dhach could have gone into more depth with his answers on those two questions, too.
Yes, the answer was essentially "no", but he could have said "no, and here's why:"
But the answer IMHO is pretty simple, and should have read:
"We want developers to have access to Windows APIs through explorer. This serves our goal of hijacking the web by luring lazy and ignorant developers to create web apps that only run on our operating system/browser platform.
Plus, nobody in their right mind would choose our browser unless it was the only one installed on their PC, by default."
I would have agreed with you except that I got a Mac Pro last month and it has been flawless. The only thing that ever went wrong with it is iTunes 7, which has a mind of its own on any Mac.
I could use it, as I regularly run Logic Pro simultaneously with other 'rewired' applications and audio plug-ins.
No doubt users of Final Cut Pro (or any video software) or Aperture would benefit from all that RAM.
Photoshop could absolutely use it when you start working with 8+ megapixel images.
Any pro multimedia user, really, could benefit from all that RAM. Now if only there was some way of getting all those media professionals to start using the Mac.....;)
PPC/Pentium: Not the same thing at all. Apple, as a computer maker (but not a chip maker) must rely on other companies for processors. Years ago when they made the transition from 680x0 to PowerPC it made sense, because PowerPC really was faster than the Pentium, and it had a 68LC040 compatibility layer that allowed non-native software to run at full speed.
PowerPC topped out at the G5, which is a fast chip, but IBM had nothing new in the oven that could compare to Intel's new Core architecture (which also toasts yesterday's Pentiums.) IBM also did little to speedbump the line. Forget about shoehorning a decently-clocked G5 into any laptop. And FreeScale practically gave up on all but embedded processors. Apple was faced with a choice: be leapfrogged by Wintel, or roll out Macintel. Apple was fortunate that with the introduction of each new PPC generation (601, 604, G3, G4, G5), they had something that Intel would have to work pretty hard at to catch up - except that this time, thee was no G6 waiting in the wings.
Steve made the right choice I think, and it's been seamless. I'm posting now from my new Mac Pro, and apart from the fact that it's an order of magnitude faster, there's no way to tell it's not my trusty ol' G4.
As for wireless iPods: I think Steve will gloss over it at introduction time, unless Apple's got wireless is doing something new
> But for now, wireless is a Zuma advangage - right now, the guy can podjack (zumajack?) the pretty girl, then when she likes the song, he can Zuma it to her.
Except, of course, that she's a lot more likely to have a pink Nano than a brown Zuma.
Lots of people here seem to hate these batteries, but I think these would be just perfect for the Wireless Mighty Mouse. My Mac Pro arrives tomorrow, and I could easily imagine keeping one of these stuck into a front USB port.
Re:Not all AAs are created equal
on
USB Batteries
·
· Score: 1
The first rechargeable AA batteries were properly 1.5V each.
Um.... when was this? As far as I remember, rechargeable NiCDs, when they first appeared on the market, were always 1.2/1.25. Sorry - but I call bullshit.
Then 1.25V became the norm and my devices requiring six volts from regular batteries are only getting five.
In the last couple years they've dropped rechargeables to 1.2V which means normal batteries are delivering 25% more power if the amps stay the same. I don't want 'em.
All rechargeable NiCD/NiMH batteries on the market are really the same voltage. 1.2 or 1.25 is just what gets printed on them. Inside they are the same chemical composition - nothing in there is somehow altering that voltage. That's why they all work in the same chargers.
Try measuring your regular alkaline AA cells under load. They typically produce about 1.2 to 1.3 volts once they're about 20% into their lifespan.
Almost every battery-powered device is designed to not crap out until your cells discharge to less than a volt each.
Of course there will be lag. The Power Mac G3 topped out at what, 450 MHz? 500 MHz? The original poster's point is that it runs and works. Aero's requirements are double of what OS X needs.
I'm curious to see September and October 2006, when students have returned to school.
I believe Macs have a higher penetration in all areas of education than in the rest of the world, which should push those figures back up. In fact, if Apple is gaining marketshare, we should see a substantial increase over the same month a year ago.
It's strange that HitBox's stats don't seem to go back more than a year.
Then you obviously have never listened to a seamless multi-hour DJ mix. Just find an album by Sven Vath or Krafty Kuts that is broken up into over a dozen tracks. If it's not your style of music, fair enough, but just listen to the transitions, and then imagine them gapless.
