ddekker
Oct 22, 01:21 PM
I heard Leo Laporte talking about this on his KFI podcast... exciting... one question... how many softwares take advantage of multi cores? I understand that the OS can deal with it for multi tasking, but how many programs multi thread?
DD
DD
netdog
Aug 11, 10:22 AM
What OS will the iPhone be running?
OS Xm
OS Xm
Dont Hurt Me
Aug 6, 08:56 AM
1 day away from the all new CUBE!:) If it happens iam buying. missed the first cube. Powermac & mini are nice but we need something inbetween not a all in one. Its time for computers with easily removable drives, upgradeable GPU's and not the size of luggage. My prediction:D The Cube squared.:)
mdriftmeyer
Aug 27, 07:45 PM
Yes, people have every right to complain when they receive faulty products, particularly so when they're paying good money, as they do when buying Apple. But whether Apple's QC has suffered significantly as they try to keep costs down due to the market pressures of increasingly feasible like-with-like comparisons with PCs, as well as meeting an increasing consumer demand, is debatable? Though there certainly seems to be a worrying increase in complaints about the new Intel Macs, I wonder how much of that is down to perception as more people use the internet as a channel to vent their complaints? Regarding the new Intel Macs, the jury here is still very much out (& will remain so for at least another 6 months). Not least because...
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Recent surveys continue to give Apple an excellent rating for overall quality when compared to other brands. (Only Sony's computers get similar ratings). Talking about "25% crap products" may feel good as a rhetorical release, but it doesn't really help the debate here.
Good point, however, about how Apple's market share could've been so much greater if only SJ had licensed out OS X. A great opportunity missed.
OEM licensing OS X would not be a panacea. I supported NeXTSTEP/Openstep for NeXT and Apple. We had a nightmare dealing with OEMs who pushed us into the trash heap.
When the merger happened they showed no more interest knowing that we could move the OS to Intel since we had it running on Intel.
Motherboard manufacturers cut corners. OEMs cut all sorts of corners on their I/O cards.
Corralling all necessary OEMs to stick to a specific spec would be a nightmare.
Vista is a classic example of diluting your OS. Five years and counting.
Apple is both a hardware and software company.
The price for their latest Mac Pro shows how price competitive it is with the rest of the industry.
Having built several clone boxes none of them from the case design, integrated motherboard design, controller design, heat transfer requirements, etc comes close to the Mac Pro. It doesn't include Hardware RAID out of the box. Big deal.
When the clone industry can produce cases in general that compete for structural integrity, motherboards with as few cables, easily maintanable cases that are easy to keep dust free then Apple might feel concerned about it's claim to having the most complete experience.
OS X has shortcomings in areas for Engineering (CAD/CAM, FEM, etc. All 3rd party concerns), Games (3rd party concerns, OpenGL 2 concerns that Apple will fix), Vertical Solution concerns (assuming Apple wants to attack the business sectors they will have to address this lack of productivity tools for Finance & Accounting within iWorks) and some other deficiencies.
They are covering their bases and growing their base, quarter by quarter.
When ROME is finally built are we all going to whine that you can save $50 here or there with a clone?
I expect no less.
Multimedia
Jul 28, 04:57 PM
I am a new Mac owner. I just bought my new 20 " iMac and I am learing aout the upcomming conference and possible new product releases. I
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
Would appreciate any thoughts on my question.
I am considering returning the new 20" I just bought in the 14 day period and taking the 10% hit and waitning to see if the iMac gets updated and I will repurchase. What is the likelyhood that the version I have will be updated. I would be bummed if I just bought it and I am at the end of a cycle. The $160 fee would actuallly be worth it to me to get thte latest. I would have to return it prior to the conference to stay within the 14 days but i may not want to loose out on lthe chance to get the latest.
Any thoughts on this 20 " model be increased with a new processor??
Thanks,
New Mac owner.....merk850
dont take it back.
I dont think that the difference will be that much, with the new systems.
If your happy with its performance then keep it.
A mild CPU boost isnt all that, and I doubt that the video cards will be upped that much.
I wouldnt take the hit in money lost, cause you can always sell it later down the line and get the lastest and greatest thats really a must buy.I respectfully disagree. I say take it back and be ready for a much faster iMac Core 2 Duo. You want the latest, take it back. It won't be the latest for many more weeks. Core 2 Duo will be the latest for two more years.
Ugg
Mar 22, 11:51 AM
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
tortoise
Aug 23, 03:04 PM
Do you have a reference showing that this translates to better performance in real-world application tests in a head to head competition?
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
Not handy, since a lot of this happened on mailing lists.
The short version is that the memory performance scales in a very sub-linear fashion as a function of the number of cores being used, whereas Opteron scalability is almost linear up to a large number of cores. The good news is that for single dual-core processors the memory performance is on par with dual-core Opterons and their in-cache performance can be better. The bad news is that this performance does not hold as you scale cores in a system. So for some applications (e.g. those that live mostly in cache) the Woodcrest processors will be mildly faster than Opterons, but for most the performance is about even in real app benchmarks.
