vwcruisn
Mar 23, 07:23 PM
Go read the forum title again.
I did. That didn't answer my question.
I did. That didn't answer my question.
MacsRgr8
Sep 9, 05:08 AM
Too bad the old Quad G5 wasn't put in there.
truz
Aug 28, 09:49 PM
Will an Apple Retail store upgrade your cpu? What's the cost to have this done without a warranty void?
Also,
The Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 1066MHz will work in an imac intel? newegg sells them for $369
Core 2 Duo Extreme runs at 2.93GHz
Also,
The Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 1066MHz will work in an imac intel? newegg sells them for $369
Core 2 Duo Extreme runs at 2.93GHz
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:08 PM
Now I can rid myself of my 27" i7 2009 iMac.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
biw314
Sep 6, 07:55 AM
When did it come out? Wht aren't you guys talking about it? Did I miss something?
tpavur
Apr 4, 12:09 PM
"So Live and Let Die!"
You shoot their leg, they shoot you in the head.
Anyone who points a gun at another person is asking for trouble, even if he/she doesn't fire it.
If guns didn't exist, things like this wouldn't be happening.
If guns did not exist it would be happening with whatever does. swords, rocks, fists... in which case the mall cop would have probably been killed in this situation and lost the "good fight". It becomes a game of numbers when guns do not exist... all guns do is put everybody on a level playing field regarldess of numbers (be realistic) or physical strength.
You shoot their leg, they shoot you in the head.
Anyone who points a gun at another person is asking for trouble, even if he/she doesn't fire it.
If guns didn't exist, things like this wouldn't be happening.
If guns did not exist it would be happening with whatever does. swords, rocks, fists... in which case the mall cop would have probably been killed in this situation and lost the "good fight". It becomes a game of numbers when guns do not exist... all guns do is put everybody on a level playing field regarldess of numbers (be realistic) or physical strength.
mike3k
Sep 4, 07:54 PM
An iPod update is way overdue. It's been almost a year since the last major iPod update.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 01:38 PM
But MS never consistently used the term App to describe any part of their business. Sure it pops up occasionally here and there, almost at random, but that's about it. Historically they've always used 'Programs'. So to use your example, why couldn't they say: "We have this thing called Marketplace. What is it? Well, it's a place where you can buy programs.....". Why are they not happy with that? It will line up so much better with their software genealogy.
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Because apps and applications have been used interchangeably for over a decade. Why only allow Apple to use it?
I suspect the truth of the matter is they now want to start using 'App' for everything (instead of Programs), because Apple has popularized the term. Its on everybody's tongue now. And MS wants in on it. They want their stuff to be associated with the buzz that Apple created. That's borderline parasitic to me.
Because apps and applications have been used interchangeably for over a decade. Why only allow Apple to use it?
thworple
Oct 27, 09:52 AM
Dude, it's a MacWorld convention, not an environmental love-in. GP needs to get their own convention. They were on private property - the conf organizers have the right to do what they want. Never mind their rights, huh?
Hmmmm, so what you're saying is that a quiet protest (which as an eye-witness I can say this was!!) about a subject they feel strongly about isn't allowed at certain conventions because of the political orientation of the people in charge.
The whole point of the MacExpo is to show the services that Apple and its Third-Party agents can supply to the public. I don't see what the harm is in advertising what they DON'T offer (ie:- in the opinion of Greenpeace - a sound environmental agenda) at the same time.
I'm not going to side with any particular viewpoint about Apple's "green policy" here, as I simply have not read enough about it to convey an honest and balanced opinion. however I do feel that it is within Greenpeace's right to advertise the issues they feel strongly about in an orderly manner (which as far as I'm concerned they did on Thursday!).
Hmmmm, so what you're saying is that a quiet protest (which as an eye-witness I can say this was!!) about a subject they feel strongly about isn't allowed at certain conventions because of the political orientation of the people in charge.
The whole point of the MacExpo is to show the services that Apple and its Third-Party agents can supply to the public. I don't see what the harm is in advertising what they DON'T offer (ie:- in the opinion of Greenpeace - a sound environmental agenda) at the same time.
