�algiris
May 6, 02:10 AM
This story reeks. I would sooner expect Apple to acquire AMD than I would for them to make yet another architecture switch.
Assuming this rumor is true who said that this would be instead of Intel on laptops? Maybe it's in addition to Intel?
Assuming this rumor is true who said that this would be instead of Intel on laptops? Maybe it's in addition to Intel?
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:48 PM
At least on iPhone you can apply the updates on the day they come out (well, JB versions have to wait a couple of days) ... compare this to Android and WinMobile7 where you are at the mercy of the carrier to 'enrich' the update with their 'features' which might take many weeks or month - if it ever comes.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
syc23
Apr 26, 03:53 PM
Fiat owns 85% of Ferrari.
Volkswagen owns 49.9% of Porsche.
Yes I know that they operate under their parent group so what's your point? I salute you for having the ability to google that information.
Volkswagen owns 49.9% of Porsche.
Yes I know that they operate under their parent group so what's your point? I salute you for having the ability to google that information.
Eidorian
Mar 29, 02:38 PM
Why in limbo? The "phone part" of the Iphone is widely acknowledged to be craptastic.True enough, I am still in search of a mobile internet device with a camera. The iPad 3G comes close except in price, size, and the mediocre camera.
I am not willing to frivolously spend money on such an endeavor just to return it to the store. I already feel guilty enough about my many product returns to the point where I believe my card number is just shy of being blacklisted. Thank god for cash.
I have a good inner circle of friends but our jobs and relationships are really killing what free time we have to game. That limits my desire to an Alienware M11x to have something portable for games.
The internet just needs to get to the point where it really is everywhere as a public service before I really buy into it. Sadly we are not there yet.
I am not willing to frivolously spend money on such an endeavor just to return it to the store. I already feel guilty enough about my many product returns to the point where I believe my card number is just shy of being blacklisted. Thank god for cash.
I have a good inner circle of friends but our jobs and relationships are really killing what free time we have to game. That limits my desire to an Alienware M11x to have something portable for games.
The internet just needs to get to the point where it really is everywhere as a public service before I really buy into it. Sadly we are not there yet.
Spoony
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
I remember first seeing the GalaxyS and it's such a blatant rip-off of Apple's design they have every right to sue on this..
But now watch as the Apple haters try to weasel this as a 'generic' design..
Apple brings out the 'App Store'.. everyone copies them....It's generic
Apple brings out the iPhone... everyone copies them.. It's generic
Imitation is a form of flattery.. but when you're business depends on having the best designs, you need to protect your edge.
I agree. I think the people posting on blogs like engadget or maybe even here are too young to appreciate the phones we had to use pre 2006/2007. It's as if their first phone was an iphone/android and oh of course why wouldn't a phone behave like this. It's so obvious.
No it's not. It's not that obvious. Phones sucked so bad before the iphone. Smart phones sucked even worse. Treo's, Q's omg. horrible pieces of equipment.
Apple has every right to sue over this. I'm surprised it took them this long.
But now watch as the Apple haters try to weasel this as a 'generic' design..
Apple brings out the 'App Store'.. everyone copies them....It's generic
Apple brings out the iPhone... everyone copies them.. It's generic
Imitation is a form of flattery.. but when you're business depends on having the best designs, you need to protect your edge.
I agree. I think the people posting on blogs like engadget or maybe even here are too young to appreciate the phones we had to use pre 2006/2007. It's as if their first phone was an iphone/android and oh of course why wouldn't a phone behave like this. It's so obvious.
No it's not. It's not that obvious. Phones sucked so bad before the iphone. Smart phones sucked even worse. Treo's, Q's omg. horrible pieces of equipment.
Apple has every right to sue over this. I'm surprised it took them this long.
mrsir2009
Apr 20, 12:31 AM
I'll be buying that phone as my first iDevice :)
Popeye206
Apr 6, 06:20 PM
It seems to me that things have gone wildly off topic. The story was "Motorola Xoom Tablet Sales: Approximately 100,000 Units So Far?" not "Android vs. Apple: Which One Sucks More?"
