious consideration to me), and what is the big draw to the Mac. I realize this isn't the best forum for a two sided debate, but I am thowing it out there anyway.
Note: I really don't want to hear how Windows sucks, because the newest version is very easily useable and quite stable and I personally know at least one person who likes Windows XP as much as OSX and uses both regularly. Granted Win 98 was a steaming pile o' dog doo and so was ME, but since 2K Windows has been very viable. Another thing to consider is that Windows is written to work on hundreds....even thousands of hardware configurations, when Mac OS needs to work on maybe 10.....That itself aquits even Windows 95 rather nicely. Besides I can run Linux or other flavors of Unix on my PC should I choose. My inquiry is about the hardware....why do you love it so much it makes you hate PC's
PS I know two people who have switched from Mac personally, so it goes both ways.
Athlon XP 1700+
ECS K7S5A Mainboard
512MB PC2100
SB Live Value
Onboard Lan
ATI Radeon 8500LE 64MB
Realtek PCI NIC
Western Digital 40GB and 20GB 7200RPM ATA 100 hard disks
Running Windows XP Professional Service pack 1
What I am getting at by this post, is why are Mac people so biggoted against the PC. Another guy made a post somewhere else about how maybe one in fifteen PC users is anti Mac, but more like one in two Mac users is anti PC. What can a Mac user do that I can't? I do audio and video editing on my PC, I can't think of anything a Mac can do my computer can't (and I'll wager I'll do anything cheaper, and being poor that's a serious consideration to me), and what is the big draw to the Mac. I realize this isn't the best forum for a two sided debate, but I am thowing it out there anyway.
Note: I really don't want to hear how Windows sucks, because the newest version is very easily useable and quite stable and I personally know at least one person who likes Windows XP as much as OSX and uses both regularly. Granted Win 98 was a steaming pile o' dog doo and so was ME, but since 2K Windows has been very viable. Another thing to consider is that Windows is written to work on hundreds....even thousands of hardware configurations, when Mac OS needs to work on maybe 10.....That itself aquits even Windows 95 rather nicely. Besides I can run Linux or other flavors of Unix on my PC should I choose. My inquiry is about the hardware....why do you love it so much it makes you hate PC's
PS I know two people who have switched from Mac personally, so it goes both ways.
more...
kustardking
Apr 16, 03:26 PM
Here's what I think the cross-compiler issue is. Adobe had the same sort of problem before they bought flash, with their app that made flash files. It was called LiveMotion and it was great. The problem with that app though, was that Macromedia controlled flash, and adobe could only reverse engineer it after the latest version had been released. So, the features of Flash 7 couldn't be realized by the Adobe LiveMotion app until waaaay after the release of Flash 7. Usually near Flash 8, etc. Adobe was essentially always a version behind. Not such a big deal with apps made for desktops and laptops. But if Apple wants to control the experience and have all it's apps updated very quickly for new OS updates, they'd have to reveal all the new features to Adobe way beforehand so that all the people making apps via Adobe's compilier could update them quickly. And of course Apple would be reliant on those developers actually desiring to pay Adobe for an upgrade to flash, which usually only comes out every year and a half or so. Much slower than updates to iPhone and it's OS. So instead, if all the developers are using Apple's tools, Apple can simply slide them a free SDK update and have them recompile. Since updating apps is so simple this way, Apple can easily require that the developers recompile in a certain time frame. Pretty hard to do for the developers that would be going through Flash, and if Adobe didn't update their tools, then the devs couldn't update, and you've got a mess and the only people losing would be the iPhone users, and then of course Apple.
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
This is a sensible perspective
Not saying it's right or wrong. Just saying that's where Apple's coming from. I really don't think they are trying to piss off Adobe in particular. Why should they be angry at Adobe anyway? They're the ones that didn't allow flash. Adobe should be angry at Apple.
This is a sensible perspective
whooleytoo
Sep 26, 04:18 PM
I'm obviously missing something obvious - where is the text of the cease and desist letter. Is it contained in one of the links in the original article?
more...
DPinTX
Mar 11, 11:32 AM
Line is about 46 now at Stonebriar. Posting pics on twitter @dpedini
Cookies are still calling my name must resist.
Stop by say Hello
DP
Cookies are still calling my name must resist.
Stop by say Hello
DP
Tailpike1153
Jan 20, 12:48 PM
I'd say I'll never get lost again but I seem to have misplaced my iPhone.:p
more...
orangephoto
Sep 20, 10:13 AM
ok the first one is all i needed
the smc said it was already up
now if they would only fix the airport issues...
i hate internet sharing with my powerbook
the smc said it was already up
now if they would only fix the airport issues...
i hate internet sharing with my powerbook
grooveattack
Feb 23, 03:41 PM
oooo high as pos please. was thinking dvd screen shot but it looks pants.
more...