I'm not going to side with any particular viewpoint about Apple's "green policy" here, as I simply have not read enough about it to convey an honest and balanced opinion. however I do feel that it is within Greenpeace's right to advertise the issues they feel strongly about in an orderly manner (which as far as I'm concerned they did on Thursday!).
2nyRiggz
Sep 12, 02:13 PM
So is this ipod still a 5G or 5.1G.....well this ipod is not the big news of the day.
Bless
Bless
Mikael
Sep 9, 10:50 AM
Thanks :D
No problem. :)
the title you just mentioned belongs to the MacPro...sorry for the misunderstanding...:rolleyes:
What a joke.
How is Winblows going on your side, Aiden? Many BSODs today?
Awww... Not this again. Windows doesn't blue screen without reason. If it did BSOD left and right, I would think that any of the three desktops at work should have gotten one in the 30,000 hours they've clocked now... I don't think I've ever seen a BSOD not being caused by bad or incorrectly configured hardware, overclocking or possibly bad drivers. As a matter of fact, the only BSODs I've had since 2002 (when I switched to XP) have been related to overclocked hardware. People need to check their damn hardware before going all ballistic over Microsoft's supposedly unstable operating system.
I always test the CPU/memory/mobo using Prime95 and Memtest86 right after I build a computer. I've caught some bad memory this way. Moreover, it has enabled me to stay BSOD-less on every machine I've built so far (that's ~15 machines in the past 5 years).
Mainly I used to leave my tower on 24/7 and the worst I would get is switching my monitor on first thing in the morning or when I got home from work and see it had rebooted itself and was telling me it was an invalid system disc.
That's almost 100% a hardware malfunction that causes Windows to restart after a serious failure. The default setting in Windows is to restart when it encounters a serious system failure and this can be disabled in the control panel to aid in seeking out the failing hardware. But I guess this is too late to fix now, since it sounds as if you sold the machine.
No problem. :)
the title you just mentioned belongs to the MacPro...sorry for the misunderstanding...:rolleyes:
What a joke.
How is Winblows going on your side, Aiden? Many BSODs today?
Awww... Not this again. Windows doesn't blue screen without reason. If it did BSOD left and right, I would think that any of the three desktops at work should have gotten one in the 30,000 hours they've clocked now... I don't think I've ever seen a BSOD not being caused by bad or incorrectly configured hardware, overclocking or possibly bad drivers. As a matter of fact, the only BSODs I've had since 2002 (when I switched to XP) have been related to overclocked hardware. People need to check their damn hardware before going all ballistic over Microsoft's supposedly unstable operating system.
I always test the CPU/memory/mobo using Prime95 and Memtest86 right after I build a computer. I've caught some bad memory this way. Moreover, it has enabled me to stay BSOD-less on every machine I've built so far (that's ~15 machines in the past 5 years).
Mainly I used to leave my tower on 24/7 and the worst I would get is switching my monitor on first thing in the morning or when I got home from work and see it had rebooted itself and was telling me it was an invalid system disc.
That's almost 100% a hardware malfunction that causes Windows to restart after a serious failure. The default setting in Windows is to restart when it encounters a serious system failure and this can be disabled in the control panel to aid in seeking out the failing hardware. But I guess this is too late to fix now, since it sounds as if you sold the machine.
Tommyg117
Sep 15, 06:07 PM
ok, but what cell phone provider are they going to use? Cingular? Verizon? I have verizon and really want them to have it.
AidenShaw
Mar 22, 02:38 PM
I want to know where to get a list of products that hook onto Thunderbolt.
Rocketman
From terminal, to see all the shipping Thunderbolt products use the command
cat /dev/null
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
Coming summer 2011 - at least 3 months away.
Rocketman
From terminal, to see all the shipping Thunderbolt products use the command
cat /dev/null
http://www.lacie.com/us/index.htm
Coming summer 2011 - at least 3 months away.
clintob
Oct 12, 03:56 PM
going on to say that Africans must be allowed to die so they can evolve and catch up is extreme and unreasonable.
It's always nice to find a reason not to make something "my problem." That's a great feeling. But I think you have gone in a pretty bad "us and them" direction with that.
I didn't say that at all. What I said is that it's been documented throughout history that people, animals, plants, and any other form of life on Earth go through phases where large groups die off. Yes, we are intelligent, educated animals with intellect and compassion, and it is therefore our job to try and curtail those deaths that are unfiar and inhumane. Nobody in their right mind would argue that.
