chrono1081
Apr 25, 10:31 AM
No, he's saying Apple does not track your location. There has been no evidence that any of the location information leaves your phone/computer. Whether that file should exist or not is another debate.
+1 the people crying about this are just plain ignorant and have NO idea how much stuff records their location. If they are so worried they need to get rid of their car GPS too. Its tracking info is MUCH more accurate and it stores it in the device. Oh and if your camera has geotagging don't forget that too!
Plus what people don't understand is that this information has to be obtained from having the device and knowing how to get the file and read it. If your phone never gets stolen you have nothing to worry about. If your phone gets stolen guess what, you also have nothing to worry about. Theives are going to wipe it anyway so they don't get caught.
+1 the people crying about this are just plain ignorant and have NO idea how much stuff records their location. If they are so worried they need to get rid of their car GPS too. Its tracking info is MUCH more accurate and it stores it in the device. Oh and if your camera has geotagging don't forget that too!
Plus what people don't understand is that this information has to be obtained from having the device and knowing how to get the file and read it. If your phone never gets stolen you have nothing to worry about. If your phone gets stolen guess what, you also have nothing to worry about. Theives are going to wipe it anyway so they don't get caught.
Padraig
Apr 23, 06:22 PM
a retina display on the 13" MBP would be the one thing that would get me to upgrade almost immediately.
I'd settle for 1440x900. It's got such an incredibly poor panel for the price point.
I'd settle for 1440x900. It's got such an incredibly poor panel for the price point.
JGowan
Mar 29, 01:56 PM
Not much good in hyping up new products if many of your core components are unobtainable.Don't know if this is a blanket statement or if you're talking about Apple specifically. "Hyping" is an odd word and very negative. If you're talking about Apple marketing and advertising a product, that's hardly fair. Why? For one, it's their product so they need to advertise it. Secondly, they hardly advertise. I see from time to time a commercial on TV and from time to time, an ad. Hardly "hyping". They get most of their best advertisement from happy customers and those predicting Apple news. They're one company who doesn't really have to remind people that they are around. When they want free publicity, they just hold a press conference and the message gets out.
The Japanese are resilient, but it will take years for them to fully recover.For some, yes. But for those that are dynamic to the economies of other big companies/countries, they will get the support they need to get back into production of all the things that the world needs.
The Japanese are resilient, but it will take years for them to fully recover.For some, yes. But for those that are dynamic to the economies of other big companies/countries, they will get the support they need to get back into production of all the things that the world needs.
DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 06:00 PM
About the cube pro or headless iMac
Yes, but quiet. Without fans, if possible.
I'm pretty much sure anything at this performance level will need fans. We are not dealing with a G3 processor anymore.
Anyhow I agree with the people that want a tower in between the iMac and these new Mac Pros. In fact, I would say these new models are probably complete overkill for 80% of Mac users. The 20% that really need this kind of power know who they are. The rest only need it for bragging rights.
I like the iMac it is perfect in my eyes, but many people like to have something that is expandable. Something they can get inside of and change things.
I don't even know if Apple needs a whole new case for that. Just a single dual core processor model would be fine. Either a single Xeon or a single Core 2 Duo. Something priced around $1,500 (+ or - a few dollars) fairly well equipped.
Like I said before these things are beasts almost to the point of overkill except for professionals. Not everyone wants an all-in-one and the Mac Mini is not comparable to a tower in any way. So I think these people's complants are justified.
Yes, but quiet. Without fans, if possible.
I'm pretty much sure anything at this performance level will need fans. We are not dealing with a G3 processor anymore.
Anyhow I agree with the people that want a tower in between the iMac and these new Mac Pros. In fact, I would say these new models are probably complete overkill for 80% of Mac users. The 20% that really need this kind of power know who they are. The rest only need it for bragging rights.
I like the iMac it is perfect in my eyes, but many people like to have something that is expandable. Something they can get inside of and change things.
I don't even know if Apple needs a whole new case for that. Just a single dual core processor model would be fine. Either a single Xeon or a single Core 2 Duo. Something priced around $1,500 (+ or - a few dollars) fairly well equipped.
Like I said before these things are beasts almost to the point of overkill except for professionals. Not everyone wants an all-in-one and the Mac Mini is not comparable to a tower in any way. So I think these people's complants are justified.
cciliberto33
Apr 9, 07:13 PM
Well if that is acting as a fraction bar which acts like a grouping symbol (parentheses). So if then 9+3 = 12 12*2 = 24. 48/24 = 2. However, if that was a normal division symbol. then 9+3 = 12. 48/2 = 24 24*12 = 288. So is it a fraction bar or a division symbol yo.
vniow
Aug 7, 02:00 PM
Upping the baseline of the MacPro to $2500, what is that.