We should be discussing the validity of the numbers and why this is the case, and not strictly "mine is longer than yours and here's why." Save those rants for a comparison of the devices story.
LOL! Unfortunately, this seems to go with the territory. Mention Android and it's bound to start a battle. Just like mention AT&T or Verizon and the flames start flying. It's silly, but fun to watch the banter.
100,000 or even 200,000 units is not good news for Moto. If sales don't increase quickly, retailers will loose interest and focus on what sells - the iPad.
We should be discussing the validity of the numbers and why this is the case, and not strictly "mine is longer than yours and here's why." Save those rants for a comparison of the devices story.
LOL! Unfortunately, this seems to go with the territory. Mention Android and it's bound to start a battle. Just like mention AT&T or Verizon and the flames start flying. It's silly, but fun to watch the banter.
100,000 or even 200,000 units is not good news for Moto. If sales don't increase quickly, retailers will loose interest and focus on what sells - the iPad.
MikeTheC
Nov 26, 05:17 PM
NEWS:
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
Well, it's a totally separate subject that's off-topic for this thread, but I would like to quote one single sentence from the related CNN news article.
The new rules will take effect Monday and expire in three years.
So, here's my question: If these rights are so important and have been recognized as being so important, then why would they want to deliberately sunset those same laws? Something here doesn't smell right.
November 23, 2006 CNN
NEW YORK (AP) -- Cell phone owners will be allowed to break software locks on their handsets in order to use them with competing carriers under new copyright rules announced Wednesday.
Given the above news, NO cellphone company may soon be subsidizing ANY phones.
Well, it's a totally separate subject that's off-topic for this thread, but I would like to quote one single sentence from the related CNN news article.
The new rules will take effect Monday and expire in three years.
So, here's my question: If these rights are so important and have been recognized as being so important, then why would they want to deliberately sunset those same laws? Something here doesn't smell right.
toddybody
Apr 25, 09:44 AM
Because "they" didn't slip this trojan into the phones...the government did via the phone companies/FCC.
It is not enough to track every internet/email action of the population, they also want to know where we are at all times and our habits so a "repairman" can enter the house of a "dissident" while they are at work and...
Ties between intelligence agencies and consumer products have to be far more defined than any of us realize.
It is not enough to track every internet/email action of the population, they also want to know where we are at all times and our habits so a "repairman" can enter the house of a "dissident" while they are at work and...
Ties between intelligence agencies and consumer products have to be far more defined than any of us realize.
OllyW
Apr 20, 05:31 AM
I have no desire to have a larger iPhone or any smart phone.
What will you do if Apple do make it bigger?
What will you do if Apple do make it bigger?
dmw007
Nov 26, 11:13 AM
i don't think it would appeal to that many people, to have an apple tablet.
i mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
No, probably not...but maybe with some Apple magic the Tablet PC industry could finally take off. :o :)
i mean, the PC/Win versions aren't great sellers...
No, probably not...but maybe with some Apple magic the Tablet PC industry could finally take off. :o :)
bowens
Sep 11, 01:24 PM
this is probably old news but meh, what the hell:
http://iphone.org
Nobody else seems interested, so they must have already seen it, but I have not. That's pretty interesting.
http://iphone.org
Nobody else seems interested, so they must have already seen it, but I have not. That's pretty interesting.
smoketetsu
May 6, 08:11 AM
Oh this rumor rearing its ugly head again. First of all is intel really stagnating so much that they would want to make this switch?
Also doesn't anyone realize that just because an OS runs on a different architecture that doesn't mean all the apps made for it will suddenly run with 100% compatibility and speed? When I say this I mean that for Windows as well. So Windows 8 is going to have an ARM version. Good luck running Crysis 2 on that (for starters.. just an example).
