GekkePrutser
Apr 18, 04:32 AM
Any have a guess guess what this might mean for the 11"? Will that have to be even more of a compromise? I'm worried the C2D/320M might be a better option for me if Apple go for Sandy Bridge and have to cut even more corners on the 11" due to even harsher space/energy drain constraints.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
KnightWRX
Apr 14, 06:21 PM
Why don't you start reading things before making your incendiary comments?
:rolleyes:
Reading what ? Someone trying to say TB is an evolution of Fiber Channel when it does nothing of what Fiber Channel is actually used for ? Have you even ever used Fiber channel ?
:rolleyes:
Reading what ? Someone trying to say TB is an evolution of Fiber Channel when it does nothing of what Fiber Channel is actually used for ? Have you even ever used Fiber channel ?
TBR
Oct 24, 07:46 AM
If the prices havn't changed as mentioned above then this may make some people who were thinking of getting macbooks justify paying the extra for the pro, it seems more worth while now. I was in that position in june but I went for the Macbook.
twoodcc
Oct 18, 04:51 PM
way to go Apple! apple keeps looking better and better each year. i'm glad i'm here
more...
steadysignal
Apr 22, 06:41 PM
That is one ugly mock-up :eek:
very much agreed. it isnt elegant like 4 is. we'll see...
very much agreed. it isnt elegant like 4 is. we'll see...
Chundles
Jun 6, 01:35 AM
There is a 15 minute window after entering a password for purchase during which you can click "buy" and not be prompted.
more...
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
leekohler
Feb 28, 05:12 PM
I didn't say he should get more money. I said CBS will probably bring the show back because it make them so much money.
Reports are Cryer gets $1 million per. These figures include what they make on syndication too.
The that would bring the total between them to $80 million, which leaves everyone else with $20 million. That hardly seems OK or reasonable. There are a lot more people to pay and after that, what's left? I'd tell the guy to take a hike, especially with all the trouble he's caused.
Reports are Cryer gets $1 million per. These figures include what they make on syndication too.
The that would bring the total between them to $80 million, which leaves everyone else with $20 million. That hardly seems OK or reasonable. There are a lot more people to pay and after that, what's left? I'd tell the guy to take a hike, especially with all the trouble he's caused.
more...
Yamcha
Apr 25, 11:52 AM
I'm looking forward to it, although I'm hoping the LED IPS display issues are resolved, I don't want to have to deal with yellow tint or dead pixels..
It'd be great if Apple had the same no dead pixel policy as Dell..
Also hoping for a new design..
It'd be great if Apple had the same no dead pixel policy as Dell..
Also hoping for a new design..
Doc750
Feb 1, 03:53 PM
Base spec 13" MBP
Hengedock
Cant wait for the mbp to arrive
i got my hendgedock last week. When you set it up, put the hendgedock on it's side, and run the wires through the dock, and plug them into the MBP. Then set the hendgedock upright with the MBP in it and tighten the screws for the various plug ins.
I wasted a good 20 min trying to follow the instructions.
It's a nice little gadget, I just wish they made it out of aluminum to match everything else.
Hengedock
Cant wait for the mbp to arrive
i got my hendgedock last week. When you set it up, put the hendgedock on it's side, and run the wires through the dock, and plug them into the MBP. Then set the hendgedock upright with the MBP in it and tighten the screws for the various plug ins.
I wasted a good 20 min trying to follow the instructions.
It's a nice little gadget, I just wish they made it out of aluminum to match everything else.
more...
Wayfarer
Apr 16, 09:39 AM
Apple could make them an option in System Preferences :p
281525
YES! We have a choice! Thanks for pointing this out.
Dear Apple,
I LOVE THE SLIDER BUTTONS!
End of story. :cool:
281525
YES! We have a choice! Thanks for pointing this out.
Dear Apple,
I LOVE THE SLIDER BUTTONS!
End of story. :cool:
digitalbiker
Oct 19, 12:02 PM
everytime apple has posted earnings in the past 2 years, i wake up the following morning and go 'why didnt i ever invest in apple'.
Damnit.
Apple hasn't done that well over the last year.
It has done great over the last 6 - 7 years but it has been fairly static over the last year or so.
In fact last year in January it was higher than it is right now.
Damnit.
Apple hasn't done that well over the last year.
It has done great over the last 6 - 7 years but it has been fairly static over the last year or so.
In fact last year in January it was higher than it is right now.
more...
zachkolk
Apr 23, 07:10 PM
I don't believe this. Why would Apple waste money on a carrier that has just been bought?
griz
Jun 7, 03:33 PM
I say they should have kept it. Let him study up, take the bar, become a lawyer and pay for it himself.
more...
creator2456
Jan 30, 06:27 AM
Pre-ordered this, even law students love Pok�mon :)
http://www.vooks.net/images/PokemonBlackESRB.jpg
I would love to be able to get it too...but I'll have to deal with the girlfriend calling me a little kid. :o
There is NOTHING wrong with grown men playing Pokemon...until they start singing the theme song. :cool:
http://www.vooks.net/images/PokemonBlackESRB.jpg
I would love to be able to get it too...but I'll have to deal with the girlfriend calling me a little kid. :o
There is NOTHING wrong with grown men playing Pokemon...until they start singing the theme song. :cool:
ToddJ
Mar 31, 08:44 PM
They ought to have a 'classic' mode for iCal so people can choose...i know it won't happen though
more...
iJohnHenry
Apr 23, 07:10 PM
and the crew member who made the video is no longer employed by this organization.
