slackpacker
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Obey the law or you may get shot. Rule #1
brian636
Mar 17, 07:16 PM
Of course McAfee would say that, they want to sell software.
Macnoviz
Sep 19, 02:54 PM
Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
macadam212
May 4, 03:32 AM
Apple's mini displayport didn't last long, or is is Thunderbolt compatible with it?
BlizzardBomb
Aug 31, 02:30 PM
Merom MacBook Pro + Conroe iMac + speedbumped Mac mini + iTunes movie downloads + widescreen video iPod
That would be awesome. :) Add a larger capacity Nano to that.
New Apple Cinema Displays with glossy screens and iSights would be amazing.
Hmm... Maybe as an option? Glossy is great, but lots strongly dislike it.
Wtf does that even mean?!
I will are not know.
That would be awesome. :) Add a larger capacity Nano to that.
New Apple Cinema Displays with glossy screens and iSights would be amazing.
Hmm... Maybe as an option? Glossy is great, but lots strongly dislike it.
Wtf does that even mean?!
I will are not know.
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 10:27 AM
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Yeah because everyone loves to carry around an external hard drive with their sleek portable MacBooks. :rolleyes:
God forbid you carry around an inch long adapter in your laptop bag. Is that too much for you?
Oh and here's some adapter prices for you:
http://www.monoprice.com/products/product.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10428&cs_id=1042802&p_id=5311
http://www.monoprice.com/products/subdepartment.asp?c_id=104&cp_id=10404
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? LOL, are you kidding me bro? Do you think USB 3 peaks out at it's max 5 Gbps? YOU are the one dreaming if you believe that. Here's some more evidence for your FUD:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CCz_c_rDAXw
USB 3 would completely choke in that situation let alone in a simply hard drive speed comparison. Give me a break. Here's another example for you to look at for some REAL WORLD USB 3 speeds:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qrtwtSjzjZI
In reality with USB 3 you get about 480 Megabits as opposed to the promised 5 Gpbs meaning Thunderbolt will be even faster than two times.
They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). So you are just ASSUMING that they will cost $250 more than USB 3 drives. OK, let's make that clear. You have no evidence to support that your $250 price difference has any validity other than the fact that FireWire drives were more expensive when it's already been explained twice and back why Thunderbolt won't be as 'exclusive' as FireWire. It's going to be on every Ivy Bridge chipset just like USB 3.0 is. Everyone's going to be using it, it's another checkmark for them to list. Why do you think PC manufactures still sell machines with eSata?
Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.LOL, words can't describe how wrong you are. You think HDD speeds cap out at 480 Mbps? Maybe in your 'practical world' where you enjoy using inferior technology because it's 'what you're used to' that's the case. But for everyone else Thunderbolt will be a massive performance gain. Let alone when external SSD's really start hitting the market. USB 3 will really be proven for the piece of trash that it is and get wasted on all bandwidth comparisons. USB 3 is capped at a theoretical transfer rate of 5 Gbps. Thunderbolt is currently at 10 Gbps and can scale up to 100 Gbps in the future.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.Same relative performance? LMAO
Thunderbolt is suited for the future of high data transfer speeds that SSD's are capable of. Who wants the bottleneck to be the port on their computer? Because that's all USB 3 is going to be.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Your 'practical world' when you were just talking about how no one will pay a premium for USB 3. Well the reason why no one's going to pay a premium for USB 3 is because it's a garbage update over USB 2.0. Thunderbolt will scale to the future. USB 3 is going to be trapped in limbo no matter what new peripherals come out down the road and given that it took them 8 years to release it a couple of years down the road when Thunderbolt is scaling even faster than USB 3. The only thing USB 3 is going to be used for down the road is nothing that USB 2 couldn't handle.
Northgrove
Apr 28, 06:09 PM
Microsoft is doing OK, now with Office and Windows 7. All of these are quite major successes for them. Windows Phone 7 still seems a bit shaky to me, but with the Office suite and Windows doing well now, they're OK. That they're beat by Apple is simply because Apple is doing far better than OK - not that MS is doing poorly. MS has their core products doing well -- Apple is grabbing large parts of markets, hardware (iPhone, iPad) as well as software (iOS). Both at once, when they've been big in neither before. That difference is sure to show up in the revenue. :)
mrkramer
Apr 25, 03:13 AM
i thought this from my first post, but his join date is 08, and he's a regular. that is what has me thinking that what he is saying is really how he thinks/acts.
I looked through some of his older posts, and while none of them are quite as obvious about how shallow and uncaring he is you can tell that he probably doesn't include the whole story. For example, he likes to argue with his neighbors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978345&highlight=) I'm guessing that we only got half the story in that thread. Sounds like he was pretty rude in an Apple store. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=644656&highlight=) and one quote from that thread:
I want the genius I dealt with to get in a car wreck tonight. I want to deal with the genius you got.
Don
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=) So based on past examples of his attitude here, I think this is really the way he thinks, not just an attempt to troll.