Also simpler applications may just need a recompile. But there are many others that would need much more than just a simple recompile. There are also many many others that wouldn't get either treatment and simply wont perform well or have good compatibility (or even work at all) for a long long time if ever. I know some developers who probably would laugh at you if you told them it'll just be a simple recompile for them. That kool-aid wasn't true in the transition to x86 either. We still have software that hasn't made the transition that would benefit from it but will simply by orphaned when rosetta is killed off in Lion. I hear people fretting because of that and having to scramble to get x86 versions of that software whether it be through bootcamp or WINE.
Speaking of which; when apple switched to x86 they gained a lot of compatibility benefits that would be dumped if\when they switch to ARM. When going from PPC to x86 I quickly started finding more software becoming available or possible to get going due to the compatibility increase of the new architecture. We would be taking a step or more backwards with ARM. Like for example there was quite a bit of software had intel specific optimizations or functions that became available for use in OS X when updating them to intel or universal binaries... this includes Windows software that ran very well because no actual emulation was involved.
Of course many casual users wouldn't care about any of that.... and there's a lot of front facing iOS software that could be easily ported. Like if an applications's engine is already available for both it's already easy to make a Mac and iOS version of the application. But the whole platform would become a lot less appealing for someone like me. I never used rosetta much as on my Core based Mac it really only worked well for me for the simplest things... like a text application I would use to post to a blog.... some application with 2D graphics.... CPU emulation tends to be dog slow and this is on the currently best performing desktop CPUs.
So you may look forward to this possibly happening but I don't. I guess I could see Apple doing it especially since they seem to be keen on having a post-PC world. But in my opinion they'd more likely dump the Mac altogether and have an iOS dominated future in the cards and if you want a Personal Computer you have to get a non-apple PC.
It's good for a company to keep its options open but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But then again I guess I could see them doing it and waving goodbye to those who don't like it.
Also doesn't anyone realize that just because an OS runs on a different architecture that doesn't mean all the apps made for it will suddenly run with 100% compatibility and speed? When I say this I mean that for Windows as well. So Windows 8 is going to have an ARM version. Good luck running Crysis 2 on that (for starters.. just an example).
Also simpler applications may just need a recompile. But there are many others that would need much more than just a simple recompile. There are also many many others that wouldn't get either treatment and simply wont perform well or have good compatibility (or even work at all) for a long long time if ever. I know some developers who probably would laugh at you if you told them it'll just be a simple recompile for them. That kool-aid wasn't true in the transition to x86 either. We still have software that hasn't made the transition that would benefit from it but will simply by orphaned when rosetta is killed off in Lion. I hear people fretting because of that and having to scramble to get x86 versions of that software whether it be through bootcamp or WINE.
Speaking of which; when apple switched to x86 they gained a lot of compatibility benefits that would be dumped if\when they switch to ARM. When going from PPC to x86 I quickly started finding more software becoming available or possible to get going due to the compatibility increase of the new architecture. We would be taking a step or more backwards with ARM. Like for example there was quite a bit of software had intel specific optimizations or functions that became available for use in OS X when updating them to intel or universal binaries... this includes Windows software that ran very well because no actual emulation was involved.
Of course many casual users wouldn't care about any of that.... and there's a lot of front facing iOS software that could be easily ported. Like if an applications's engine is already available for both it's already easy to make a Mac and iOS version of the application. But the whole platform would become a lot less appealing for someone like me. I never used rosetta much as on my Core based Mac it really only worked well for me for the simplest things... like a text application I would use to post to a blog.... some application with 2D graphics.... CPU emulation tends to be dog slow and this is on the currently best performing desktop CPUs.
So you may look forward to this possibly happening but I don't. I guess I could see Apple doing it especially since they seem to be keen on having a post-PC world. But in my opinion they'd more likely dump the Mac altogether and have an iOS dominated future in the cards and if you want a Personal Computer you have to get a non-apple PC.
