darh
Aug 15, 01:11 PM
Video cards won't make a difference in FCP as of now if that's what you are asking performance wise. If you are using Motion/Games, anything that really feeds off the video card, then I'd go for the higher end video card.
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
Couldn't it be the harddrive that is the limiting factor in this bnechmark?
Otherwise I'd go for the 2.6 ghz.
Couldn't it be the harddrive that is the limiting factor in this bnechmark?
Soba
Jul 28, 01:02 PM
you can't make a statement like that. that's like saying "i hate general electric air conditioners." what the heck? all CPU's (and air conditioners) do the same thing.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
I'm not sure if this was intended as some kind of throwaway comment or not, but this is not even remotely true.
The original poster said he hated the P4, and honestly, the P4 was a lousy chip design from day 1. The original Pentium 4 chips released about 5 1/2 years ago were outperformed in some instances by an original Pentium chip running at 166MHz. The Pentium 4 was an awful architecture in many respects that simply could not be cleaned up enough to be viable; that would be why Intel abandoned it and based its current designs on the Pentium Pro's core (which was really a very decent server chip in the nineties).
When Apple announced last year they were going with Intel, a lot of people agreed it was a good choice based on the current state of the PowerPC architecture and based on Intel's planned chip designs. Personally, I was a bit unsure at the time, but was optimistic about the switch and figured we could scarcely do much worse than sticking with the G5, which was languishing. Turning back the clock a bit, if instead of releasing the G5, Apple had announced a switch to Intel in I would have thought they were crazy. Intel's chips were awful at that time and there wasn't much of a light at the end of the tunnel, either.
CPUs can be very, very different even if the overall system architecture is similar. And I side with the original poster. The P4 was a dog, and thankfully it is about to be buried forever.
RebootD
Mar 31, 05:24 PM
What?
Just speaking to your 'year of the linux' quote that's all.
Just speaking to your 'year of the linux' quote that's all.
IceMacMac
Apr 10, 08:47 PM
The pro of today is no longer the pro of the past decade. Pro is a far broader term in 2011. Nearly anyone could be a 'pro' with a little interest, work, and dedication.
To me the term denotes a person who is gaining a sizeable portion of their income from video production...and whom is talented enough to woo paying clients.
So in my opinion the meaning for "Pro" has changed little.
To me the term denotes a person who is gaining a sizeable portion of their income from video production...and whom is talented enough to woo paying clients.
So in my opinion the meaning for "Pro" has changed little.
matticus008
Nov 29, 08:32 AM
I question any law/contract of this type on several grounds:
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
It depends on the system in place. In Canada, I believe the proceeds are turned over to the CRIA which is then responsible for distribution to its members through a process of their own selection (and not legally specified).
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
Again, it's up to the labels to decide. Once they get their cut from the CRIA, the label controls distribution within its internal channels. More popular artists on that label probably get a bigger cut than niche artists, but more importantly, individual artists likely never see much in the way of proceeds from this.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
No. Most importantly, the royalty does not create a stipulation, or even a fiduciary relationship between you, the customer, and the CRIA. The exchange is between the company (Apple, RCA, Samsung, Microsoft, etc.) and the industry consortium.
Even setting that aside, you have no record of a transaction taking place at all. You can't claim to have paid royalties and have received nothing in return granting you any rights (one way to fight this is to demand that a given label supply you with a written document). Absent consideration, all you've essentially done is paid money for nothing--you didn't send the label a contract with your dollar (and you can't, since you're not paying them the dollar anyway, you'd be paying Apple). Your contribution isn't so much because you're pirating music, but because you could be. It's like putting down a deposit, having to pay insurance, or having a membership in a book club. You pay money, but that's not the end of the transaction. The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
1 - How are the eligable rightsholders identified/compensated?
It depends on the system in place. In Canada, I believe the proceeds are turned over to the CRIA which is then responsible for distribution to its members through a process of their own selection (and not legally specified).
2 - How are they compensated equitably? Do you compensate Jay-Z and a classical artist the same? Which ever you prefer, Jay-Z sells more.
