apolloa
Apr 23, 06:11 PM
Bogus story because Apple would never fit graphics cards capable of outputting at that res in the iMacs or laptops. Plus I don't think any single monitor can have that resolution that you can buy today?
wclyffe
Dec 27, 01:34 PM
Hey well my girlfriend just got me a kit for Christmas, and it works great. I've be on a trip with a total drive time of 18 to 20
hours, and I haven't had a problem, and it actually improves my iPhone 3g function since it doesn't have to use the native gps chip. So I think it is a good product. Good luck with BLT!!!
Glad to hear, and congrats! I just saw BLT has them in stock so mine will likely be shipping out tomorrow!
hours, and I haven't had a problem, and it actually improves my iPhone 3g function since it doesn't have to use the native gps chip. So I think it is a good product. Good luck with BLT!!!
Glad to hear, and congrats! I just saw BLT has them in stock so mine will likely be shipping out tomorrow!
greenstork
Aug 4, 01:02 AM
Never buy an apple product!!!
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
What doesn't your Macbook do fast enough?
As soon as you do something new and better comes out!!!
AAAHHHHHH
I am typing this away on my new Macbook, Core 1 Duo; which i bought under the self-brainwashed reasoning that the MBP alone would see 2x2. Why you ask? Cuz I figured hey, the MB JUST came out, why refresh it every 2 months! The MBP has been out like 8 months, that makes sense.
I can only PRAY I am right.
No that my Macbook will be instant crap... I just COULD have waited until september.
Damn you apple...
What doesn't your Macbook do fast enough?
wovel
Apr 25, 10:55 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
Steve did not actually say anything. Someone said he did, MR decided it must be fact. The ease with which these headers can be faked or even fake mails can be be put ion gmail boxes was shown conclusively last year.
These stories should have a much more pronounced disclaimer.
Steve did not actually say anything. Someone said he did, MR decided it must be fact. The ease with which these headers can be faked or even fake mails can be be put ion gmail boxes was shown conclusively last year.
These stories should have a much more pronounced disclaimer.
arnizzlewhizzle
Jul 30, 07:59 PM
i think cingular would be their best bet as a serious partner. their sim cards would be ideal for this.
iphone3gs16gb
Mar 26, 09:34 PM
Don't listen to this crap...
Cougarcat
Apr 23, 09:26 PM
The current iMac's can't even run games at 2560x1440 very well, so an even higher resolution? Unless they want to stick a desktop Radeon 6950 (at least) in there, it just wouldn't work. Surely Apple sees how important gaming is with iOS and Steam?
You don't have to run games at those high resolutions.
You don't have to run games at those high resolutions.
Blakeco123
Apr 23, 04:37 PM
sorry just a correction the resolution isnt 3200x3200 its 3200x2000 i just checked
QCassidy352
Aug 2, 11:00 AM
Apple's been so boring this year, with a bluetooth might mouse just about the most exciting release thus far...
macbook pro? imac core duo? intel mini? macbook? :confused:
mac pro, xserve intel, leopard previews, maybe cinema displays, maybe something like a tablet that we haven't heard about.
no updates to imacs, macbooks, macbook pros, or minis. Those are minor speed bumps that will be done quietly over the coming weeks and months, not something to trumpet in a keynote.
macbook pro? imac core duo? intel mini? macbook? :confused:
mac pro, xserve intel, leopard previews, maybe cinema displays, maybe something like a tablet that we haven't heard about.
no updates to imacs, macbooks, macbook pros, or minis. Those are minor speed bumps that will be done quietly over the coming weeks and months, not something to trumpet in a keynote.
Reach9
Mar 28, 12:06 PM
Wow, this has to be bs. I cannot believe Apple won't introduce any hardware in WWDC '11.
They're planning on stretching the iPhone 4? Good job Apple, don't complain about losing customers now. If Apple releases the next iPhone after 2 years, then they are officially going to lose whatever market share they had.
I'm still going to wait for another announcement because every report said that there would be an iPhone 5 this summer, it makes no sense.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
So in your world a 'real refresh' is when the externals change? Don't judge a book by it's cover, the 3GS was a massive upgrade.