It's good for a company to keep its options open but just because you can do something doesn't mean you should. But then again I guess I could see them doing it and waving goodbye to those who don't like it.
commonpeople
Jul 30, 12:21 AM
As a photo geek I would have to disagree with you here. I don't believe myself that the lens quality for something so small would be good enough, and I especially don't believe that the sensors @ 5mp that small would be up to it. You'd have ridiculous amounts of noise in almost any photo, and optical aberrations would be easily picked up. Pixel density would be incredible. They have trouble getting good performance out of 6mp sensors that are several times as large as the one that would be here, and lenses on those same point and shoot digital cameras often will show massive amounts of chromatic aberrations particularly around strong light sources and highlight-shadow transitions even with lenses that are many many times larger.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
Given the quality (sic) of iSight, I'm not sure that Apple is going to make a camera phone that will satisfy you. Come back in 30 years and we'll see.
You would also probably not have a real zoom.
This is all speculation on my part, but based on the price points of the best point and shoots, to get decent performance out of a cell camera that small and with that much resolution, you'd have to pay a huge price tag.
Given the quality (sic) of iSight, I'm not sure that Apple is going to make a camera phone that will satisfy you. Come back in 30 years and we'll see.
petvas
May 4, 03:14 PM
Can you boot off the stuff in the DMG?
I havent tried that but you can create a bootable USB drive: http://www.blogchampion.com/blog/2011/3/12/how-to-create-a-bootable-mac-os-x-lion-usb-installer-from-ap.html
When I am back home I will try to burn the dmg file and see if it boots.
I havent tried that but you can create a bootable USB drive: http://www.blogchampion.com/blog/2011/3/12/how-to-create-a-bootable-mac-os-x-lion-usb-installer-from-ap.html
When I am back home I will try to burn the dmg file and see if it boots.
Tommyg117
Jul 29, 11:45 PM
If this had Verizon support, I'd be really pumped. My plan is up in 2 months!
Stella
Apr 7, 10:16 AM
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point, my point was 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock for a prolonged period of time'. This is very different from Apple being found guilty etc etc.
If Apple was found to be abusing its position... yes. But this is NOT my point, my point was 'countries start to investigate Apple due to a shortage of components due to Apple buying up the available stock for a prolonged period of time'. This is very different from Apple being found guilty etc etc.
GGJstudios
Dec 29, 10:45 AM
For those who insist that Mac OS X needs not AV protection, I politely disagree .... Today we know her as "Typhoid Mary". Approximately 30 people died as a direct result of the Typhus virus she carried, but was apparently immune to.
Poor analogy. Mary was a source of the virus. Macs are not the source of Windows viruses. No Mac can have a file containing a Windows virus, unless it first receives that file from a Windows computer. Windows, not Mac, is the source for Windows viruses.
Yes, Macs may be largely immune in today's threat environment.
Macs are not immune. They are not affected in any way by Windows malware, but they are not immune to threats. The only malware threats in the wild that can affect current Mac OS X are those which can be avoided by prudent action on the part of the user.
But threats change.
Yes, they do change. If the situation changes and a virus is introduced in the wild that affects Mac OS X, it will make news headlines and anyone paying attention will be alerted. Until that time, no AV software can detect a threat that does not yet exist.
But we all communicate with the Windows world.
Not every Mac user shares files with Windows users. You can communicate with Windows users without sharing files that could pose a threat.
Please consider taking one for the team and getting some sort of AV.
Interesting you should choose that phrase:
1. take one for the team
The act of someone willingly making a sacrafice for the benefit of others.
The only ones who would benefit by Mac users making the sacrifice of system performance in running AV software are Windows users who don't run AV software. Even then, it would only protect them from infected files you might send them. It would not protect them from files sent from other computers, websites, emails, IMs, etc., which pose a far greater threat than any Mac.
If Windows users are properly protected, they have no need for Mac users to run AV, since they're protected from threats, no matter where they come from. If you want to do this, that's your choice, but I have no desire to take steps to try to protect any Windows users who don't care enough to protect themselves.
Poor analogy. Mary was a source of the virus. Macs are not the source of Windows viruses. No Mac can have a file containing a Windows virus, unless it first receives that file from a Windows computer. Windows, not Mac, is the source for Windows viruses.
Yes, Macs may be largely immune in today's threat environment.
