deniseeliza
Aug 29, 02:44 PM
I don't believe Apple would (or should) license out Mac OS X to run on non-Apple hardware. This is because Apple is a hardware company that uses Mac OS X to sell hardware. I wouldn't want it to be licensed out anyway, because then we would have to deal with registration key nightmares. Right now, there's nothing but your conscience and a license agreement you probably threw away keeping you from installing one copy of Mac OS X on every Mac you can get your hands on. Not that I do that, but I sure like just popping in my disk and reinstalling whenever it strikes my fancy.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
On to the support issue, I think since the beginning of technical support there have always been those who complain that quality has really gone down and back in the good ol' days, you never had any problems, ever! And now, by golly, it's a coin toss whether you get a machine that even turns on!
Right, gramps, and back in your day, you walked to school uphill both ways in the snow with no boots and you liked it.
And 25% of new machines being lemons? Last quarter, Apple reported they shipped 1,327,000 computers. If we call a quarter 90 days, and assume that 25% of them are dead, that's more than 3,600 computers sold defective every single day. Are you kidding me? You really think a major hardware company would sell 3,600 defective computers every single day and get away with it?
This is what's really happening: Apple is selling more machines than ever. Apple's customers have greater access to the internet than ever. Even if the rate of failure stays the same, you have more customers with more internet savvy to come whine and moan on bulletin boards.
Yes, you deserve a perfectly functioning computer and you have the right to complain when your computer is broken. So call Apple or go down to your local service provider and get your machine serviced under warranty. That's what it's there for. It's also the number 1 best way to help Apple get clued in to potential issues with their products. They're not going to issue a recall because a bunch of bulletin board users complain to each other over and over again until they convince each other that there isn't a single MacBook Pro in the world that functions properly.
Eduardo1971
Apr 11, 12:34 PM
If true, this means that Apple has raised the white flag and accepted the defeat that Android has given to them. Not caring about the power of the hardware relative to others in the marketplace is a hallmark of a niche ecosystem.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
Welcome to obscurity Apple - Population You
Yet another example of an opinion being passed off as 'fact'.
Not surprised given your chosen signature.
gnasher729
Jul 14, 05:20 PM
A 2.66 Ghz Woodcrest will probably be faster than a 2.93Ghz Conroe. A 1.83Ghz Yonah is faster than a 3.2Ghz Pentium, right?;)
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
Merom, Conroe and Woodcrest all use Intel's new "Core Microarchitecture" (a bit confusing: Core Duo does _not_ use "Core Microarchitecture", it is basically an improved Pentium III. The Core 2 Duo chips use Core Microarchitecture).
All three chips produce the same performance at the same clockspeed. Cache size may make a difference, but the Conroe models starting at 2.4 GHz all have the large 4 MB cache. So a single 2.66 GHz Woodcrest will be substantially slower than a 2.93 GHz Conroe. Not that it matters; the 2.93 GHz Conroe is extremely overpriced and unlikely to be used in any Macintosh.
I personally would expect 2.0GHz Conroe, 2.66 GHz Conroe, 2 x 2 GHz Woodcrest and 2 x 2.66 GHz Woodcrest for a wide range from cheap to maximum performance.
msb3079
Apr 7, 10:59 PM
Obviously you know little about retail and accounting.
I was a manager at Circuit City for several years and I could not disagree any more.
The quicker you move stock, the better.
Obviously, you DON'T know.
I was a manager at Circuit City for several years and I could not disagree any more.
The quicker you move stock, the better.