They're planning on stretching the iPhone 4? Good job Apple, don't complain about losing customers now. If Apple releases the next iPhone after 2 years, then they are officially going to lose whatever market share they had.
I'm still going to wait for another announcement because every report said that there would be an iPhone 5 this summer, it makes no sense.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
So in your world a 'real refresh' is when the externals change? Don't judge a book by it's cover, the 3GS was a massive upgrade.
Nuks
Aug 12, 11:25 AM
Alright, I was planning on getting the 2.0 ghzMacbook W/ 1 gig of ram from the apple education store (canada) for 1460 Canadian. However, I was going to get it before the Nano promotion was up, and therefore, could sell the nano and make back about 260 (or so) Canadian. Is it worth it to wait for Merom, and not make back the 260? What are the benefits of Merom?
Basically, is it worth $260?
EDIT: 2 questions:
1. I think the nano promotion is up September 16. Will they probably be announced before then?
2. If the promotion is up, is it worth the $260?
Thanks.
Basically, is it worth $260?
EDIT: 2 questions:
1. I think the nano promotion is up September 16. Will they probably be announced before then?
2. If the promotion is up, is it worth the $260?
Thanks.
Chundles
Aug 3, 01:21 AM
It's not a "chintzy marketing ploy by Intel". It's a scientific test conducted by two Intel Marketing engineers which I always believe because Intel employees are honest people with families and friends who love them. :)
It's not scientific at all. No way in hell is it scientific. I should know, I'm a scientist, got a degree and everything.
I would expect Merom to show greater performance but with a similar battery life.
Unless.....Apple are bringing back the old modular battery compartments... :eek:
It's not scientific at all. No way in hell is it scientific. I should know, I'm a scientist, got a degree and everything.
I would expect Merom to show greater performance but with a similar battery life.
Unless.....Apple are bringing back the old modular battery compartments... :eek:
Cinch
Jul 30, 10:26 AM
Yeah tell me about it.
How much does it take to break a Verizon contract again...?
For me it is $175 which is no big deal if you are a early adopter of tech. A more likely scenario that a lot of people here ellude to is for Cingular, T-mobile, Verizon etc. to adopt the phone, in which case we'll only have to pay for the phone. Of course expect premium price, which for a stock holder is not a bad scenario!
Cinch
How much does it take to break a Verizon contract again...?
For me it is $175 which is no big deal if you are a early adopter of tech. A more likely scenario that a lot of people here ellude to is for Cingular, T-mobile, Verizon etc. to adopt the phone, in which case we'll only have to pay for the phone. Of course expect premium price, which for a stock holder is not a bad scenario!
Cinch
smulji
Mar 30, 10:58 PM
Very true but those Macs are portables, not iMacs and certainly not the overpriced and overpowered Xeon server driven Mac Pro's that replaced the affordable and (at the time) upgradeable G4's and G5's we all used for our work. What happened to the dedicated 20/23/30" LCD CCFL Apple Cinema Display line, or even the Apple Studio Display line before them? Replaced with ONE 27" LED LCD based off the 27" iMac (basically an iMac without a computer). Times change, I get it, but why do they have to leave us power users who supported them before the iPod and need Apple systems for work behind? It's costing us thousands to switch to Windows systems and applications such as Avid and Premiere Pro/Adobe Suites.
IDevices are amazing, but please, don't make the already dwindling prosumers systems become iOS systems for the average Joe. There are a lot of people on here that are new comers from Apple's iPod/iPhone influx that don't know/understand what this is doing to those who really need OS X and affordable mid-towers and top notch displays again� and once built in California, now "designed" in California. Man, sad times for us and the states on that change...
pretty much the vast majority of electronic products are designed in the westernized world and manufactured in some third world country. Fortunate or unfortunate that's the reality.
IDevices are amazing, but please, don't make the already dwindling prosumers systems become iOS systems for the average Joe. There are a lot of people on here that are new comers from Apple's iPod/iPhone influx that don't know/understand what this is doing to those who really need OS X and affordable mid-towers and top notch displays again� and once built in California, now "designed" in California. Man, sad times for us and the states on that change...
pretty much the vast majority of electronic products are designed in the westernized world and manufactured in some third world country. Fortunate or unfortunate that's the reality.