The baseline is actually somewhere around $2100, you can lower some of the options when configuring.
The baseline is actually somewhere around $2100, you can lower some of the options when configuring.
ptysell
Apr 7, 11:08 AM
Actually, this is more of a situation of a monopsony in play where there are multiple sellers of various components but only a single buyer. This, in turn, locks out other buyers from being able to leverage price efficiencies and limits the competition from achieving an upper hand price wise.
Nothing is stopping RIM from paying MORE than Apple to secure supply for their product.
Its simple supply and demand.
There is a limited supply and massive demand.
What does that do to price?
The simple fact of the matter is that Apple is willing to shell out the cash to get what they need to fill the demand of their customers.
Nothing is stopping RIM from paying MORE than Apple to secure supply for their product.
Its simple supply and demand.
There is a limited supply and massive demand.
What does that do to price?
The simple fact of the matter is that Apple is willing to shell out the cash to get what they need to fill the demand of their customers.
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.
louis Fashion
Mar 27, 02:01 PM
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Great guess! But I still will be first in line in 2012 for my IPV.3!!
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
Great guess! But I still will be first in line in 2012 for my IPV.3!!
Evangelion
Sep 11, 09:55 AM
It is excellent that you can play movies it on an iPod, but I hardly think that is enough to launch "screenplay". Most people want to see a movie on a large screen, not a computer or an iPod.
Is there any reason why you couldn't do both?
Is there any reason why you couldn't do both?
SandynJosh
Apr 23, 09:41 PM
I will be honest and truthful and say for a mobile device on batteries, I'm very impressed as what the iPhone and iPad can do gaming wise.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
However I will also state, and I think we all should be honest, that at the moment, Apple are bringing the games DOWN to what their hardware can do, as opposed to making Hardware so great that gaming is being pushed UP to take advantage of Apples industry leading performance.
In your first paragraph you talk about Apple's mobile products, which is where Apple will be putting most of their effort in the foreseeable future. To have successful portable products, having a long time between charges is highly important. The old brute force methods of throwing power and RAM at the gaming performance problem can not be part of the design mindset. Game designers know this and are becoming much better at coding for portable games, but they are not quite there yet. Meanwhile Apple is working to find ways to build in performance and not increase power draw.
THIS is the future as Apple sees it, and their acceptance in the broad general market shows that they are on the right track.
When Apple release GTX580 beating desktops, and/or Xbox360 / PS3 beating gaming devices, I will happily bow down to them being the greatest in graphics.
NOW you have switched to talking about desktop and console gaming computers. THIS is a whole different area. First off, it's a tiny segment of the whole computer market. It's big, but not nearly as huge as what Apple is aiming for with their products.
In a nutshell, Apple's strategy is to capture the mobile device market as completely as they can. They are being highly successful at that strategy from iPods to iPhones, to iPads, to Laptops.
Meanwhile they are growing rapidly in the iMac desktop and tower market due primarily to the halo effect of their success in the portable arena. They are doing this even while the desktop and tower markets are shrinking overall. Can you see why Apple will not be putting a lot of effort into this segment?
But right now, they are trailing by miles due to years of neglect as they just did not have products that could compete, and their one semi attempt at a console got nowhere.
Note: I would LOVE LOVE LOVE Apple to turn this around.
You are right. Apple did not have products that could compete in the desktop and console markets. This was primarily due to game developers not interested in writing games for Intel chips and PowerPC chips. Since the installed base for Intel-based computers was more then a order-of-magnitude larger than the installed base of Macs. Apple was never going to enjoy being a suitable gaming platform until they switched to Intel CPUs.
Once Apple made the switch, they have come a long way towards being an acceptable gaming computer, but they have no desire or plans to go after the high end of this market... it's just not that profitable or large. Remember AlienWare? They had the best gaming computer, IMO, and they had to sell themselves to another company to stay alive.
As for the console market, it's crowded with established competitors and will likely see one squeezed out. Not the kind of market that Apple or anyone else should want to jump into.
They need to ditch the "Laptops on a Stand" design of the iMac for starters, but I feel they never will as they have decided they won't compete and they cannot compete in this sector of the market.