Again, it's up to the labels to decide. Once they get their cut from the CRIA, the label controls distribution within its internal channels. More popular artists on that label probably get a bigger cut than niche artists, but more importantly, individual artists likely never see much in the way of proceeds from this.
3 - If I've paid the royalty, don't I own rights to the music? Sure, I may need to find a copy of it, but I'm told that they're all over a thing called the "internet".
No. Most importantly, the royalty does not create a stipulation, or even a fiduciary relationship between you, the customer, and the CRIA. The exchange is between the company (Apple, RCA, Samsung, Microsoft, etc.) and the industry consortium.
Even setting that aside, you have no record of a transaction taking place at all. You can't claim to have paid royalties and have received nothing in return granting you any rights (one way to fight this is to demand that a given label supply you with a written document). Absent consideration, all you've essentially done is paid money for nothing--you didn't send the label a contract with your dollar (and you can't, since you're not paying them the dollar anyway, you'd be paying Apple). Your contribution isn't so much because you're pirating music, but because you could be. It's like putting down a deposit, having to pay insurance, or having a membership in a book club. You pay money, but that's not the end of the transaction. The only thing this royalty grants you is a tacit guarantee that Universal will continue to provide digital content.
thatisme
Apr 27, 09:21 AM
Sleep walking a lot lately?
Nope. However, here are just a few threads detailing the behavior. I have to believe that this location issue is part of this problem... I guess we'll see when the "fix" is in....
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=989469&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=926618&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1064116&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1050560&highlight=att+data+usage
Nope. However, here are just a few threads detailing the behavior. I have to believe that this location issue is part of this problem... I guess we'll see when the "fix" is in....
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=989469&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=926618&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1064116&highlight=att+data+usage
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1050560&highlight=att+data+usage
nagromme
Jul 14, 03:07 PM
Leave the Xeons for the PowerMacs, but introduce some mini-tower machines with Conroe chips - they would fit nicely between the iMac and PowerMac.
Yes--whatever the name, whatever the case size, a low-to-midrange tower is needed to fill a gap in the lineup.
It could even just be a lower-spec'd Mac Pro than the ones posted in this article. Just something that allows a choice of display--and GPU--for non high-end buyers.
I think it's only a matter of time before this gap (and the "small MacBook Pro" gap) are filled. After all, Apple did fill the bottom-end headless gap (Mac Mini) which once seemed impossible!
Yes--whatever the name, whatever the case size, a low-to-midrange tower is needed to fill a gap in the lineup.
It could even just be a lower-spec'd Mac Pro than the ones posted in this article. Just something that allows a choice of display--and GPU--for non high-end buyers.
I think it's only a matter of time before this gap (and the "small MacBook Pro" gap) are filled. After all, Apple did fill the bottom-end headless gap (Mac Mini) which once seemed impossible!
nagromme
Aug 25, 05:02 PM
I have always wondered if Apple's past industry record on support was really accurate. I think that Apple had such a loyal following of users that they tended to give Apple rosey marks for what most would classify as just average support.
A very logical theory--and sometimes true, no doubt--but three possible points to counter that:
* There is NOT a pattern of Mac users tending to hide their dissatisfaction--not even with even the smallest thing Apple does wrong. At least, not on these forums :D
* Consumer Reports (and PC Magazine too to some extent) break down the numbers in quantifiable ways: like whether Apple support solved the problem or not, and how long you had to wait on hold. It's not just "subjective impressions" being gathered. These are professional surveys after all.
* People aren't just loyal out of the blue, they're loyal because Apple HAS done well by them. People being happy on Mac is a FAIR factor, I think, not an unfair one. (The fact that Mac users like Apple/Macs so much is sometimes used as a REASON to claim that Apple/Macs don't deserve it. That's a little backwards at best.)
Nonetheless, I think you have a point about Switchers being an increasing group. I'm not sure exactly HOW that affects the outcome, but I think that it must, and that it's something Apple must adapt to.