Obviously, you DON'T know.
rangrbob
Jun 22, 10:33 PM
Well being Best Friends has it's advantages. And his DM is actually pretty cool. The store that received 5 of them that he is getting the 2 from, they are all idiots in that store. The Manager is literally Cross-Eyed, Employees don't even greet you when you walk in and are not very knowledgable. It's a shame too because I use to work at that store for several years. Received many trophies for sales. Including this one...
http://i48.tinypic.com/24fjhvm.jpg
What's really sad is that it's a Mall store. Use to be a Million Dollar plus store. Now it has dropped well below that. Although it was back in the day when they actually cared about their employees. They have such a high turn over rate anymore. I had quit because I got tired of the DM (Different DM then) threatening us with our jobs everyday during Golden Quarter. I left my keys on the desk and never returned along with a few others Managers at the time.
They stopped handing out awards and plaques to their employees and stores, but they are still happy to threaten your job.
http://i48.tinypic.com/24fjhvm.jpg
What's really sad is that it's a Mall store. Use to be a Million Dollar plus store. Now it has dropped well below that. Although it was back in the day when they actually cared about their employees. They have such a high turn over rate anymore. I had quit because I got tired of the DM (Different DM then) threatening us with our jobs everyday during Golden Quarter. I left my keys on the desk and never returned along with a few others Managers at the time.
They stopped handing out awards and plaques to their employees and stores, but they are still happy to threaten your job.
jclardy
Mar 26, 11:14 AM
This. Until this happens displays won't advance any further for actual computers (non-tablet) because there are so many form factors.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
Apple can spend the time to make graphics for each flavor of iPhone or iPad because there aren't that many to deal with. It becomes a lot more difficult to do this across a large range of products. Besides, computers are getting to the point where they are too powerful for most users (hence the popularity of the iPad). A retina display option would give people more incentive to upgrade their desktops, laptops, etc. I think?
As a designer, I'd love a retina 27" ACD. 300dpi right on my screen, almost perfect. Now if we could just get the color/brightness a little more accurate...
I really don't see the point of a display anywhere near 300DPI for a desktop or laptop. My MBP 15" with the 1680x1050 display has a DPI of 128, and with this I can only see the pixels of the fonts if my face is 6" away from the screen, which is above the keyboard. If you have a monitor on a desk it is going to be at least a foot away, but probably more like 1.5-2 feet.
Some of Apples displays are still around 90-100 DPI which I could see upgrading from those to around 150 or so. The main reason they aren't doing it right now is because the menu bar and all other interface elements would be tiny. On my MBP they are already pretty small along with all the default fonts and that is only at 128DPI.
So some kind of resolution independence is necessary, I am hoping for a general fix and not just a retina display fix (2x) because there will be no in between. With a general fix they could implement a slider that allows you to resize everything to fit any resolution.
But back on topic, I am pretty surprised if this is true. I guess they are pushing for a summer release, but I guess they could be pretty much feature complete by now and just need to work out bugs.
ohla313
Apr 6, 10:13 AM
awesome!!! this is really tempting. Should I throw an SSD in my 2010 4GB 2.66 GHz 13" MBP or sell it and wait for the MBA refresh?
boncellis
Jul 20, 12:05 PM
double post, my apologies.
zero2dash
Sep 18, 02:26 PM
The Thinkpad X40 I'm typing from Bluescreened on me no longer than three weeks ago. My crime? coming out of suspend mode.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
I'll never forget at my old job (Kinkos) when our dual G4 running Panther had that system crash screen come up that is gray and basically says "your FUBAR'D" in like 8 languages...we were all stunned. :D Good times...never thought I'd see a bad crash like that in OSX. Or back in 2000 when our workstations were all running Windows 95b - I lost track of how many blue screens we'd get in a day. Man Win95 was garbage. :p Big for it's time - utter garbage now.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
I'll never forget at my old job (Kinkos) when our dual G4 running Panther had that system crash screen come up that is gray and basically says "your FUBAR'D" in like 8 languages...we were all stunned. :D Good times...never thought I'd see a bad crash like that in OSX. Or back in 2000 when our workstations were all running Windows 95b - I lost track of how many blue screens we'd get in a day. Man Win95 was garbage. :p Big for it's time - utter garbage now.
gnasher729
Apr 8, 02:19 AM
So quotas are done on a daily basis and not a weekly basis? WOW. And I thought the quarterly earning reports made companies make bad decisions.