wPod
Oct 10, 12:40 PM
i predict a 10" (or similarly small size) macbook, along with core 2 bumps for the macbook pro. i predict the 10" or such b/c a friend of mine (who has big connections in the 'tech world' (he is an IT director and somehow magically knows a lot of people in the 'tech world' (like he implimented a wireless network before there was wireless networking, he got some pre-production 802.11b gear before it was standardized, he also did the same thing with a gigabit router)) anyway, he told me he has been demoing a 10" mac laptop. and i was just like 'sure whatever you say' (cause sometimes this guy can be completely full of *hit.) but he eventually convinced me that he has actually seen some 10" mac laptop demo computer somewhere. im still pretty skeptical about it, but this guy is a big mac hater, so the only reason he would try it is if it was some 10" super portable machine. b/c he does LOVE ultra portable laptops, and he is kinda getting a liking for mac, only because he can run windows on it! (though he has yet to actually purchase a mac)
Unorthodox
Sep 25, 10:01 AM
The Apple Store isn't even down..... :(
more...
OreoCookie
Mar 29, 08:31 AM
You have to have a standard frame of reference which is a 35mm sensor size.
That's correct, but you're not using this standard of reference properly: no manufacturer uses effective focal lengths to refer to lenses for dslrs (e. g. it's a 17-55 mm f/2.8 lens and not a 27-88 mm f/2.8 (equiv.) lens), be it a lens tailored for crop lenses or otherwise, but always the physical focal length. I think this is where your misunderstanding lies. This means a full frame lens and a crop lens with the same focal length with produce the same field of view on the same body. A 17-55 mm lens set to 50 mm will produce the same field of view than a nifty fifty on a crop camera (say, a 7D or a 40D).
Note that very often, this is handled differently on compact cameras where you will often find effective focal lengths rather than actual focal lengths, the reason being that sensor sizes can vary quite widely between models.
That's correct, but you're not using this standard of reference properly: no manufacturer uses effective focal lengths to refer to lenses for dslrs (e. g. it's a 17-55 mm f/2.8 lens and not a 27-88 mm f/2.8 (equiv.) lens), be it a lens tailored for crop lenses or otherwise, but always the physical focal length. I think this is where your misunderstanding lies. This means a full frame lens and a crop lens with the same focal length with produce the same field of view on the same body. A 17-55 mm lens set to 50 mm will produce the same field of view than a nifty fifty on a crop camera (say, a 7D or a 40D).
Note that very often, this is handled differently on compact cameras where you will often find effective focal lengths rather than actual focal lengths, the reason being that sensor sizes can vary quite widely between models.
swiftaw
Apr 7, 06:57 PM
The fact that congress cannot construct a budget is simply a failure of them to perform their duties. Part of the reason is that the motivation to avoid a shutdown isn't great enough, thus I propose a two-fold solution to motivate them a little
1) Congress persons do not get paid during the shutdown. Perhaps if they were to not get paid they would be more motivated.
2) In the event of a shutdown all members of congress immediately become ineligible to run for re-election for their current position and ineligible to run in any other federal election. Since a shutdown means they've failed, they shouldn't be allowed to continue.
1) Congress persons do not get paid during the shutdown. Perhaps if they were to not get paid they would be more motivated.
2) In the event of a shutdown all members of congress immediately become ineligible to run for re-election for their current position and ineligible to run in any other federal election. Since a shutdown means they've failed, they shouldn't be allowed to continue.
more...
rdowns
Apr 5, 09:05 AM
Oh my, what a conundrum for the fan boys. On one hand, CR loves the iPad and Apple's customer service but on the other hand, we have the iPhone 4. :D
redeye be
Jun 23, 05:24 PM
Redeye, you have to enjoy the warm weather a bit. Stop developing that widget and get out into the sun!
Yeah, you're probably right. Although most of the work is done during the currently to hot nights ;).
What am I saying.... Get back to work and work on it all day tomorrow, it's gonna rain anyhow! :D
Bossing me around, are you? :mad:
I'll have you're folding @$$ in 178 days as i can see from the new version of the widget. Watch your back mate :D.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Just made it work a half an hour ago, have fun with it ppl.
See first post to download.
As the new 'bug' section says: there is a resizing bug when viewing the back. Click the bottom of the widget to make it large before you view prefs to get the smoothest transition.
The code cleanup is needed now more than ever. This was one of the lasts steps in the beta stage. I will now (appart from fixing some more - user reported - bugs maybe) start working on the widget from scratch. Less code, nicer graphics, easier to use. It will take a while though.
Any request on widget abilities will be considered.
Time to enjoy the weather.
24�C at 12:23 am :(.
Have fun with the widget and let me know what you think.
Yeah, you're probably right. Although most of the work is done during the currently to hot nights ;).
What am I saying.... Get back to work and work on it all day tomorrow, it's gonna rain anyhow! :D
Bossing me around, are you? :mad:
I'll have you're folding @$$ in 178 days as i can see from the new version of the widget. Watch your back mate :D.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Just made it work a half an hour ago, have fun with it ppl.
See first post to download.
As the new 'bug' section says: there is a resizing bug when viewing the back. Click the bottom of the widget to make it large before you view prefs to get the smoothest transition.
