Intel chips take ridiculous amounts of power, and give off huge amounts of heat. The current PowerPC chips use a fraction of the power. This makes no sense for the Mini or the iBooks.
iBook battery life will drop by at least a third, maybe one half. Unless of course they could use slower chips, but there's no way that's going to fly. We all know the canonical Mac argument - "yeah the clock speeds are lower but the chip is totally different so it's not a one-to-one correspondence. Trust me, we're faster". Except this time, there _will_ be a one-to-one correspondence!
In market where clock speed is the main thing marketers latch onto, putting a genuinely slower chip in an iBook is suicide.
In a product line which relies on a marketing thrust of reliability, putting a frigging heating element in a notebook is likewise suicide.
Executive summary: either this is a hoax or Steve Jobs has finally gone off the deep end.
This is the last straw. I need a new machine, I have been trying to decide between a PC (cheap, company purchase plan) and a Mac (expensive) for some time.
I'm going Mac. Costs more, but I actually get some rights for my money.
I already have a copy of XP that is unusable because I tinkered with my hardware too many times and I don't feel like calling Microsoft.
Offtopic, but what the hell: has anyone had bad experiences with the Mac Mini?
I agree. Thing is, a few years back, companies used equity to finance a product or service. Then they started using a product or service to "finance equity". This is of course arse-backwards and of no benefit to either the consumer or the long-term investor. It puts the long-term interests of the corporation in the hand of the most short-sighted stakeholders - the traders.
Now since the 90's some people have figured out that you don't even need a product or service - you can use _hype_ to "finance your equity" instead. How long before it all comes crashing down?
IMHO the current state of the financial system is completely screwed-up.
Slashdot Mirror
If it's true, that is.
Intel chips take ridiculous amounts of power, and give off huge amounts of heat. The current PowerPC chips use a fraction of the power. This makes no sense for the Mini or the iBooks.
iBook battery life will drop by at least a third, maybe one half. Unless of course they could use slower chips, but there's no way that's going to fly. We all know the canonical Mac argument - "yeah the clock speeds are lower but the chip is totally different so it's not a one-to-one correspondence. Trust me, we're faster". Except this time, there _will_ be a one-to-one correspondence!
In market where clock speed is the main thing marketers latch onto, putting a genuinely slower chip in an iBook is suicide.
In a product line which relies on a marketing thrust of reliability, putting a frigging heating element in a notebook is likewise suicide.
Executive summary: either this is a hoax or Steve Jobs has finally gone off the deep end.
No. Nice to know I'm not the only tin hat man here.
All generalisms are wrong.
Isn't that a paradox? :)
<pedantic mode>
I think you mean "hallmarks", though.
</pendantic mode>
Aaggggggggggh
"Irregardless" IS NOT A WORD. It's either "irrespective" or "regardless".
Call me a curmudgeon but when I read stuff like that in something trying to be a formal paper, I end up thinking the author is a buffoon.
Now that's out of my system...
Only if Jean Chretien doesn't like you ;)
Two dollar signs rampant, rather.
This is the last straw. I need a new machine, I have been trying to decide between a PC (cheap, company purchase plan) and a Mac (expensive) for some time.
I'm going Mac. Costs more, but I actually get some rights for my money.
I already have a copy of XP that is unusable because I tinkered with my hardware too many times and I don't feel like calling Microsoft.
Offtopic, but what the hell: has anyone had bad experiences with the Mac Mini?
I agree. Thing is, a few years back, companies used equity to finance a product or service. Then they started using a product or service to "finance equity". This is of course arse-backwards and of no benefit to either the consumer or the long-term investor. It puts the long-term interests of the corporation in the hand of the most short-sighted stakeholders - the traders.
Now since the 90's some people have figured out that you don't even need a product or service - you can use _hype_ to "finance your equity" instead. How long before it all comes crashing down?
IMHO the current state of the financial system is completely screwed-up.
... because there is only one of it. If there were several 'internets' then it would be a different story.