I looked through some of his older posts, and while none of them are quite as obvious about how shallow and uncaring he is you can tell that he probably doesn't include the whole story. For example, he likes to argue with his neighbors (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=978345&highlight=) I'm guessing that we only got half the story in that thread. Sounds like he was pretty rude in an Apple store. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=644656&highlight=) and one quote from that thread:
I want the genius I dealt with to get in a car wreck tonight. I want to deal with the genius you got.
Don
plus parking in a handicapped spot. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=928429&highlight=) So based on past examples of his attitude here, I think this is really the way he thinks, not just an attempt to troll.
Multimedia
Sep 12, 03:33 AM
Multimedia, in the Sept.12th thread, you said:
"I now predict a 50% chance the C2Q Mac will be unveiled tomorrow. And if not tomorrow no later than early November."
I guess that's what people disagreed with (although I haven't finished reading the whole thread yet). I agree with you that it is indeed really big news and I still can't quite wrap my mind around the idea, but I'd be extremely surprised if Apple announces anything Kentsfield later today. (It's already the 12th here in South Korea.)I agree. I let my enthusasm for the surprise Core 2 Quadro would be ready for retail shelves mid October swept my logic away. I've changed that post since coming to my senses.
"I now predict a 50% chance the C2Q Mac will be unveiled tomorrow. And if not tomorrow no later than early November."
I guess that's what people disagreed with (although I haven't finished reading the whole thread yet). I agree with you that it is indeed really big news and I still can't quite wrap my mind around the idea, but I'd be extremely surprised if Apple announces anything Kentsfield later today. (It's already the 12th here in South Korea.)I agree. I let my enthusasm for the surprise Core 2 Quadro would be ready for retail shelves mid October swept my logic away. I've changed that post since coming to my senses.
GGJstudios
Apr 4, 05:02 PM
I stand corrected.
I find myself standing that way a lot! :)
I find myself standing that way a lot! :)
Otaviano
Apr 22, 05:48 AM
How does streaming music to my iPhone help me, when O2 cap my Internet usage, and then charge when you use more.
A great point, it's kind of funny how consumers have let the media lead us into believing we need clouded services out of everything. I can understand streaming television and films, but what is so hard about syncing your music at home once or twice a week?
A great point, it's kind of funny how consumers have let the media lead us into believing we need clouded services out of everything. I can understand streaming television and films, but what is so hard about syncing your music at home once or twice a week?
applesith
May 3, 11:20 AM
2 External displays?? That is very very sexy! I want one. Too bad i can't justify the purchase.
AppleScruff1
Apr 25, 10:08 PM
And a large portion of that 99% of the market will find integrated graphics fine, until they venture to the Apple App Store, and find that their spanking new MBA have a video card not supported by 99% of the games on sale... In fact, integrated graphics are not only not supported, but are specifically singled out in most game's system requirements.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
I don't question the gaming issue, I just wonder what percentage of MBP buyers would not buy because of the Intel graphics. My uneducated guess would be a very small percentage. Remember, Apple caters to the average consumer, not the geeks.
jcshas
Sep 12, 02:30 PM
I am so going to upgrade my 60 GB to the new 80 GB 'er. Finally enough space to hold my entire music collection + a back-up of my iPhoto Library.
slackpacker
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Obey the law or you may get shot. Rule #1
WannaGoMac
Apr 11, 08:21 AM
Because what I ultimately want is an airplay/airmusic station ready to play from any of the 9 iOS/iTunes devices in the house wirelessly in the family area.
Home sharing from your Mac won't do that?
Home sharing from your Mac won't do that?
nospleen
Sep 10, 08:24 AM
It seems the people who were mad about the intel switch are getting quieter and quieter... ;)
runninmac
Oct 12, 08:04 PM
Dang they look good! I think the red is going to be a great hit especially in the high school crowd. Now if only I could justify one of these :)
szark
Sep 15, 06:33 PM
What is NIH syndrome?
NIH = not invented here. apple was notorious for this behavior in the 80s and 90s, much to their detriment, and success.
Just to further clarify -- NIH syndrome is when a company chooses not to use technologies invented by other companies in its own products. They prefer to design and build the entire package themselves, in-house.
I'm not that interested in an iPhone. Apple would need to add some very unique features for me to consider buying one.
NIH = not invented here. apple was notorious for this behavior in the 80s and 90s, much to their detriment, and success.
Just to further clarify -- NIH syndrome is when a company chooses not to use technologies invented by other companies in its own products. They prefer to design and build the entire package themselves, in-house.
I'm not that interested in an iPhone. Apple would need to add some very unique features for me to consider buying one.
starflyer
Apr 4, 12:10 PM
REAL police are hesitant to fire upon a fleeing suspect, why the **** is a mall cop shooting people in the head who are running away without any stolen property?
Yes, they were running away and unarmed. Read the article before making such an idiotic post.
Yes, they were running away and unarmed. Read the article before making such an idiotic post.
IJ Reilly
Aug 24, 05:04 PM
This might be a valid point, except that the $100 million payout isn't being charged against profits. Instead, it is being recorded as an asset and ammortized over many years, meaning it will have very minimal impact to the bottom line.