As for this past month--I don't see any unusual pattern of complaints, personally. Things like that always fluctuate, and if there IS an increase in the last few weeks, I bet it's not the first such, nor the last.
For the record, my own experience: I have had Apple bend over backwards for me and offer better service (even free not-warranty repair for wear-and-tear) than they were bound to do. I have also had some frustration with getting canned responses from the first-level techs (at other companies too)--but I politely but firmly move up the ladder!
A very logical theory--and sometimes true, no doubt--but three possible points to counter that:
* There is NOT a pattern of Mac users tending to hide their dissatisfaction--not even with even the smallest thing Apple does wrong. At least, not on these forums :D
* Consumer Reports (and PC Magazine too to some extent) break down the numbers in quantifiable ways: like whether Apple support solved the problem or not, and how long you had to wait on hold. It's not just "subjective impressions" being gathered. These are professional surveys after all.
* People aren't just loyal out of the blue, they're loyal because Apple HAS done well by them. People being happy on Mac is a FAIR factor, I think, not an unfair one. (The fact that Mac users like Apple/Macs so much is sometimes used as a REASON to claim that Apple/Macs don't deserve it. That's a little backwards at best.)
Nonetheless, I think you have a point about Switchers being an increasing group. I'm not sure exactly HOW that affects the outcome, but I think that it must, and that it's something Apple must adapt to.
As for this past month--I don't see any unusual pattern of complaints, personally. Things like that always fluctuate, and if there IS an increase in the last few weeks, I bet it's not the first such, nor the last.
For the record, my own experience: I have had Apple bend over backwards for me and offer better service (even free not-warranty repair for wear-and-tear) than they were bound to do. I have also had some frustration with getting canned responses from the first-level techs (at other companies too)--but I politely but firmly move up the ladder!
gerrycurl
Jul 14, 05:59 PM
the question still remains--will the powermacs be able to use standard, off the shelf, pc video cards?
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
i know that you couldn't do so in the power architecture due to the bios irregularities. now that they're using efi, does this still mean we have to buy mac based cards? because that's really the question nobody seems to ask and nobody seems to have an answer for.
what this new mac workstation will mean is the chance to upgrade your macs based on commodity parts. no more mac tax for hardware. i remember when the radeon 9700 was king, the price was around $299 for pc version and $399 for mac version.
think about this, the ability to upgrade processor, video card, and sound card without having to pay the apple tax.
that's what it really comes down to. the speculative "good" version of the mac pro has a so-so video card, but it's not really worth the $600 more just to get a 1800, i'd rather just get the 1600 and upgrade on my own.
bdkennedy1
Mar 26, 01:09 PM
I find this extremely hard to believe considering how unfinished the beta was 2 months ago.
gorgeousninja
Apr 19, 04:36 PM
How can this be that 'Apple have a pretty strong case' when so many posters have said that whatever Apple does is generic, and that they have never designed or innovated anything?...
Oh! Ding!!
Must be cos they are all talking cr*p....
Oh! Ding!!
Must be cos they are all talking cr*p....
brianus
Sep 14, 01:10 PM
This is NEW because it is on a 3 hour weekday morning telecast. That makes it NEW and NEWS. Nothing about content. I NEVER watch American Idol. You are judgemental.
Well he did kind of have a point there at the end. You could stand to tone down your use of enormous, colored type if you don't want your posts "judged" as having an emotional content beyond their actual words.
Well he did kind of have a point there at the end. You could stand to tone down your use of enormous, colored type if you don't want your posts "judged" as having an emotional content beyond their actual words.
rawdigits
Sep 13, 08:57 AM
I guess I'll wait until Tigerton. I want to buy a merom MBP when it comes out.
The architecture of Tigerton is without the Frontside Bus. More in direction of AMD. Much more efficiency than put just 8 Cores to the 1.3 FSB. Clovertown alos has slower RAM.
:rolleyes:
The architecture of Tigerton is without the Frontside Bus. More in direction of AMD. Much more efficiency than put just 8 Cores to the 1.3 FSB. Clovertown alos has slower RAM.
