JAT
Mar 30, 10:05 AM
Aiden,
In America, we've got "Freedom of Speech." And, we also have "Freedom of Religion". (We've also got "Separation of Church and State", but as far as I can tell, the respondant represents neither government, nor is he trying to use government to promote his views.) So, it seems to me the respondant is merely exercising his two aforementioned "Freedoms" simultaneously.
Additionally, you conflate "asking" people to do something with "pushing". Sorry, but I get "asked" to do things all day, in normal communication, via advertising, in speeches and presentations, etc. I don't see any problem with this as long as coercion is not involved. I am free to play or not, as I choose. Human interaction just plain involves a lot of this "asking" stuff.
BTW, I'm a complete atheist. I think "asking to pray" is totally cornball. But I don't see a problem with it-- whatever gets you through the day is fine by me.
The most dogmatic persons I have ever conversed with are evolutionists and atheists. Their decrying of religion is hilarious in view of the beliefs they present themselves. Faith. Credulity. Different words, often confused, often misapplied.
In America, we've got "Freedom of Speech." And, we also have "Freedom of Religion". (We've also got "Separation of Church and State", but as far as I can tell, the respondant represents neither government, nor is he trying to use government to promote his views.) So, it seems to me the respondant is merely exercising his two aforementioned "Freedoms" simultaneously.
Additionally, you conflate "asking" people to do something with "pushing". Sorry, but I get "asked" to do things all day, in normal communication, via advertising, in speeches and presentations, etc. I don't see any problem with this as long as coercion is not involved. I am free to play or not, as I choose. Human interaction just plain involves a lot of this "asking" stuff.
BTW, I'm a complete atheist. I think "asking to pray" is totally cornball. But I don't see a problem with it-- whatever gets you through the day is fine by me.
The most dogmatic persons I have ever conversed with are evolutionists and atheists. Their decrying of religion is hilarious in view of the beliefs they present themselves. Faith. Credulity. Different words, often confused, often misapplied.
Wolfpup
Jan 5, 11:27 AM
I used to think you didn't REALLY need it if you didn't do anything stupid, but then I had it catch something in a banner ad a couple of times, so...now I think it's just better to be safe than sorry.
I think those two attacks are the only times I've been attacked, although I've heard of more recent things like that too.
I think those two attacks are the only times I've been attacked, although I've heard of more recent things like that too.
robvas
Apr 21, 02:57 PM
Making the width & height those dimensions, might make the length a lot longer. I could see space requirement problems & how would placement be effected without it being rack mounted?
You mean depth. 1U's are DEEP.
http://i.imgur.com/sM1sK.jpg
You mean depth. 1U's are DEEP.
http://i.imgur.com/sM1sK.jpg
Moyank24
May 5, 01:57 PM
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
Oy vey. Me thinks I'm going ta be ill.
Oy vey. Me thinks I'm going ta be ill.
Al Coholic
Apr 23, 05:31 PM
That volcano pic is very telling... considering all the heat issues with the new MBP's.
Coincidence? I think not! :eek:
Coincidence? I think not! :eek:
Velmonk
Sep 16, 04:26 PM
2.16 and 2.33 Merom options
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
IMO, these are the least that Apple can do to keep up with other high performance notebooks in the market. I think new MBP's will arrive one the same day as Photokina although they may not be highlighted at the event.
the keyboard is the main reason i didn't buy a macbook
Magnetic latch
MacBook style keyboard
New video card (Nvidia?)
160GB hard drive option
IMO, these are the least that Apple can do to keep up with other high performance notebooks in the market. I think new MBP's will arrive one the same day as Photokina although they may not be highlighted at the event.
the keyboard is the main reason i didn't buy a macbook
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
Don't panic
May 3, 01:16 PM
still more questions:
is it possible for a fight to end with both monsters and heroes in the room? (this will depend on how you organize the HP/AP)
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
is it possible for a fight to end with both monsters and heroes in the room? (this will depend on how you organize the HP/AP)
what happens next? another battle the next turn/round? can the heroes run? can the monster be re-located by the villain?
can the healing treasure bring HP to be higher than the level (e.g, if i am level 3, with 1HP left, I am alone and I find the healing treasure, do i go to 3HP, to 6HP or is it like a flask that i can use in part and in part save/share later)?
can the villain put traps in already explored rooms?
would 'explore' also find secret doors if any?
zimtheinvader
Sep 15, 10:01 PM
I think no new enclosure, they would have done that when they went Intel! I also second the antiMB keyboard sentiment. The powerbook keyboard is nearly perfect, & one of the the major selling points for MBP over MB for journalists, scientists, intensive-keyboardists, ect, only minor improvements could me made unless there is some new technology integrated...
AppleAmerican
Mar 29, 04:49 PM
The cost for final assembly is minor.
For example, the cost to make an iPhone may be 200 dollars. It probably costs $1 for the final assembly (or by your calculation, $7 if the assembly is done in US). However, if you manufacture all the parts in US, it will cost $1400.
A major portion of these components were American made. In 2000, American EXPORTED more high tech components than it imported. Here is the .gov source (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0007.html#2000). How did you come up with $1400, my figures are fact based. Assembly is certainly more than $1 per unit. Typically assembly is a large portion of manufacturing costs. We competed and still can today.
For example, the cost to make an iPhone may be 200 dollars. It probably costs $1 for the final assembly (or by your calculation, $7 if the assembly is done in US). However, if you manufacture all the parts in US, it will cost $1400.