I addressed this above. As for the "Laptops on a Stand" design, it's such a bad design that the largest computer company, HP, as well as others, have copied it.
Console wise, I'm not sure they could compete against a 360 or a PS3. Let's say Apple against a PS4 or a Xbox720
Nope, can't see that happening either.
I address this above. Apple doesn't want to be in this arena. It's small and the competition is deadly.
The low power/trimmed down, casual gamers games, seems to be the only area they are going for.
Once more you are correct. There are many many times more gamers that want a short diversion while they have a few minutes away from home, then those who want to spend thousands on an immersive game experience that requires a larger block of time. "Portability with games optional" trumps "wired to the wall and game-focused" all the way to the bank.
But Again, I would LOVE Apple to turn this around and take high end graphics seriously in their future products.
The high-end gamer is not on Apple's radar at the moment and likely never will be unless a way is found to address hi-end graphics on a portable device without impacting battery life.
I know you'd like Apple to chase this rainbow, but they won't, there's no pot of gold at the end.
KCMichaelB
Nov 11, 09:14 AM
How wrong you are.
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
It found 7 trojans (6 for Windows and 1 for OS X) on my Mac.
Btw, how does one know if their computer is virus/malware/adware free if they never scan for it?
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
It found 7 trojans (6 for Windows and 1 for OS X) on my Mac.
Btw, how does one know if their computer is virus/malware/adware free if they never scan for it?
Marx55
Aug 7, 05:05 PM
Anyone specs about noise level (db) when..?:
- Sleep.
- Idle.
- Low load.
- Medium load.
- High load.
- Maximum load
Thanks.
- Sleep.
- Idle.
- Low load.
- Medium load.
- High load.
- Maximum load
Thanks.
nmrrjw66
Apr 14, 12:53 PM
Holy crap! You know these things are going on but to read the details is nauseating.
America is getting bent over and the dummies in the Tea Party are championing for their own destruction. Here is a link to the story about the Real Housewives of Wall Street.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411
I strongly recommend people do whatever they can to watch the Documentary Inside Job.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/
It's red face enraging to see how much money was pocketed by rich *******s in this country while working americans were losing their homes.
America is getting bent over and the dummies in the Tea Party are championing for their own destruction. Here is a link to the story about the Real Housewives of Wall Street.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/the-real-housewives-of-wall-street-look-whos-cashing-in-on-the-bailout-20110411
I strongly recommend people do whatever they can to watch the Documentary Inside Job.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/
It's red face enraging to see how much money was pocketed by rich *******s in this country while working americans were losing their homes.
CalBoy
May 3, 12:58 AM
SI is superior in conversions only
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Please tell me that's sarcasm. :rolleyes:
I have a "feel" for Imperial measurements, and they are a pain in the ***.
I don't think so, and I'm not being sarcastic.
Temperature is a great example. Celsius and Kelvin are fantastic for science and engineering for obvious reasons, but when it comes to everyday uses, Fahrenheit makes more sense. It's very intuitive to think of numbers on a 100 scale. That's why when you're looking at the weather or taking someone's body temperature, it's easier to get a grasp of what is "high" or "low." Fahrenheit is also more accurate for casual uses because it can express smaller changes more easily than Celsius.
The metric system also lacks easy naming schemes for everyday sizes. Recipes, for example, would have to be written out in ml rather than cups or spoons. In such a situation, base 10 is not helpful at all because recipes are rarely divided or multiplied by 10. The metric system could in fact be worse for such applications because cutting 473 ml in half is more of a pain than cutting 2 cups in half (and yes, while recipes could theoretically be modified to be in flat metric ratios, the fact is that there are far too many recipes in existence already for that to be realistic in the short-medium term).
However, we have been seeing the transition to metric in some subtler ways. Soda, water, and juice have been sold in metric quantities for a while now, and I've even seen more and more bags of chips, boxes of cereal, and some candy bars (mind you not popular ones) come in metric sizes. This is obviously advantageous for manufacturers because it means a streamlined production line. I just don't think we're going to get most people to use the metric system for non-scientific daily tasks because it may not be as superior as it would seem at first blush.
Imperial is superior as I actually have a feel for the numbers
Please tell me that's sarcasm. :rolleyes:
I have a "feel" for Imperial measurements, and they are a pain in the ***.
I don't think so, and I'm not being sarcastic.