:rolleyes:
Vegasman
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
Apple's solution is fine by me. They wouldn't have done anything if there wasn't so much press about it, but I guess that's a good reason (one of the only ones) for the press to exist.
Interestingly, this behavior of waiting for things to blow up in the press before they are addressed will only lead to MORE things getting blown up in the press. Maybe Apple likes that? I dunno.
Interestingly, this behavior of waiting for things to blow up in the press before they are addressed will only lead to MORE things getting blown up in the press. Maybe Apple likes that? I dunno.
Porchland
Aug 7, 04:18 PM
I'm real excited for the new iChat and Spaces, along with these new "top secret features..." They better be good!
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
My bets are on some kind of Boot Camp-ish feature that will allow for native installation of Windows applications -- without Windows -- right into OS X. It would obliterate the need for applications to be written for both Windows and Mac.
<ducks and waits for flamers to whine about how impossible this is>
The finder is definately my bet for something to be revamped, along with probably iLife which will be revamped for leopard.
Edit : Also something more with virtualization (boot camp area) as they did not touch that really.
My bets are on some kind of Boot Camp-ish feature that will allow for native installation of Windows applications -- without Windows -- right into OS X. It would obliterate the need for applications to be written for both Windows and Mac.
<ducks and waits for flamers to whine about how impossible this is>
heisetax
Jul 14, 04:05 PM
A new case would be "fun" but what I care about is what it delivers, not how it looks when I crawl under my desk :)
For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)
Two optical slots would be nice, allowing me to "wait and see" about next-gen optical formats.
My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac :)
From a purely math point of view the Mac will always loose out when compared to a like Windows unit. This will be easier yet to see with both machines using the same processors. A Mac User will add in the Mac experience, ease of use, better looking case, options that just work, Plug 'n Play compared to Plug 'n Pray & other items like total cost of ownership or need we say less headachs.
Bill the TaxMan
For the low-end (single chip) towers, dual core Conroe makes more sense to me than Xeon, simply for cost reasons. (Though I'm eyeing the new Xeons for my first ever top-end Mac... with dual-duals!)
Two optical slots would be nice, allowing me to "wait and see" about next-gen optical formats.
My intention: to wait for 3Ghz+ Xeon, which sounds like it should only be a few months later. That's also time for a few little tweaks to be made if necessary, giving me something between a version A and version B machine.
Without a doubt. And in keeping with long tradition, the "less expensive" name-brand PC will mysteriously come with less (ports, software, even speed if Netburst lingers) than the Mac :)
From a purely math point of view the Mac will always loose out when compared to a like Windows unit. This will be easier yet to see with both machines using the same processors. A Mac User will add in the Mac experience, ease of use, better looking case, options that just work, Plug 'n Play compared to Plug 'n Pray & other items like total cost of ownership or need we say less headachs.
Bill the TaxMan
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 02:21 PM
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I wouldn't call over 50% of the N American market a small, local network. Time will tell whether GSM or CDMA will win out. I agree in the long run WCDMA has more upside, but who knows what'll come out in the next few years.
VZW doesn't bill me. I hate VZW for crippling phones and expensive service. I have good service from Sprint, similar capabilities, and the plans are very reasonable... and they are CDMA.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
I wouldn't call over 50% of the N American market a small, local network. Time will tell whether GSM or CDMA will win out. I agree in the long run WCDMA has more upside, but who knows what'll come out in the next few years.
VZW doesn't bill me. I hate VZW for crippling phones and expensive service. I have good service from Sprint, similar capabilities, and the plans are very reasonable... and they are CDMA.
takao
Dec 7, 06:18 PM
I love my TVR and my B-Spec driver actually knows how to handle it, so i've been using it as often as appropriate.