A major portion of these components were American made. In 2000, American EXPORTED more high tech components than it imported. Here is the .gov source (http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c0007.html#2000). How did you come up with $1400, my figures are fact based. Assembly is certainly more than $1 per unit. Typically assembly is a large portion of manufacturing costs. We competed and still can today.
ucfgrad93
May 5, 11:31 AM
BTW, searching a room disarms traps, so we should get to a point where our last move is search instead of move, if I understand the rules.
Agreed.
Agreed.
toddybody
Apr 24, 09:10 AM
Ps: Happy Easter everyone:)
Fuchal
Apr 25, 08:51 AM
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
No, he's saying Apple does not track your location. There has been no evidence that any of the location information leaves your phone/computer. Whether that file should exist or not is another debate.
No, he's saying Apple does not track your location. There has been no evidence that any of the location information leaves your phone/computer. Whether that file should exist or not is another debate.
TequilaBoobs
Nov 22, 08:18 PM
apple knows hot to create sexy products and market a gotta-have-it item, and with the cell phone market fickle yet fervent, a brand name like apple with premium brand badging and daring design could make big waves and have their loyal fanbase purchase yet another apple product in a different arena... i think its a good risk on apples part and will probably make me shares go up.
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:09 PM
It'll take me over 4 days.
But due to the International Date Line, isn't really only 2 days?
But due to the International Date Line, isn't really only 2 days?
B.winkle
Apr 10, 10:53 AM
Answer is 2. I'm right and you're wrong. So there! ;.) I sleep with a math teacher!!!
Auax
Apr 21, 09:22 PM
i prefer a smaller one..
LegendKillerUK
Apr 20, 07:44 AM
I'm still on a 3G so I'll be loving whatever they do for the 5. I personally don't want them to touch the externals, it's my favourite looking device.
yellowballoon
Mar 29, 12:29 PM
Windows Live Skydrive is 25 GB for free.
Right and Window's Phone automatic uploads to Sky Drive, free of charge. What does iOS have?
Right and Window's Phone automatic uploads to Sky Drive, free of charge. What does iOS have?
Whozown
Apr 5, 04:55 PM
2010 - Apple Loses #1 Mobile OS spot to Android OS
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
2011 - Apple pisses off their JB customers and loses 10% more
2012 - Apple loses #2 and #3 spot to Windows Mobile & HP OS
Within 12 months Apple will own the same market share as their computers, 9% ... and it'll have been the same story: rose to glory, abuse the customer and business partners, people get sick of the rulebook and leave for more open pastures.
This is all deja vu from the 80s repeating itself, wow.
I dumped iPhone at xmas, now I'll likely dump iPad 2 if this trend continues. If they really push the washington involvement to stop jailbreaking, I'll get rid of my 3 iMac\MB Air\MB Pro... I don't support companies who attack me. They're here because of me, not the opposite. If they don't get that, adios.
HAHAHAH! Please, be my quest. There aren't enough people with similar thinking to even register on Apple's "oh no" list. They'll continue to grow and put out product after product that will dominate the market. The difference between the 80's and now is the "cool" appeal. People HAVE to have that new Apple product.
Piggie
Apr 23, 06:25 PM
Because those screens WILL look better to those normal customers. Text and graphics will look sharper, and clearer.
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
The iPhone screen, before the retina screen, had a higher resolution than macs. People could not see individual pixels. Despite that, ask any Tom Dick or Harry on the street, and they will be unequivocal that the Retina screen is far better looking than the 3GS screens.
The iPhone, before the current model had a screen res of 320 x 480
The first iMac, made 13 years ago in 1998 (the G3) had a screen res of 1024x768 the same as an iPad2 they are making today.
The first Apple Mac in 1984, 27 years ago had a screen res of 512�342 on a black and white screen.
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
islanders
Sep 15, 09:04 PM
BT
Estimated Ship Date
Sep 26, 2006 (wow that date looks familiar?!?!)
Arrival Date
Oct 3, 2006
A full week delivery time seems like a bit of long wait for someone who is ordering a MBP.
Why can�t they send it second day for an extra two bucks?
Although I agree that Photakinda seems like the logical date for an update, I�m confused who would order a MBP snail mail?
Could you bump that up if you called back and did the overnight gig?
Just curious.
Estimated Ship Date
Sep 26, 2006 (wow that date looks familiar?!?!)
Arrival Date
Oct 3, 2006
A full week delivery time seems like a bit of long wait for someone who is ordering a MBP.
Why can�t they send it second day for an extra two bucks?
Although I agree that Photakinda seems like the logical date for an update, I�m confused who would order a MBP snail mail?
Could you bump that up if you called back and did the overnight gig?
Just curious.
ineedamac
Mar 26, 10:53 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Maybe I'm missing something. I don't get all of the comments that iOS 4.3 is so outdated and in need of a major overhaul. I like 4.3. It works for me.
I like the notification system. An applet pops up when I have a notification and I can choose to ignore it or go into the app for more information. What is wrong with that? I'm all for doing things better and maybe someone can show me a better way.
Maybe I'm missing something. I don't get all of the comments that iOS 4.3 is so outdated and in need of a major overhaul. I like 4.3. It works for me.
I like the notification system. An applet pops up when I have a notification and I can choose to ignore it or go into the app for more information. What is wrong with that? I'm all for doing things better and maybe someone can show me a better way.
spazzcat
Mar 29, 09:15 AM
Yes there are, android are the market leaders(by volume) ~33%, Apple are third after Nokia with ~16% market share.