Temperature is a great example. Celsius and Kelvin are fantastic for science and engineering for obvious reasons, but when it comes to everyday uses, Fahrenheit makes more sense. It's very intuitive to think of numbers on a 100 scale. That's why when you're looking at the weather or taking someone's body temperature, it's easier to get a grasp of what is "high" or "low." Fahrenheit is also more accurate for casual uses because it can express smaller changes more easily than Celsius.
The metric system also lacks easy naming schemes for everyday sizes. Recipes, for example, would have to be written out in ml rather than cups or spoons. In such a situation, base 10 is not helpful at all because recipes are rarely divided or multiplied by 10. The metric system could in fact be worse for such applications because cutting 473 ml in half is more of a pain than cutting 2 cups in half (and yes, while recipes could theoretically be modified to be in flat metric ratios, the fact is that there are far too many recipes in existence already for that to be realistic in the short-medium term).
However, we have been seeing the transition to metric in some subtler ways. Soda, water, and juice have been sold in metric quantities for a while now, and I've even seen more and more bags of chips, boxes of cereal, and some candy bars (mind you not popular ones) come in metric sizes. This is obviously advantageous for manufacturers because it means a streamlined production line. I just don't think we're going to get most people to use the metric system for non-scientific daily tasks because it may not be as superior as it would seem at first blush.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:07 PM
This makes me sick to the core. And very very angry
WHAT RIGHT DOE"S APPLE HAVE
to act like big brother and control what another company does?
Steve Jobs started off with Apple to fight "the man" yet he is the man.
Microsoft would never do this, they know better because thousands of Apple fans would be on the internet with Safari posting the most vile crap you would ever want to read.
Why do the Apple fans allow this to continue? what is so great about a company that lies about who they are?
While Apple makes some innovative cool tech toys this behavior continues to prove who they are a controlling Money grubbing capitalistic company!
I will revel in the day that Jailbreaking goes to court again and Apple is told once and for all they can't tell everyone what to do and must allow Jailbreaking. Yes it will happen, what comes around goes around.:cool:
Users are already speaking. I switched to Android, and I don't even need to root to use it with all the things I jailbroke iPhone to be able to do.
Now my friends have started seeing my device and switching too, makes Apple's iPhone 4 look primitive.
As soon as Android has a tablet that's decent hardware I'm totally gone from iOS. My bet is that'll be in the next 6 months.
WHAT RIGHT DOE"S APPLE HAVE
to act like big brother and control what another company does?
Steve Jobs started off with Apple to fight "the man" yet he is the man.
Microsoft would never do this, they know better because thousands of Apple fans would be on the internet with Safari posting the most vile crap you would ever want to read.
Why do the Apple fans allow this to continue? what is so great about a company that lies about who they are?
While Apple makes some innovative cool tech toys this behavior continues to prove who they are a controlling Money grubbing capitalistic company!
I will revel in the day that Jailbreaking goes to court again and Apple is told once and for all they can't tell everyone what to do and must allow Jailbreaking. Yes it will happen, what comes around goes around.:cool:
Users are already speaking. I switched to Android, and I don't even need to root to use it with all the things I jailbroke iPhone to be able to do.
Now my friends have started seeing my device and switching too, makes Apple's iPhone 4 look primitive.
As soon as Android has a tablet that's decent hardware I'm totally gone from iOS. My bet is that'll be in the next 6 months.
Chef Medeski
Jul 21, 11:40 PM
Apple can't not update at least the top-end MacBooks.
Wow, that only took 5 minutes for me to understand.
You mean Apple has to update.... you know that whole double negative thing
Wow, that only took 5 minutes for me to understand.
You mean Apple has to update.... you know that whole double negative thing
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 02:12 AM
I didn't quite read the whole thread, and I've seen people trying to present definitive answers representing multiple possible answers. While I don't claim to be an end all source, math is one thing that I can do and do understand.
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
KingYaba
Sep 16, 06:00 PM
It's always the next "event" apple holds. Oh, I swear it's coming! I just know it! That powerbook g5 is coming, I can smell it. :p
baleensavage
Apr 26, 02:50 PM
This is hardly surprising considering only Apple manufactures iOS phones and new Android phones are coming out each week. What's clear from this data is RIM and the others are quickly on their way out and many of those people are buying Android phones. But I do agree with others that Apple needs to start upping their game to compete. They should start with a low-end phone that has a smaller non-retina display and a few less other features that could get iOS devices into the hands of those that won't buy an expensive smartphone.
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 08:58 AM
there's a big difference between the device knowing where it is/has been and that information actually being uploaded to "the mothership".