What I'm saying is that when a group of people emerge (not ALL the African people - namely the group of African men who have decided that it is their duty to rape, impregnate, and pilage to their hearts content) who commit crimes against humanity, and then start to wreap the whirlwind, it's "natural" for those people to eventually meet their end - whether it be natural or otherwise. There are an AWFUL lot of African people who are compeltely innocent and in many ways helpless and it is our duty as leaders of the free world to help in any way we can. Of course - that's obvious.
But we also have to leand creedence to the idea that there's a portion of the African culture that is too deeply rooted for us to change, and that has to be allowed to die out on its own. Not the people themselves - the notions that are ingrained in that culture that have caused this problem. Those notions need to die off, and that will only happen in time.
THAT is what I'm trying to say.
It's always nice to find a reason not to make something "my problem." That's a great feeling. But I think you have gone in a pretty bad "us and them" direction with that.
I didn't say that at all. What I said is that it's been documented throughout history that people, animals, plants, and any other form of life on Earth go through phases where large groups die off. Yes, we are intelligent, educated animals with intellect and compassion, and it is therefore our job to try and curtail those deaths that are unfiar and inhumane. Nobody in their right mind would argue that.
What I'm saying is that when a group of people emerge (not ALL the African people - namely the group of African men who have decided that it is their duty to rape, impregnate, and pilage to their hearts content) who commit crimes against humanity, and then start to wreap the whirlwind, it's "natural" for those people to eventually meet their end - whether it be natural or otherwise. There are an AWFUL lot of African people who are compeltely innocent and in many ways helpless and it is our duty as leaders of the free world to help in any way we can. Of course - that's obvious.
But we also have to leand creedence to the idea that there's a portion of the African culture that is too deeply rooted for us to change, and that has to be allowed to die out on its own. Not the people themselves - the notions that are ingrained in that culture that have caused this problem. Those notions need to die off, and that will only happen in time.
THAT is what I'm trying to say.
know-it-all5
Sep 12, 04:23 PM
First and foremost, though i am repeating what others have said... this is still a 5g ipod... This update was VERY minor... I say expect an iphone at macworld 06, and ipod 6g somewhere in 1st quarter of 07 (maybe macworld).
gugy
Sep 5, 07:03 PM
I think this is totally feasible, but one question that many of you haven't addressed is: "Do you see this interaction and interface happening for the Windows users?"
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
very true, unfortunately those bastards dictate what will be successful. :eek:
another thing is make sure any video transmitted wirelessly will work perfect.
I had my airport xpress 30 feet from my computer hooked up to my stereo and the signal would drop all the time. This to work it needs to work flawlessly, if not forget it. I rather have the media center hooked up on my stereo and TV without the wireless crap.
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
very true, unfortunately those bastards dictate what will be successful. :eek:
another thing is make sure any video transmitted wirelessly will work perfect.
I had my airport xpress 30 feet from my computer hooked up to my stereo and the signal would drop all the time. This to work it needs to work flawlessly, if not forget it. I rather have the media center hooked up on my stereo and TV without the wireless crap.
manu chao
Apr 11, 05:56 AM
Care to actually show me what app that will actually do what I was talking about? :rolleyes:
I want to play music from iTunes on my Mac as the source, and multiple airplay devices as the target. Currently I can only play to Airport Expresses and Apple TVs (and upcoming Airplay certified speakers). I want Apple to include all iOS devices to that list of target devices.
As mentioned multiple times in this thread: Airfoil
Airfoil runs on your Mac, Airfoil Speakers on your iOS devices. Start Airfoil Speakers (which is a free app) on your iOS devices and then select inside Airfoil on the Mac on which devices you want your sound being played. You can let it play on multiple devices at the same time and the app does a decent job of synchronising the sound. In addition to iOS devices any Airport Expresses and Apple TVs can also be selected. And you can select to broadcast the sound of individual applications on the Mac only (eg, iTunes only to avoid other system sounds being transmitted).
Or, for simpler needs, just enable Home Sharing in iTunes and play your Mac's iTunes content directly from your iOS device.