Shasta
Aug 2, 11:54 AM
This is a summary of what I think WWDC will be like: more can be found at a thread I unfortunately wrote right as this one was being published.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=221151
"Myths, Dreams, and Expectations"
so here we go!
Myths:
Powerbook G5
iPhone
iTablet
iPod
Dreams:
New Displays
Price Drops
Free Candy and Naked Women
Expectations:
OSX 10.5
New Hardware: Pro Macs, X Serves, MacBook Pros
My reasons for all of this can be found at the other thread
Shasta
(Sorry for the thread spamming)
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=221151
"Myths, Dreams, and Expectations"
so here we go!
Myths:
Powerbook G5
iPhone
iTablet
iPod
Dreams:
New Displays
Price Drops
Free Candy and Naked Women
Expectations:
OSX 10.5
New Hardware: Pro Macs, X Serves, MacBook Pros
My reasons for all of this can be found at the other thread
Shasta
(Sorry for the thread spamming)
jrhone
May 7, 04:58 PM
Finally, they'll be charging what the service is worth!
Soooo.....web hosting of as many sites you want as long as they are under 20GB is not worth anything? Or find my i***? Or fle sharing? Or MM galleries? Or maybe a Pro Photog can build and upload his entire site AND host it directly from Aperture? There are MANY MANY cool features of Mobile Me...if you dont need them...dont buy it..but many do...I have for years and get LOTS of use out of it...
Soooo.....web hosting of as many sites you want as long as they are under 20GB is not worth anything? Or find my i***? Or fle sharing? Or MM galleries? Or maybe a Pro Photog can build and upload his entire site AND host it directly from Aperture? There are MANY MANY cool features of Mobile Me...if you dont need them...dont buy it..but many do...I have for years and get LOTS of use out of it...
nanofrog
Apr 27, 10:33 PM
The heat alone would melt that case in a couple months:)
Nah... The chip would go way before the aluminum melts (~108C or so max for any semiconductor to die <quick/instant death>, and aluminum melts at 660C :eek). :D :p
Nah... The chip would go way before the aluminum melts (~108C or so max for any semiconductor to die <quick/instant death>, and aluminum melts at 660C :eek). :D :p
ergle2
Sep 15, 09:24 PM
I believe the new macbook pro merom's will be .1-.3 inches thicker, and POSSIBLY incorporate a new blu-ray DVD burner, 160GB HD, ATI X1800 Graphics card, and improved display to 1920X1200 for 17". I believe this to be true based on the information gathered from brenthaven's website, showing the 12/15 pro case that is out of stock is 1/4" thicker in the space needed to hold the macbook. The only reason for this is if they know "something" we don't...such as a thicker machine. Also, they are coming out around the 26th-30th. Maybe? what do you guys think?
I can't see Blu-Ray at all.
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.
I can't see Blu-Ray at all.
If it were, I'd figure it'd be an option due to the cost of the drives. Sony offer a laptop in with and without forms and the "with" model costs an extra $1700... but right now I just don't think there's demand.
Based on that, it doesn't seem likely to me.
Then again, I can't see them making the case any thicker than the last-gen PowerBooks, either.
We'll find out soon enough.
Zoowatch
Aug 7, 09:10 PM
how about frontrow and Apple remote?
i know this is a pro machine...
but having these built-in would be great
besides... SJ mentioned that frontrow would be enhanced in Leopard
does this mean that the new Mac Pro would have frontrow as well?
i know this is a pro machine...
but having these built-in would be great
besides... SJ mentioned that frontrow would be enhanced in Leopard
does this mean that the new Mac Pro would have frontrow as well?
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
CalBoy
May 5, 02:27 PM
Sorry it took so long to respond to this; I assure you it took only a second to Google (this is just the first result I found):
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
http://lamar.colostate.edu/~hillger/pays-off.html
All of that is about the private sector switching to save money on their bottom line, something which I already mentioned should happen (and will without intervention).