You have to remember that the people setting up these quotas are not the brightest. We had reports here of sales people who would not sell you stuff because selling it means they miss their quota.
Say the quota is "you have to sell one extended warranty and one HDMI cable for every PS3 sold". If the sales person is just reaching his quota, and you want to give the store real money for two PS3 without any warranty and without any HDMI cable, that sale would make him miss his quota, so he'll pretend the devices are not in stock. What's to blame is the guy setting up idiotic targets, where the sales person has to do things that are bad both for the shop and the customer to meet his targets.
You have to remember that the people setting up these quotas are not the brightest. We had reports here of sales people who would not sell you stuff because selling it means they miss their quota.
Say the quota is "you have to sell one extended warranty and one HDMI cable for every PS3 sold". If the sales person is just reaching his quota, and you want to give the store real money for two PS3 without any warranty and without any HDMI cable, that sale would make him miss his quota, so he'll pretend the devices are not in stock. What's to blame is the guy setting up idiotic targets, where the sales person has to do things that are bad both for the shop and the customer to meet his targets.
greenstork
Jul 31, 12:25 PM
Apple will never ship a desktop machine so close in size to the mini. Impractical and too much market confusion. I'm expecting a ~25% decrease in size of the current G5 tower, making it more mid-tower sized. This would still be an improvement to the current behemoths.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
Wow, you're pulling out my deep cuts with your sig. They never did fit a G5 in a notebook, I guess that was my intention with that quote. The G4 was never a great chip. It ran hot and the only way to make it faster was to make it run hotter, Apple needed a new chip and they knew it. Because they couldn't find a producer of efficient PPC chips, they switched to Intel, and I don't think anyone saw that coming.
Sometimes, chip makers move backwards to an architecture that works. Look at Intel's latest chips, they're an evolution of the Pentium M architecture and a departure from what previously was their "best" and fastest, the Pentium 4.
Azdel
Jun 14, 06:55 PM
I just got off the phone with my local RadioShack. I was told that the PIN would not guarantee you a phone on launch day, but that the chances of getting one are VERY VERY good. I know the manager very well, and trust that whoever told him said the same thing. I'm assuming the calls were done on a regional, if not district level, as opposed to company wide to give people a chance to ask questions, so it seems that most likely personal interpretations came into play, causing the original message, whatever it may have been to get screwed up.
mozumder
Apr 5, 06:55 PM
- Major revamp of asset cataloguing system with integrated final cut server, something similiar to what Aperture does with photos. This will be it's biggest feature
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
- Core image fx with integrated Shake-style fx compositing
and the usual obvious things (64 bit, new formats, updated quicktime, etc..)
laidbackliam
Aug 7, 02:34 AM
this is me going out an a limb here.
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
"if" this happens, which i find unlikely based on pure speculation, the mac mini could keep yonah processors, the Mac could get conroe, the iMac could get conroe, and the Mac Pro could go balls to the wall with 3.0ghz woodcrests.
the Mac would be the affordable tower that people have been wanting. yet another reason for people to switch. a unit that works, that has an upgrade path, but doesn't cost 1500+.
again, i don't think this will happen at wwdc, but i do think it would be cool
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
"if" this happens, which i find unlikely based on pure speculation, the mac mini could keep yonah processors, the Mac could get conroe, the iMac could get conroe, and the Mac Pro could go balls to the wall with 3.0ghz woodcrests.
the Mac would be the affordable tower that people have been wanting. yet another reason for people to switch. a unit that works, that has an upgrade path, but doesn't cost 1500+.
again, i don't think this will happen at wwdc, but i do think it would be cool
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 03:58 PM
Only if you have an active subscription on all of them. That's the number the graph behind the link shows.
That may be, but I highly doubt every infant, elderly folks, and the poverty stricken all have cell phones. If that's the case, then I'd have to say that there are a lot of people who's financial priorities are kinda messed.