I want to play music from iTunes on my Mac as the source, and multiple airplay devices as the target. Currently I can only play to Airport Expresses and Apple TVs (and upcoming Airplay certified speakers). I want Apple to include all iOS devices to that list of target devices.
As mentioned multiple times in this thread: Airfoil
Airfoil runs on your Mac, Airfoil Speakers on your iOS devices. Start Airfoil Speakers (which is a free app) on your iOS devices and then select inside Airfoil on the Mac on which devices you want your sound being played. You can let it play on multiple devices at the same time and the app does a decent job of synchronising the sound. In addition to iOS devices any Airport Expresses and Apple TVs can also be selected. And you can select to broadcast the sound of individual applications on the Mac only (eg, iTunes only to avoid other system sounds being transmitted).
Or, for simpler needs, just enable Home Sharing in iTunes and play your Mac's iTunes content directly from your iOS device.
wnurse
Aug 23, 10:08 PM
So, in summary...
Apple pays Creative a one time fee of $100M to licence their patents.
Creative joins the 'Made for iPod' program making accessories for their competitor, Apple, who gets money for 'Made for iPod'.
Creative still HAS to defend it's patent against other competitors - that's the nature of patents - or licence it to them. If they do, Apple takes some of that money too. In a round-a-bout way, Apple is getting money back from it's competitors. Nice.
Creative have a much better case because Apple settled.
Creative still owns a valid patent. If Apple had won, there would be no patent so anyone could copy the Creative/Apple style interface.
Apple continues on as if nothing has happened. No long court case delaying sales. No injunctions to halt imports.
Explain to me why people think Apple lost here?
Creative knew it was about to get reamed by Microsoft's Zune which it's players aren't compatible with. They knew to get out of the market. Instead of legitimising Microsoft's offering, they've tied up with Apple. It might bug us that Apple have legitimised a bogus patent but it's otherwise very, very smart.
Interesting, I did not know so many apple fans were lawyers and patent experts. Some call the patent bogus, some claim apple really didn't infringe but felt like being santa claus to creative and some even claim that the lawsuit would have cost apple 100 million (like it would have cost creative 0. Why not slug it out and see how much creative have in the coffers to pay their lawyers?). You guys would all make excellent attorneys!!!.
I'll summarize.
1. Apple infringed on the patent
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Actually, creative won, regardless of whether apple destroys them in the market or not. Man, even Steven (jobs) is not as pissed as you all are. I think he's lying comfortable in his bed right now, probably watching the news. Chill out. Companies infringe on other companies patents all the time. Companies settle all the time. This is not an abnormal event.
Apple pays Creative a one time fee of $100M to licence their patents.
Creative joins the 'Made for iPod' program making accessories for their competitor, Apple, who gets money for 'Made for iPod'.
Creative still HAS to defend it's patent against other competitors - that's the nature of patents - or licence it to them. If they do, Apple takes some of that money too. In a round-a-bout way, Apple is getting money back from it's competitors. Nice.
Creative have a much better case because Apple settled.
Creative still owns a valid patent. If Apple had won, there would be no patent so anyone could copy the Creative/Apple style interface.
Apple continues on as if nothing has happened. No long court case delaying sales. No injunctions to halt imports.
Explain to me why people think Apple lost here?
Creative knew it was about to get reamed by Microsoft's Zune which it's players aren't compatible with. They knew to get out of the market. Instead of legitimising Microsoft's offering, they've tied up with Apple. It might bug us that Apple have legitimised a bogus patent but it's otherwise very, very smart.
Interesting, I did not know so many apple fans were lawyers and patent experts. Some call the patent bogus, some claim apple really didn't infringe but felt like being santa claus to creative and some even claim that the lawsuit would have cost apple 100 million (like it would have cost creative 0. Why not slug it out and see how much creative have in the coffers to pay their lawyers?). You guys would all make excellent attorneys!!!.
I'll summarize.
1. Apple infringed on the patent
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
Apple could blow a hundred million in legal expenses. It's less of an instance of throwing in the towel, and more of an instance of, "You know, the way idiot judges/juries hand out settlements these days, let's just give them a paltry sum, let them think they've won, and still destroy them in the MP3 market."