The code cleanup is needed now more than ever. This was one of the lasts steps in the beta stage. I will now (appart from fixing some more - user reported - bugs maybe) start working on the widget from scratch. Less code, nicer graphics, easier to use. It will take a while though.
Any request on widget abilities will be considered.
Time to enjoy the weather.
24�C at 12:23 am :(.
Have fun with the widget and let me know what you think.
linsam
Jan 6, 11:12 PM
No Sound For Me Either. I Suspect An Update To Come Real Soon.
greengiant912
Apr 1, 01:30 PM
My question though is how is this any different then having multiple TVs on your cable account? You can only watch TV on your account when your in your own home and on your own WiFi. Time warner took some pretty big steps to make sure you can't "steal" cable... It is a pretty secure app.
I am just wondering why Viacom and others are bitching? Its just like going in the other room and watching it on the other TV... Doesn't allow you to watch TV away from home..
I am just wondering why Viacom and others are bitching? Its just like going in the other room and watching it on the other TV... Doesn't allow you to watch TV away from home..
chrono1081
Apr 11, 08:33 PM
Haha, spoiled Americans ;)
Cheapest in my town, Gothenburg, Sweden, is $8,5 per gallon...
Agreed we are spoiled. Unfortunately the U.S. has a horrible infrastructure as far as public transportation and such so many people live far from their jobs and have to drive everywhere.
I remember in New Zealand paying $4 something per liter :eek:
Here where I live at the Sheetz gas stations its $3.75.
Cheapest in my town, Gothenburg, Sweden, is $8,5 per gallon...
Agreed we are spoiled. Unfortunately the U.S. has a horrible infrastructure as far as public transportation and such so many people live far from their jobs and have to drive everywhere.
I remember in New Zealand paying $4 something per liter :eek:
Here where I live at the Sheetz gas stations its $3.75.
tktaylor1
Apr 23, 02:47 PM
[QUOTE: What could possibly have you on the fence? Was it the birther issue? Him taking his casinos into bankruptcy 3 times? His Iraq solution to just "take all the oil"? His China solution to renegotiate? His general I'm a dumb, rich, ****ing American badass attitude? His public feuds with Rosie O'Donnell?]
Scottsdale
Apr 20, 12:40 PM
I have zero reason to downgrade to Sandy Bridge with its forced worthless IGP & chipset.
I do believe the backlit keyboard will make it back IF Apple continues to sell a MacBook. If Apple eliminates the MB and puts the low end MBA in its place at $999, then I suspect the backlit keyboard stays a thing of the past. If however Apple keeps the MB, I think it will conclude that at least the 13" MBA needs the upgraded feature. It is extremely low cost. I would be shocked if it costs $0.50 per MBA unit, and it seems like a big advantage. I think Apple likes to "experiment" with features so it can then add them back and act like they learned their lesson when actually they just want added sales.
I really don't believe there is any worry about a Sandy Bridge CPU making its way into the MBA. With Apple's update cycles, it could easily just wait for Ivy Bridge. Let's remember that the only Mac that uses low and ultra low voltage CPUs are the two MBAs. Apple can update the MB, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac to Sandy Bridge standard core CPUs and not get the horrific loss in graphics performance that the MBA would receive with LV and ULV CPUs and their respective IGPs. I just think the vast majority of MBA buyers a, don't care, and b, would be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m for another year.
I will be shocked to see a Sandy Bridge MBA unless it includes a standard voltage CPU... Ivy Bridge just makes much more sense.
I do believe the backlit keyboard will make it back IF Apple continues to sell a MacBook. If Apple eliminates the MB and puts the low end MBA in its place at $999, then I suspect the backlit keyboard stays a thing of the past. If however Apple keeps the MB, I think it will conclude that at least the 13" MBA needs the upgraded feature. It is extremely low cost. I would be shocked if it costs $0.50 per MBA unit, and it seems like a big advantage. I think Apple likes to "experiment" with features so it can then add them back and act like they learned their lesson when actually they just want added sales.
I really don't believe there is any worry about a Sandy Bridge CPU making its way into the MBA. With Apple's update cycles, it could easily just wait for Ivy Bridge. Let's remember that the only Mac that uses low and ultra low voltage CPUs are the two MBAs. Apple can update the MB, Mac mini, and 21.5" iMac to Sandy Bridge standard core CPUs and not get the horrific loss in graphics performance that the MBA would receive with LV and ULV CPUs and their respective IGPs. I just think the vast majority of MBA buyers a, don't care, and b, would be better off with C2D and Nvidia 320m for another year.
I will be shocked to see a Sandy Bridge MBA unless it includes a standard voltage CPU... Ivy Bridge just makes much more sense.
baypharm
Dec 3, 10:02 AM
If you want it, buy it. Stop complaining about other people's success. Lots of people sell 3rd party junk.
Sorry but this is not legal success. That's the difference.
Sorry but this is not legal success. That's the difference.
No comments:
Post a Comment