I try not to sell any cars unless they are junk (like a 97 Civic or whatever it is. Worst beginner's prize car ever) or if i have two of the same kind.
haha you should see some of the cornering my bspec driver does in my camaro .. hilarious
regarding two of the same kind: i just won my _third_ VW Lupo as a reward... good grief what a waste
some tipps: if you buy a Lambo for the lambo only race: buy a Gallardo, since there is Gallardo only race in the next set of races
also for some of the early races the ferrari 512bb is really worth it especially some of the oldtimer races early on and with tuning even fast enough for the ferrari only race
I try not to sell any cars unless they are junk (like a 97 Civic or whatever it is. Worst beginner's prize car ever) or if i have two of the same kind.
haha you should see some of the cornering my bspec driver does in my camaro .. hilarious
regarding two of the same kind: i just won my _third_ VW Lupo as a reward... good grief what a waste
some tipps: if you buy a Lambo for the lambo only race: buy a Gallardo, since there is Gallardo only race in the next set of races
also for some of the early races the ferrari 512bb is really worth it especially some of the oldtimer races early on and with tuning even fast enough for the ferrari only race
layte
Mar 31, 03:58 PM
First, I have a Dell Streak. Wanted to see what the fuss was about. Took a year for the official Froyo release to appear. Yeah, fragmentation exists.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
(I appreciate Android on the Streak, but GOOD GOD does it feel like a laggy piece of software compared to my iPhone and iPad. It has widgets and tons of convenient apps for pirating software or games (no... I own ALL those ROMS)... but I digress.)
So, Android unifies. Google forces handset/tablet manufacturers to adopt a stock OS interface. How will they differentiate themselves? What incentive, beyond a free OS, will there be to creating "phone B" that looks just like "phone A". This is where Google will shoot itself in the foot. The less the carriers and handset manufacturers can customize, the less incentive they have to launch on Android. Heck, just emulate Android if you want the apps, right RIM?
Weren't there waves a few weeks about about Motorola wanting its own OS? I'd want to control my own destiny. This is creating a "walled garden" (Andy as caretaker) for the device manufacturers/carriers, and they're the ones that Google needs to be pushing the platform.
The thing is, if handset manufacturers want to crap up a handset with their own gunk they are free to do so still. They will have to wait longer than has been the case (is there an echo in here?) but it is still possible. This isn't Google completely shutting off access, just them making things a bit harder (some will think this is a good thing, some wont).
Perhaps they can differentiate with hardware, or custom applications (just not anything that messes with the base OS by the looks of things). Horrible skins need to die a death, even hardcore fandroids would agree with that.
Michael383
Apr 8, 05:34 AM
Why anyone would ever choose to buy an Apple product at Best Buy over the Apple Store is beyond me. :confused:
Because the price points at the Apple store and the Best Buy where I bought my MBP were the same.
Because the price points at the Apple store and the Best Buy where I bought my MBP were the same.
Dan==
Jul 27, 05:02 PM
Another way Apple could do it is just to elongate the Mini's case to make it just as svelte vertically, only slightly wider. Could you take a run at that one Dan==? ;)
I could take a stab to make a Mini double-wide :-). (Perhaps not til the weekend tho to make it pretty.)
It would work well in home entertainment setups, but not so much on the desktop, I think. I'd expect a deeper, rather than wider, chassis would be preferred.
I could take a stab to make a Mini double-wide :-). (Perhaps not til the weekend tho to make it pretty.)
It would work well in home entertainment setups, but not so much on the desktop, I think. I'd expect a deeper, rather than wider, chassis would be preferred.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 20, 12:57 PM
These ipad clone tablets made by samsung are not worth the price.
mr.steevo
Apr 28, 04:51 PM
This thread is Still rattling on about this?
The Titanic is still sinking...
The Titanic is still sinking...
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:38 PM
I own both the iPad and the Xoom - both do some things very well, and both do some things horribly.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.
I am starting to wean myself off of iOS, though. The iPad served me well as a "starter" tablet, but I constantly find myself wanting it to do more or different things, which is something Android (not the Xoom specifically, but Android as a whole) does offer.
To each his own, you know?
This is an excellent point. I still recommend the iPad to my parents, family and friends who are new to the tablet market. For those of my friends who are techy and into computers/technology, the XOOM is much more enjoyable.
This is why having competition is good. If Jobs had his way we'd all be stuck with iPads whether we wanted them or not.