Actually, creative won, regardless of whether apple destroys them in the market or not. Man, even Steven (jobs) is not as pissed as you all are. I think he's lying comfortable in his bed right now, probably watching the news. Chill out. Companies infringe on other companies patents all the time. Companies settle all the time. This is not an abnormal event.
Saladin
Sep 14, 09:59 PM
2. Apple's announcement a few days ago about the new iTunes store: (to quote Page 1) "TV shows will now be sold at 640x480 px h264. While the updated 5G iPods announced today will be able to play the new format, there has not been any indication from Apple of yet that the new shows will be playable on older 5G iPods. Apple's official knowledge-base article still states that h264-encoded movies must be 320 x 240 at 30 fps."
That's false information. I already downloaded Sacred Planet (640*480 h.264) from the iTunes Movie Store and loaded it onto my newly updated 5G iPod. The movie works perfectly. Since that would have been the strongest point in your argument for a multiple use device, I would now say your conclusion lacks weight. I'm not saying that they won't release one soon, just use better proofs to support your conclusion next time.
That's false information. I already downloaded Sacred Planet (640*480 h.264) from the iTunes Movie Store and loaded it onto my newly updated 5G iPod. The movie works perfectly. Since that would have been the strongest point in your argument for a multiple use device, I would now say your conclusion lacks weight. I'm not saying that they won't release one soon, just use better proofs to support your conclusion next time.
dime21
Apr 19, 11:15 AM
Do any of these suits ever actually get resolved?
no, they languish in the courts for years, what with all the appeals and what not. eventually, after 6 or 7 years have gone by, and all the products and technologies involved have lost their relevance and been obsoleted, and all the people involved has either left the company, or forgotten the details, the two sides will reach a settlement agreement, usually involving some kind of stock swap, licensing agreement, or other shady shenanigans instead of real actual money. welcome to the world of corporate law.
no, they languish in the courts for years, what with all the appeals and what not. eventually, after 6 or 7 years have gone by, and all the products and technologies involved have lost their relevance and been obsoleted, and all the people involved has either left the company, or forgotten the details, the two sides will reach a settlement agreement, usually involving some kind of stock swap, licensing agreement, or other shady shenanigans instead of real actual money. welcome to the world of corporate law.
OllyW
Mar 29, 01:06 PM
He said he would be happy with 1% of the TOTAL MOBILE PHONE MARKET SHARE, not just SMARTPHONES!
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
They had 2.9% of the worldwide mobile phone market for 2010.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1543014
What % of the total do Apple actually have?
The latest figure I could see was 1.5%, not that much over the target the Steve set.
Don't read the % figure of the Smartphone market as being the target Steve was after!
They had 2.9% of the worldwide mobile phone market for 2010.
http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=1543014
Christopher387A
Apr 25, 02:11 PM
I can't wait! :D
iMacZealot
Sep 14, 08:34 AM
Anyone know when we might see an update to the MacBook (not MBP)???
Not on the 24th. Later in the fall maybe?
Not on the 24th. Later in the fall maybe?
asdf542
Apr 14, 01:44 PM
I was asking you what I thought would be an easy question for you to answer. I'll ask again, it will work with any USB device, do you think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? I'll wait.
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle that a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
Yeah, it is. USB 3.0 is not that big of a step up from USB 2.0 so those that really need the extra bandwidth will not bother with it and go straight to Thunderbolt. Simple as that. Leave your rinky dink Toys R Us low bandwidth peripherals to USB and leave the big boy peripherals to Thunderbolt.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.Sure you have, you've completely ignored my other post then changed the subject to reading comprehension to smokescreen the topic at hand. Oh and give me a break with your non-insult ********. You have been making jabs about short buses and taking comprehension classes over a Thunderbolt and USB discussion. If anything you are the one that needs to take some classes, maybe not on comprehension but I'm sure you get the idea.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle that a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.Actually let's do a real recap:
You agree with a claim that Thunderbolt will be Mac only
I respond with an article that simply states it won't be
You respond with the reason it won't take off as manufacturers will have to add it separately
Econgeek tells you it's a completely different scenario because they don't need a license through Apple
I tell you Intel will be supporting both
You then start with your strawman argument and ignore a portion of what I stated
You also follow that up with some insults
I respond with video proof of why Thunderbolt will be popular with many devices
You ignore then respond with more insults
No comments:
Post a Comment