Correct, and that's why Steve is telling the truth unlike the trolls pretending this is an Apple conspiracy. That file is stuck on your hard disk and goes nowhere. Delete it and you don't even have that (as I did months ago when this story first broke). I tried the mapping tool and it won't work on my machine because consolidated.db cannot be found. Yet my iPhone works just fine, and Location Services works fine too.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
Correct, and that's why Steve is telling the truth unlike the trolls pretending this is an Apple conspiracy. That file is stuck on your hard disk and goes nowhere. Delete it and you don't even have that (as I did months ago when this story first broke). I tried the mapping tool and it won't work on my machine because consolidated.db cannot be found. Yet my iPhone works just fine, and Location Services works fine too.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
Chundles
Aug 3, 08:58 AM
How You Do Dat? :eek:
Um, surely you're not that silly.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
Um, surely you're not that silly.
He was giving a "SteveQuote" similar to the one from WWDC '05 along the lines of "Oh by the way if you look up here you'll see this whole presentation is running on Intel processors."
nuckinfutz
May 9, 02:51 PM
The best thing about using the free Google Sync, has been that my family has been able to move between different phone models so easily.
We've swapped between iPhone, WinMo, WebOS, Blackberry and Android... and each new phone gets all our contacts and calendar entries within a few minutes after taking them out of the box and putting in our Google account info.
It's great that the calendar info is shared between every computer we have as well.
Our kitchen Touchsmart computer, running a custom iGoogle homepage with Google calendar, is the nexus point for checking our family schedule each morning.
Does MobileMe support all devices as well? And what's worth $100 a year about it?
And that's also the worst thing about Google or any web based tool. There's a layer of abstraction with a web based
tools versus native. In address book or iCal that data is part of a systemwide API that any 3rd party developers can access. This means I can install and app and it automatically knows who's in my contacts and often will start to autocomplete email address based on who's in my contacts list. Doing mail merge is easy when your contacts are local. Addressing letters in Pages is as easy as dragging the contact vcard over to the proper field.
Ditto for iCal. If you don't like Apple's option no worries get something more networking robust like Busycal and voila all your data is there with a little secret sauce on top. Install a CRM tool and bam there are you calendar events and contacts.
Everyone talking about how great web based tools are for sync always fail to mention what they "give up" by going to web based tools and from my experience they are giving up a lot of potential productivity.
MobileMe has no desire to support WinMo, or RIM or Palm WebOS. They are free to develop their own systems and I'm glad Apple is not trying to be all things to all platforms. MobileMe has ironed out a lot of the initial growing pains and wrinkles and for me it just hums along.
My question to Google fans ....if your password got compromised and your emails and contacts got deleted. How would you recover?
We've swapped between iPhone, WinMo, WebOS, Blackberry and Android... and each new phone gets all our contacts and calendar entries within a few minutes after taking them out of the box and putting in our Google account info.
It's great that the calendar info is shared between every computer we have as well.
Our kitchen Touchsmart computer, running a custom iGoogle homepage with Google calendar, is the nexus point for checking our family schedule each morning.
Does MobileMe support all devices as well? And what's worth $100 a year about it?
And that's also the worst thing about Google or any web based tool. There's a layer of abstraction with a web based
tools versus native. In address book or iCal that data is part of a systemwide API that any 3rd party developers can access. This means I can install and app and it automatically knows who's in my contacts and often will start to autocomplete email address based on who's in my contacts list. Doing mail merge is easy when your contacts are local. Addressing letters in Pages is as easy as dragging the contact vcard over to the proper field.
Ditto for iCal. If you don't like Apple's option no worries get something more networking robust like Busycal and voila all your data is there with a little secret sauce on top. Install a CRM tool and bam there are you calendar events and contacts.
Everyone talking about how great web based tools are for sync always fail to mention what they "give up" by going to web based tools and from my experience they are giving up a lot of potential productivity.
MobileMe has no desire to support WinMo, or RIM or Palm WebOS. They are free to develop their own systems and I'm glad Apple is not trying to be all things to all platforms. MobileMe has ironed out a lot of the initial growing pains and wrinkles and for me it just hums along.
My question to Google fans ....if your password got compromised and your emails and contacts got deleted. How would you recover?
adbe
Apr 5, 01:43 PM
That takes some balls.
You might well think that if you didn't bother to read the article.
You might well think that if you didn't bother to read the article.
No comments:
Post a Comment