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/thatsnice_cat-1.jpg
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/thatsnice_cat-1.jpg
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
DTphonehome
Jul 21, 02:05 PM
I'll get excited when/if Apple's Market share reaches 10%. Other than that, it's not such a big deal, IMO. :o
You can't get to 10% from 4% without passing through 4.8%
You can't get to 10% from 4% without passing through 4.8%
SensaiMinstixs
Jun 6, 06:41 AM
I don't really think the kid is rolling with a credit card of his own at 11 years of age. So maybe the mother should think about setting up a iTunes account for her son with a apple gift card or pre-pay visa. That way he can't run wild like Hulkamania with her credit card.... I wish my parents would of let me have free access to there visa as a kid :rolleyes:
SuperCachetes
Dec 30, 11:23 PM
<snip>
You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
<snip>
^^^^ All of that.
A huge problem (no pun intended) in America is the gigantic portions masquerading as meals in fast-food and casual restaurants. Some of the dishes available at very popular chains are absolutely ridiculous in size. Yet we buy them because they are a "good value." And let's face it - more often than not, we make a pretty good run at finishing off our plates, don't we? Unfortunately, that's just continuing the validation of the portion sizes...
I'm 6'-1" and 210# and when I go to a burger joint now, I usually get the kid's meal. I can't imagine going back to Jack's "Ultimate Cheeseburger" which in all honesty I used to love. :(
You should never feel full or stuffed. A donut is not faster to mow down than an Apple. It's not more filling either. It's tons more calories though.
<snip>
^^^^ All of that.
A huge problem (no pun intended) in America is the gigantic portions masquerading as meals in fast-food and casual restaurants. Some of the dishes available at very popular chains are absolutely ridiculous in size. Yet we buy them because they are a "good value." And let's face it - more often than not, we make a pretty good run at finishing off our plates, don't we? Unfortunately, that's just continuing the validation of the portion sizes...
I'm 6'-1" and 210# and when I go to a burger joint now, I usually get the kid's meal. I can't imagine going back to Jack's "Ultimate Cheeseburger" which in all honesty I used to love. :(
roadbloc
Apr 22, 07:16 AM
Record-breaking quarters and the position as the trend-setter in consumer tech.
These legal skirmishes haven't and won't result in any major untoward changes to Apple products. We all know this already.
Are you seriously suggesting that Apple is beyond the law because of record breaking quarters? :rolleyes:
These legal skirmishes haven't and won't result in any major untoward changes to Apple products. We all know this already.
Are you seriously suggesting that Apple is beyond the law because of record breaking quarters? :rolleyes:
obeygiant
May 1, 10:28 PM
Let the conspiracies theories begin.
lmalave
Oct 19, 08:09 AM
Heh heh...yeah me too. Maybe that's what The Steve (tm) was referring to when he said that '07 was going to be one of the most exciting years for Apple yet.
Or it could just be a new colour range for the iPod nanos.
I don't think Apple will come out with a "consumer" tower for the foreseeable future. I think Apple's strategy is to make "consumer" products like the Mini which are made to look more like consumer electronic devices (e.g. look like a stereo or DVD players). A tower just does not fit that category. Apple makes the Mac Pro for professionals that will actually put in a specialized video or audio card for their *professional* work. And yes, a consumer like a gamer might want that expandability just so they can get the latest and greatest gaming video card, but Apple is *not* going to aim for that category anytime soon because: 1) it's a small fraction of the market compared to the overall consumer market, and 2) the PC owns the gaming market. And why would Apple want to go for the PC gaming market anyway? A disproportionate amount of gamers just build "white box" computers so they can optimize everything to their liking for the lowest cost, and that's *definitely* not Apple's market.
Or it could just be a new colour range for the iPod nanos.
I don't think Apple will come out with a "consumer" tower for the foreseeable future. I think Apple's strategy is to make "consumer" products like the Mini which are made to look more like consumer electronic devices (e.g. look like a stereo or DVD players). A tower just does not fit that category. Apple makes the Mac Pro for professionals that will actually put in a specialized video or audio card for their *professional* work. And yes, a consumer like a gamer might want that expandability just so they can get the latest and greatest gaming video card, but Apple is *not* going to aim for that category anytime soon because: 1) it's a small fraction of the market compared to the overall consumer market, and 2) the PC owns the gaming market. And why would Apple want to go for the PC gaming market anyway? A disproportionate amount of gamers just build "white box" computers so they can optimize everything to their liking for the lowest cost, and that's *definitely* not Apple's market.
Harthansen
Jan 25, 06:31 PM
Apple's stock (APPL in NYSE) has plummeted $68 in the last 30 days (from $198 to $130 or 35%) does anyone know what has caused this? Curious...
-Hart
-Hart
Немає коментарів:
Дописати коментар