This is really little more than a bookkeeping trick. The books will now report that Apple bought something for $100 million, something they thought they already owned. It's still the same dollar figure, no matter where the accountants put it in the books. The way I understand it, in theory at least, Apple could generate some revenue from this "asset" if Creative obtains more licenses. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm betting we never do see it.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
This is really little more than a bookkeeping trick. The books will now report that Apple bought something for $100 million, something they thought they already owned. It's still the same dollar figure, no matter where the accountants put it in the books. The way I understand it, in theory at least, Apple could generate some revenue from this "asset" if Creative obtains more licenses. I'll believe it when I see it. I'm betting we never do see it.
The Microsoft Zune possibilities are interesting. We haven't seen the Zune interface yet, but you can be sure Creative is going to be taking a good, hard look at the device when it finally surfaces (sometime during this decade, almost without a doubt). We'll just have to wait and see. We'll also have to wait and see if Creative dumps their DMP business. If any of these events occur, I'm prepared to change my opinion about this settlement.
thworple
Oct 27, 10:25 AM
I'm sorry, what part of 'private property' don't you people understand?
They weren't trespassing or anything like that!!! Its not like they wandered onto someone's back yard and started selling lemonade from a small stand without permission.
They had purchased a small stall there and went about their business handing out leaflets highlighting their concerns at Apple's environmental policy, as well as giving people some tasty Organic Apples (which many, myself included, lapped up ;) ).
Sure, they wandered away from their stall to the entrance to hand out leaflets, but so did half or dozen or so other stallholders. The fact remains that I haven't heard of anyone else being ejected because of this. And it makes you concerned that they were singled out because of the message they were trying to convey.
I was personally more bothered by the people trying to sell you something you didn't want as soon as you entered the Expo (that and the fact that every time I went to the Google stand they'd run out of sweets! :rolleyes: )
They weren't trespassing or anything like that!!! Its not like they wandered onto someone's back yard and started selling lemonade from a small stand without permission.
They had purchased a small stall there and went about their business handing out leaflets highlighting their concerns at Apple's environmental policy, as well as giving people some tasty Organic Apples (which many, myself included, lapped up ;) ).
Sure, they wandered away from their stall to the entrance to hand out leaflets, but so did half or dozen or so other stallholders. The fact remains that I haven't heard of anyone else being ejected because of this. And it makes you concerned that they were singled out because of the message they were trying to convey.
I was personally more bothered by the people trying to sell you something you didn't want as soon as you entered the Expo (that and the fact that every time I went to the Google stand they'd run out of sweets! :rolleyes: )
MrWinters
Apr 28, 03:46 PM
Microsoft is DEAD. And so is Google.
GO APPLE!
Microsoft just posted a record quarter.
"Microsoft reported strong third-quarter sales and earnings, as the software giant weathered slowing PC sales with strong performances from its Office and Xbox businesses.
Net income in the company's fiscal third quarter climbed 31 percent to $5.23 billion on sales of $16.43 billion, a 13 percent gain.
"We delivered strong financial results despite a mixed PC environment, which demonstrates the strength and breadth of our businesses," Microsoft's chief financial officer, Peter Klein, said in a statement. "Consumers are purchasing Office Xbox, and Kinect at tremendous rates, and businesses of all sizes are purchasing Microsoft platforms and applications."
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20058406-75.html#ixzz1Kqvp0N71"
Just because Apple's profit was higher doesn't dispel the end for Microsoft or Google. Every company in American except one made less profit that Apple, and trust me, they aren't all "doomed or Dead"....
Grow up Mr. Lawyer!
GO APPLE!
Microsoft just posted a record quarter.
"Microsoft reported strong third-quarter sales and earnings, as the software giant weathered slowing PC sales with strong performances from its Office and Xbox businesses.
Net income in the company's fiscal third quarter climbed 31 percent to $5.23 billion on sales of $16.43 billion, a 13 percent gain.
"We delivered strong financial results despite a mixed PC environment, which demonstrates the strength and breadth of our businesses," Microsoft's chief financial officer, Peter Klein, said in a statement. "Consumers are purchasing Office Xbox, and Kinect at tremendous rates, and businesses of all sizes are purchasing Microsoft platforms and applications."
Read more: http://news.cnet.com/8301-10805_3-20058406-75.html#ixzz1Kqvp0N71"
Just because Apple's profit was higher doesn't dispel the end for Microsoft or Google. Every company in American except one made less profit that Apple, and trust me, they aren't all "doomed or Dead"....
Grow up Mr. Lawyer!
fetchmebeers
Sep 12, 03:12 PM
Can sombody explain the following:
"old" 5G 30 GB: music playback 14 h, video playback 2 h.
"new" 5G 30 GB: music playback STILL 14 h, video playback ALMOST DOUBLED at 3.5 h.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
why are you confused??? video play got extended, what do you expect more than that??
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
"old" 5G 30 GB: music playback 14 h, video playback 2 h.
"new" 5G 30 GB: music playback STILL 14 h, video playback ALMOST DOUBLED at 3.5 h.
:confused: :confused: :confused:
why are you confused??? video play got extended, what do you expect more than that??
i'm just glad that my 5gen didn't get outdated so fast
No comments:
Post a Comment