Macs are not immune. They are not affected in any way by Windows malware, but they are not immune to threats. The only malware threats in the wild that can affect current Mac OS X are those which can be avoided by prudent action on the part of the user.
But threats change.
Yes, they do change. If the situation changes and a virus is introduced in the wild that affects Mac OS X, it will make news headlines and anyone paying attention will be alerted. Until that time, no AV software can detect a threat that does not yet exist.
But we all communicate with the Windows world.
Not every Mac user shares files with Windows users. You can communicate with Windows users without sharing files that could pose a threat.
Please consider taking one for the team and getting some sort of AV.
Interesting you should choose that phrase:
1. take one for the team
The act of someone willingly making a sacrafice for the benefit of others.
The only ones who would benefit by Mac users making the sacrifice of system performance in running AV software are Windows users who don't run AV software. Even then, it would only protect them from infected files you might send them. It would not protect them from files sent from other computers, websites, emails, IMs, etc., which pose a far greater threat than any Mac.
If Windows users are properly protected, they have no need for Mac users to run AV, since they're protected from threats, no matter where they come from. If you want to do this, that's your choice, but I have no desire to take steps to try to protect any Windows users who don't care enough to protect themselves.
wclyffe
Dec 10, 01:34 PM
Just a quick post that I thought was noteworthy! Here is a Youtube video showing a guy putting an iPhone WITH A CASE ON IT into the Tomtom Car Kit, and its fine. Granted, its not a full case, but I heard you could have no case at all, so at least it offers some protection to the back of the phone.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nR46AFeRVU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3nR46AFeRVU
greenstork
Aug 2, 12:42 PM
(HDMI isn't really designed for computer displays)
I think that's kind of his point isn't it. I know I'd like to see more "media center" type features in my Mac.
I think that's kind of his point isn't it. I know I'd like to see more "media center" type features in my Mac.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 02:54 PM
Apple needs to respond. I would prefer them to do it with an iOS overhaul and some diversification of their product line. Apple won't sacrifice margins significantly, so to expand market share they should appeal to more people and step up advertising on the cheaper previous-gen models.
Apple can't, it would wreck havoc on their margins. A cheaper phone isn't just one that you pay $50 for and then end up with the same contract as the regular one. It's a cheap phone that you can buy without a contract.
And they would also lose the people, and there are lots here, just in this thread, who talk about exclusivity and being part of a club that not everyone can join.
Ferrari doesn't make cheap cars for everyone. But while most people would rather like to drive a Ferrari than a Toyota, most people would prefer to own Toyota. They make more money even if their cars aren't as exclusive. (Also, Ferrari is now owned by Fiat.)
Apple can't, it would wreck havoc on their margins. A cheaper phone isn't just one that you pay $50 for and then end up with the same contract as the regular one. It's a cheap phone that you can buy without a contract.
And they would also lose the people, and there are lots here, just in this thread, who talk about exclusivity and being part of a club that not everyone can join.
Ferrari doesn't make cheap cars for everyone. But while most people would rather like to drive a Ferrari than a Toyota, most people would prefer to own Toyota. They make more money even if their cars aren't as exclusive. (Also, Ferrari is now owned by Fiat.)
ender land
Apr 14, 11:08 AM
So we have websites that allow us to track where a dollar goes, how about letting us see where all the money the government spends is going
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?
You mean like
http://www.federalbudget.com/
http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/
http://www.usaspending.gov/
or any other websites easily found via google?
jamesryanbell
Mar 28, 11:56 AM
Good. If I've got the latest stuff, I don't want that to be second rate that quickly. Give me till 2012 at least. (joking)
leetlamer
May 6, 08:05 AM
Lmfao. There is absolutely no way they are going to put ARM chips in desktop or laptop computers in the near future.
Its not gonna happen. You can't beat Intel in performance.
ARM is good because its low power. Thats great for phones and tablets, but for freaking desktops you need performance.
Its not gonna happen. You can't beat Intel in performance.
ARM is good because its low power. Thats great for phones and tablets, but for freaking desktops you need performance.