The holiday season is coming up and Apple's set-top box isn't ready. Presumably, Apple announced it today so that people will pass up other boxes and wait for Apple's.
Apple clearly wants market dominance here, and they don't want an entire Christmas's worth of competing product to be out there when they eventually release it!
I think you're pretty accurate. You have to expect Apple to expand on "Front Row" in Leopard, which in its current implementation is a pretty amazing proof-of-concept.
I'm thinking you'll be able to stream your preview, then purchase your movie, and watch it as it downloads. A VESA wall-mountable 24-inch self-contained widescreen LCD computer seems like a pretty good vessel for this to me.
BTW -- Apple are also expected to announce a new iPod Nano with increased capacity and a metallic enclosure.
Apple had Boot Camp waiting in the wings, and didn't release it until MS announced that Vista would not boot on EFI machines. Apple recognized from the beginning of the Intel switch that the ability to run Windows would add great value to the Mac, in that it gives people one less reason to fear them.
When the Intel switch was announced, Schiller said that Apple would never support users running other operating systems on a Mac, but would not do anything to stop it.
TFA is nothing more than a troll. Everyone knows a Mac is a Mac. I know several Windows users who are now thinking of switching, and they never would have otherwise if not for Boot Camp.
Mac OS Rumors has a long history of being the most uninformed, random Mac rumor site in existence. Its predictions are rarely accurate, and when they are, they have generally been mentioned on another site first.
This is a fairly typical MOSR pipe dream.
Apple does not need my unreliable, low-speed bandwidth. They deliver 100+ MB software updates to thousands of users without blinking. Given that most of their iTMS downloads (music, movies, whatever) are from Windows users, they would see little gain by offering software update credits to Mac users. In fact, for their paltry savings on the cost of bandwidth, they would have an administrative nightmare to face.
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed.
As soon as I read that I thought "so why not write off IE, bundle Firefox and be done with it."
Unfortunately the ugly truth remains: Firefox is a cross-platform product that makes web browsing the same on every OS.
Unfortunately in 1995, Firefox was available, and it was called Netscape Navigator.
The problem is that at that time, performance issues dogged it. Honestly, MSIE was a better browser then - shame about it being evil, though.
dhach could have gone into more depth with his answers on those two questions, too.
Yes, the answer was essentially "no", but he could have said "no, and here's why:"
But the answer IMHO is pretty simple, and should have read:
"We want developers to have access to Windows APIs through explorer. This serves our goal of hijacking the web by luring lazy and ignorant developers to create web apps that only run on our operating system/browser platform.
Plus, nobody in their right mind would choose our browser unless it was the only one installed on their PC, by default."
I would have agreed with you except that I got a Mac Pro last month and it has been flawless. The only thing that ever went wrong with it is iTunes 7, which has a mind of its own on any Mac.
Small market? I'm not so sure...
;)
I could use it, as I regularly run Logic Pro simultaneously with other 'rewired' applications and audio plug-ins.
No doubt users of Final Cut Pro (or any video software) or Aperture would benefit from all that RAM.
Photoshop could absolutely use it when you start working with 8+ megapixel images.
Any pro multimedia user, really, could benefit from all that RAM. Now if only there was some way of getting all those media professionals to start using the Mac.....
So by that Logic, you're sying I could come up with a new soft drink and call it iPod?
PPC/Pentium: Not the same thing at all. Apple, as a computer maker (but not a chip maker) must rely on other companies for processors. Years ago when they made the transition from 680x0 to PowerPC it made sense, because PowerPC really was faster than the Pentium, and it had a 68LC040 compatibility layer that allowed non-native software to run at full speed.
PowerPC topped out at the G5, which is a fast chip, but IBM had nothing new in the oven that could compare to Intel's new Core architecture (which also toasts yesterday's Pentiums.) IBM also did little to speedbump the line. Forget about shoehorning a decently-clocked G5 into any laptop. And FreeScale practically gave up on all but embedded processors. Apple was faced with a choice: be leapfrogged by Wintel, or roll out Macintel. Apple was fortunate that with the introduction of each new PPC generation (601, 604, G3, G4, G5), they had something that Intel would have to work pretty hard at to catch up - except that this time, thee was no G6 waiting in the wings.
Steve made the right choice I think, and it's been seamless. I'm posting now from my new Mac Pro, and apart from the fact that it's an order of magnitude faster, there's no way to tell it's not my trusty ol' G4.