The question is if the government mandated the metric system for EVERYTHING, from speed limits on the roads to the measurements on a box of Betty Crocker brownies. Many of these things won't actually lead to any increased economic efficiency because certain products can only be produced locally (say weather reports) and consumed locally. The cost of these industries switching would be quite expensive with no real economic gain because the products and services can't be exported or imported.
Is that wink a small admission of how silly your system really is? :) Sure, the math was simple, but how meaningful are all these crazy fractions? If I actually had to try and picture what these fractions represent, I'd want to convert the denominator into a multiple of 10 first in order to try and picture it. I might note that twice 48 is roughly 100, so I know we're dealing with a bit over 26%. Other fractions could prove more difficult. With the metric system, you never have to do this. You're always dealing with base-10, which is something we all understand and can picture, without having to memorise particular fractions and what they represent.
No the wink was just to say that 1) I would use a calculator, and 2) even if I couldn't, multiplying fractions is not hard at all.
Well, we could certainly argue that international communication would be a LOT simpler if there was only one language � and it would be! However, the reality is, we have a world with not only a diversity of language, but a diversity of culture, and the two are intricately linked. That makes the world a very interesting place, and being able to speak multiple languages would be a wonderful skill to have when travelling and engaging in other cultures. People are generally proud of their heritage, culture and language, and there aren't too many people suggesting the world should lose all of that richness in the interest of conformity. (Well, there are such people, but I think we can agree they're generally pretty scary.)
This is off topic, but language is but one part of culture. Customs, celebrations, and even measures, are all marks of a culture. In the process of colonization and free trade, we've actively destroyed many languages, customs, celebrations, and measures. I think we typically don't consider the loss of a measurement system to be too catastrophic because of the many conveniences that can be had from uniformity. But the same is true for language as well. I think the real reason we tend to gloss over measures is because they are typically easier to learn than a new language. Anthropologically speaking, however, they are very valuable in exploring a culture.
What is different about the US that it can't do likewise? I honestly find it perplexing. Be honest now� Is it because the French invented it?
Ultimately I think it comes down to the fact that the US is one of the few countries that had a great deal of popular sovereignty determine the outcome of whether or not we should switch to the metric system. Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. Still others had theirs done at the point of a gun.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. Americans also tend not to have a great deal of respect for the sciences (scientific literacy is appallingly low) so it makes it a tougher pitch to the everyday person. Then there's also the issue that to most it's a solution for a problem that doesn't exist; why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
You're not stepping out onto the moon this time. Just about every other country on the planet (and there are quite a few of them!) have gone before you, and it worked out just fine. Sure, it takes some time, but not as long as you might like to imagine. Let me come back to my own experience� I was born in the 70s, around the time Australia was just starting to transition to the metric system. The older folk may well have had a difficult time with it, but if so I was blissfully unaware of it. I came to learn what an inch was, since most rulers had inches on one side and mm/cm on the other, and people still, to this day, casually talk about their height in feet and the weight of newborn babies in pounds. (Yes, some old habits die hard.) But these sort of things are the exceptions. The transition to metric was so efficient, I, as a first generation growing up with it, didn't even notice there was a transition happening.
Seriously, you should be looking to Australia and other countries with successful transitions and learning from them, instead of just perpetuating all these fanciful stories of how terrible it's going to be to change.
The issue goes beyond just the prescribed time period to shift, however. As I mentioned above, there are a lot of infrastructure concerns. Not to mention that Australia in the 1970s was 13 million people, or about 24 times smaller than the current US population. The only other countries that were on this scale were India and China when they transitioned, and both had much less infrastructure and an already illiterate population that could be trained from the ground up.
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
Frogurt
Sep 16, 12:53 PM
They released the C2D iMACS altogether. I would be really surprised if they didn't do AT LEAST the same to their pro line-ups.
Except that Apple has typically released only the 15 inch model before later introducing the 17 (and 12 when they existed) when they do major updates. Witness the introduction of the Al case and the Intel switch. Of course it matters whether this is a major update. If, like the iMacs, there is not a major case redesign and it is just a processor bump then expect them to be released simultaneously. But if there is a change in case, I would be surprised (pleasantly though) if the 17 came out at the same time.