That may be, but I highly doubt every infant, elderly folks, and the poverty stricken all have cell phones. If that's the case, then I'd have to say that there are a lot of people who's financial priorities are kinda messed.
lorductape
Nov 28, 06:39 PM
I suspect the main reason that Microsoft agreed to pay money in the first place is that they needed to get the music labels on board to boost the Zune Music Store, Microsoft was in the weaker position here and I believe the labels exploited that weakness.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
I believe, correct me if I'm wrong, that microsoft suggested it in the first place to universal.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 03:02 PM
I hope that number keeps rising; we need competition to not let Apple rest on it's laurels.
John Gruber once (correctly) stated (or maybe quoted someone else) that Apple's greatest competitor is Apple. Jobs & Co. have never been keen on flipping on the cruise control when they have a successful product (unlike, say, Microsoft).
Do you honestly believe that the XOOM is pushing Apple to do better? Please.
John Gruber once (correctly) stated (or maybe quoted someone else) that Apple's greatest competitor is Apple. Jobs & Co. have never been keen on flipping on the cruise control when they have a successful product (unlike, say, Microsoft).
Do you honestly believe that the XOOM is pushing Apple to do better? Please.
NoSmokingBandit
Nov 30, 07:15 AM
I havent gotten to them yet, but i've heard they are just as awesome as GT3's endurance races.
Willis
Jul 27, 01:45 PM
I havent checked yet to see if someone mentioned it, but in regard to what people expect to see at WWDC, dont worry if it isnt annouced then... Paris Expo is in September.
Mac Pro's might come out then i think.
Mac Pro's might come out then i think.
agentmouthwash
Nov 28, 08:17 PM
If this happens, I will proudly use Bit Torrent and pirate all Universal music that I want. Right now I use itunes because the price scheme is perfect. Universal is making a big mistake.
dongmin
Sep 19, 10:02 AM
It gets annoying. Why? Because it's true and most people don't want to admit it.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.While you make some valid points, you overlook others:
1. As soon as the new model comes out, the older models will drop in price. So even if you aren't getting the fastest and greatest, even if you're buying the lowest end MBP, you'll benefit from the price break.
2. MBPs are expensive computers. You're investing in something that you'll keep around for 3-4 years. I want to future-proof my computer as much as possible. Features like easily-swappable HD and fast graphics card will affect "the average user" 2+ years from now (pro'ly sooner) when everyone's downloading and streaming HD videos and OS X has all this new eye-candy that will require a fast graphics card.
3. There are other features than just a 10% increase in CPU power that we are hoping in the next MBP, including a magnetic latch, easily-access to HD and RAM, and better heat management. Certainly the average Joe will be able to benefit from these features, even if all you do is word process and surf the web.
In a few cases here and there, the extra processor power/speed is going to help. But for a majority of people buying a MacBook, they're not going to be burning home-made DVD's, doing intense Music compositions, or using it for hard-core gaming. They're going to SURF and WRITE.
As for the "resale" value, again, most people who are buying a used MacBook are NOT going to ask "is it a Merom?" They're going to ask how nice the case is, how much use it's gotten, and how much it is, and that's it.
Everybody likes to play "ooo, I'm the hard-core computing whiz and I need the BEST out there", but I bet you if you took an honest poll out there of everyone who's answered this thread, you'd find at least 75% these Apple fans have no need for for the extra speed, they just want it because it's "cool" and "fast" and it's the latest thing out there.While you make some valid points, you overlook others:
1. As soon as the new model comes out, the older models will drop in price. So even if you aren't getting the fastest and greatest, even if you're buying the lowest end MBP, you'll benefit from the price break.
2. MBPs are expensive computers. You're investing in something that you'll keep around for 3-4 years. I want to future-proof my computer as much as possible. Features like easily-swappable HD and fast graphics card will affect "the average user" 2+ years from now (pro'ly sooner) when everyone's downloading and streaming HD videos and OS X has all this new eye-candy that will require a fast graphics card.