As for wireless iPods: I think Steve will gloss over it at introduction time, unless Apple's got wireless is doing something new
Except, of course, that she's a lot more likely to have a pink Nano than a brown Zuma.
Lots of people here seem to hate these batteries, but I think these would be just perfect for the Wireless Mighty Mouse. My Mac Pro arrives tomorrow, and I could easily imagine keeping one of these stuck into a front USB port.
Um.... when was this? As far as I remember, rechargeable NiCDs, when they first appeared on the market, were always 1.2/1.25. Sorry - but I call bullshit.
Then 1.25V became the norm and my devices requiring six volts from regular batteries are only getting five. In the last couple years they've dropped rechargeables to 1.2V which means normal batteries are delivering 25% more power if the amps stay the same. I don't want 'em.
All rechargeable NiCD/NiMH batteries on the market are really the same voltage. 1.2 or 1.25 is just what gets printed on them. Inside they are the same chemical composition - nothing in there is somehow altering that voltage. That's why they all work in the same chargers.
Try measuring your regular alkaline AA cells under load. They typically produce about 1.2 to 1.3 volts once they're about 20% into their lifespan.
Almost every battery-powered device is designed to not crap out until your cells discharge to less than a volt each.
Of course there will be lag. The Power Mac G3 topped out at what, 450 MHz? 500 MHz? The original poster's point is that it runs and works. Aero's requirements are double of what OS X needs.
I'm curious to see September and October 2006, when students have returned to school.
I believe Macs have a higher penetration in all areas of education than in the rest of the world, which should push those figures back up. In fact, if Apple is gaining marketshare, we should see a substantial increase over the same month a year ago.
It's strange that HitBox's stats don't seem to go back more than a year.
Then you obviously have never listened to a seamless multi-hour DJ mix. Just find an album by Sven Vath or Krafty Kuts that is broken up into over a dozen tracks. If it's not your style of music, fair enough, but just listen to the transitions, and then imagine them gapless.
The holiday season is coming up and Apple's set-top box isn't ready. Presumably, Apple announced it today so that people will pass up other boxes and wait for Apple's.
Apple clearly wants market dominance here, and they don't want an entire Christmas's worth of competing product to be out there when they eventually release it!
Is that Mac or Windows iTunes?
...is it possible to have a kernel panic automatically retrieve web content from goatse.cx?
Don't want to burst your bubble, but... this technology already exists for Blu-ray. See here and here.
Umm... Apple has several billion in the bank.
I don't have much use for a wireless monitor either, but they sure are popular. This site has dozens of them, all at different price points.
I think you're pretty accurate. You have to expect Apple to expand on "Front Row" in Leopard, which in its current implementation is a pretty amazing proof-of-concept.
I'm thinking you'll be able to stream your preview, then purchase your movie, and watch it as it downloads. A VESA wall-mountable 24-inch self-contained widescreen LCD computer seems like a pretty good vessel for this to me.
BTW -- Apple are also expected to announce a new iPod Nano with increased capacity and a metallic enclosure.
Apple had Boot Camp waiting in the wings, and didn't release it until MS announced that Vista would not boot on EFI machines. Apple recognized from the beginning of the Intel switch that the ability to run Windows would add great value to the Mac, in that it gives people one less reason to fear them.
When the Intel switch was announced, Schiller said that Apple would never support users running other operating systems on a Mac, but would not do anything to stop it.
TFA is nothing more than a troll. Everyone knows a Mac is a Mac. I know several Windows users who are now thinking of switching, and they never would have otherwise if not for Boot Camp.
Isn't that the same guy who insisted we'd never see a video iPod?
Pure speculation. All Apple + Nike development has until now been under the Cone of Silence.
It just is. Have a nice day.
Mac OS Rumors has a long history of being the most uninformed, random Mac rumor site in existence. Its predictions are rarely accurate, and when they are, they have generally been mentioned on another site first.
This is a fairly typical MOSR pipe dream.
Apple does not need my unreliable, low-speed bandwidth. They deliver 100+ MB software updates to thousands of users without blinking. Given that most of their iTMS downloads (music, movies, whatever) are from Windows users, they would see little gain by offering software update credits to Mac users. In fact, for their paltry savings on the cost of bandwidth, they would have an administrative nightmare to face.
I file this one under bullshit.