Except that Apple has typically released only the 15 inch model before later introducing the 17 (and 12 when they existed) when they do major updates. Witness the introduction of the Al case and the Intel switch. Of course it matters whether this is a major update. If, like the iMacs, there is not a major case redesign and it is just a processor bump then expect them to be released simultaneously. But if there is a change in case, I would be surprised (pleasantly though) if the 17 came out at the same time.
kntgsp
Apr 5, 11:58 PM
I can understand Apple's concern here it could give the impression to an uneducated user that it is OK to jailbreak their phone
It is ok to jailbreak your phone. There isn't the slightest thing wrong with doing so.
It is ok to jailbreak your phone. There isn't the slightest thing wrong with doing so.
macindork
Apr 22, 10:24 AM
Citation needed.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
The fact is, the Xserve wasn't selling well and it had all the server features. A rackable Mac Pro would sell even less to those Xserve buyers. Forget redundant power supplies if you don't believe in them, just lack of LOM or hot-swap drives is a killer by itself.
And seriously, Thunderbolt ? Host based storage ? Forget that, to get into my data center, you need multi-path Fiber Channel. Thank god at least Apple recognizes that and offers the option on the Mac Pro. Thunderbolt is not a SAN technology and it's not replacing SANs anytime soon. I don't want to manage hundreds of storage arrays for each hosts. I want to manage 1 unified storage array and then present LUNs to my hosts as needed. That way, I get better distribution of my existing storage and can even manage some over-provisionning depending on the technology I use.
A lot of people here never worked with enterprise-grade systems. A rackable Mac Pro would at best be used as someone else stated, to rack along video/audio equipement in a studio. Not to rack into a data center.
I work for a school district and even we go for redundant PS when possible, especially on our ESX boxes. Believe it or not though we are still gigabit to our SAN and while Fiber Channel may be awesome in this scenario do you not think Thunderbolt would have the throughput for say, a DAS box? Then again, we aren't as demanding in our environment. ESX is nice in this way because its all of our servers (well, almost all virtualized) and one Equallogic.
Even our Active-Active cluster boxes have redundant power supplies plugged into seperate electrical circuits and wired to independant UPSes, never mind our Active-Passive cluster solutions...
The fact is, most data centers do go for maximum redundancies without single points of failure on the hardware side.
When you have a massively parallele solution with custom software that is built to run on non-redundant hardware like Google built with their search engine, yeah, you can afford to skimp on hardware. They don't care if 1 node out of their 10000 fails, and the software doesn't see the impact. But that 1 specialised custom application is not an industry standard and is far from the norm in building data centers.
The fact is, the Xserve wasn't selling well and it had all the server features. A rackable Mac Pro would sell even less to those Xserve buyers. Forget redundant power supplies if you don't believe in them, just lack of LOM or hot-swap drives is a killer by itself.
And seriously, Thunderbolt ? Host based storage ? Forget that, to get into my data center, you need multi-path Fiber Channel. Thank god at least Apple recognizes that and offers the option on the Mac Pro. Thunderbolt is not a SAN technology and it's not replacing SANs anytime soon. I don't want to manage hundreds of storage arrays for each hosts. I want to manage 1 unified storage array and then present LUNs to my hosts as needed. That way, I get better distribution of my existing storage and can even manage some over-provisionning depending on the technology I use.
A lot of people here never worked with enterprise-grade systems. A rackable Mac Pro would at best be used as someone else stated, to rack along video/audio equipement in a studio. Not to rack into a data center.
I work for a school district and even we go for redundant PS when possible, especially on our ESX boxes. Believe it or not though we are still gigabit to our SAN and while Fiber Channel may be awesome in this scenario do you not think Thunderbolt would have the throughput for say, a DAS box? Then again, we aren't as demanding in our environment. ESX is nice in this way because its all of our servers (well, almost all virtualized) and one Equallogic.
No comments:
Post a Comment