3. There are other features than just a 10% increase in CPU power that we are hoping in the next MBP, including a magnetic latch, easily-access to HD and RAM, and better heat management. Certainly the average Joe will be able to benefit from these features, even if all you do is word process and surf the web.
Yvan256
Apr 19, 02:01 PM
why? iphones outselling itouches by so much makes sense to me.
But it doesn't make sense to a lot of us. The monthly fees on an iPhone are just too much for a lot of budgets. You pay your iPod touch once and that's it. No more to pay every month after that.
But it doesn't make sense to a lot of us. The monthly fees on an iPhone are just too much for a lot of budgets. You pay your iPod touch once and that's it. No more to pay every month after that.
kresh
Aug 26, 04:41 AM
If you haven't been reading the comments, it would appear MOST people are complaining about the more recent models. I would agree with most that the Powermac G5's have had serious issues and now recent macbook's... Apple needs to do one of the following ... Higher Quality Assurance testing OR better support cause right now they're missing both.
I'm 40 years old and literally can't remember how many computers I have purchased for personal use. I normally only keep a computer for 5 or 6 months before getting something newer. I know I had to have purchased 50 or 60 computers for personal use.
My very first Apple product was a 1.25GHz G4 Mac Mini. (March 2005 I think) On advice from a friend, I purchased this computer and he helped me over-clock it to 1.58GHz and upgrade to 1GB ram.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a power user, but I absolutely love this little computer. It's the best piece of electronics I have ever purchased, and it's the longest time I have ever kept a computer. I just can't imagine using any other operating system, for ANY reason.
My whole household is now all macs, my wife and 4 kids each have one. The 6 mac mini's that we have in our house are unconditionally flawless.
I was going to put my Mini on eBay this weekend and get a MacBook Saturday at the Apple store in Raleigh. I was assuming the MacBook was a Mini in a notebook case, but now I'm scared of doing so. If the MacBook is not as nice and reliable as my mini, I would be extremely upset.
Sorry to ramble on so, but it is really rare for me to find a product, or anything, that has impressed me as much as my Mini has.
After the long story, would any of you really recommend the MacBook vs my Mini (knowing that I love it so)?
I'm 40 years old and literally can't remember how many computers I have purchased for personal use. I normally only keep a computer for 5 or 6 months before getting something newer. I know I had to have purchased 50 or 60 computers for personal use.
My very first Apple product was a 1.25GHz G4 Mac Mini. (March 2005 I think) On advice from a friend, I purchased this computer and he helped me over-clock it to 1.58GHz and upgrade to 1GB ram.
I'll be the first to admit that I'm not a power user, but I absolutely love this little computer. It's the best piece of electronics I have ever purchased, and it's the longest time I have ever kept a computer. I just can't imagine using any other operating system, for ANY reason.
My whole household is now all macs, my wife and 4 kids each have one. The 6 mac mini's that we have in our house are unconditionally flawless.
I was going to put my Mini on eBay this weekend and get a MacBook Saturday at the Apple store in Raleigh. I was assuming the MacBook was a Mini in a notebook case, but now I'm scared of doing so. If the MacBook is not as nice and reliable as my mini, I would be extremely upset.
Sorry to ramble on so, but it is really rare for me to find a product, or anything, that has impressed me as much as my Mini has.
After the long story, would any of you really recommend the MacBook vs my Mini (knowing that I love it so)?
rovex
Mar 22, 02:27 PM
Actually it is less than 50% the screen area of an iPad. Maybe you should check your math before calling someone stupid.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
I got confused, but nonetheless the smaller screen results in smaller body which in turn means better portability. Which A LOT of individuals want.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
I got confused, but nonetheless the smaller screen results in smaller body which in turn means better portability. Which A LOT of individuals want.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