I've seen fairly comprehensive benchmarks for both databases and scientific computing applications, both of which thoroughly exercise the memory subsystem. Even though a single Intel core theoretically has more bandwidth, the high latency means that the real bandwidth is about the same as the slower Opterons (which have real bandwidth that approaches theoretical) and the cross-sectional bandwidth of Opterons when you get up to 4 cores and higher is much higher since the scaling is almost linear with the number of cores. For Intel, I think it was the case that a bigger cache was a cheaper design choice than a truly scalable memory subsystem. As a result, they will have different competencies. Some types of floating point codes should run very well on Intel.
RMDI
Apr 27, 09:22 AM
Does Apple really think this double talk, where they say they keep a database of location but don't log the location is going to fly?
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
But it is true! They didn't log that I was at this date and hour in this restaurant and next hour I was at position xyz, but it was a cache of something related but also different. For example for every celltower-data there is only one timestamp. So you can't even determinate when a place was first (or even last) visited. For real location tracking this data is really inaccurate and useless. Location tracking was not the purpose of this cache and not the intention of Apple. I think it is legitim and important when they emphasize that in their Q&A.
What this data is useable for is drawing nice circles on a google map and visualizing a path of traveling between cities if you have physical access to your personal computer. And all this points are adressed in a software update.
skunk
Mar 22, 07:39 PM
I don't think Obama was "dragged" into this at all, the US has gotten willingly involved - but to what extent do you think it was stage-managed?As far as necessary to make it appear that he was the "last piece of the jigsaw" rather than its inventor.
chrmjenkins
Apr 6, 11:36 AM
That isn't what this story reads, and I don't think anyone but you and I have even read the actual facts supposed here.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
I actually find this one of the least accurate stories ever posted on MacRumors.com for several reasons... the OP is assuming ULV in the 13" MBA. The OP is assuming that if SB IGP is good enough for MBP it's fine for MBA. There is no rumor or timeframe listing these chips especially not in the 13" MBA. It seems like it's a blatant attempt to stir up activity without any real facts, rumors, or even common knowledge about the chips used in the MBAs.
Certainly the people haven't read the story or they're somehow focusing on the 11" MBA. Sure, this would be fine for the 11" MBA in terms of CPU clock speed but even then it's a gigantic loss in Tue graphics capabilities. That leads to a problem with the author saying good enough for 13" MBP than good enough for MBA. However, the IGP clock speed used in this ULV chip will be nearly a 50% drop in graphics performance. That for me doesn't equate to if this then that...
I am disappointed with MR for even writing such a poor piece of garbage. Forget that I cannot stand the SB IGP... the assumptions made here are absurd! It definitely doesn't warrant this sort of reply from the fans of the MBA. You and I could assailed things all day, but that isn't the story written.
Given Apple's willingness to go with it on the 13", I'm inclined to go with the reasoning that they'll use it here. The argument that it will be a big step down from the 320M is kind of moot given that anyone will say you're crazy if you try to insist that a MBA should be used for anything like gaming or graphical work (read anyone as Apple). You also have to remember that the 320M is downclocked in the MBAs too compared to the 13", so the drop isn't as drastic as you state.
The combination of a lower or equal TDP, a GPU that doesn't need its own heatsink because its integrated into the CPU and the very likely prolonged battery life for the MBA, it's pretty much a done deal for the MBA.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
He didn't quite tell the whole story. A LV and ULV chip likely went through different binning as their performance at the same settings varies because the process they are built on varies. The chips that work at the extremes (say Intel's extreme desktop processors or the lowest voltage CPUs they offer) are likely the top performers in their binning tests. Just because a chip can function as a LV doesn't mean it would meet the requirements for ULV, for example. However, if the ULV chip were to be scaled to the LV's parts speed and voltage, it would function just fine.
Joe2000
Aug 6, 06:08 AM
What about TV Show downloads in the UK? Pleeeeaaaase!!! :rolleyes:
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
Looking foward to these Mac Pros though, my Dad is definatley going to buy one. :D
Thanks, Joe.
gnasher729
Apr 8, 02:21 AM
On the other hand, if you have some sort of special needs (e.g. needing a long cable in an area with lots of interference while transferring data with a high bandwidth), then a $5 cable might not be up-to-scratch. But it that is unlikely, so it's worth trying the $5 cable first.
Well, I can't run my 1920x1200 monitor at that resolution on my MBP with a �5 mini-dvi to DVI adapter, only up to 1600x1200 :mad: Had to buy the Apple one. Still worth the attempt.
Well, I can't run my 1920x1200 monitor at that resolution on my MBP with a �5 mini-dvi to DVI adapter, only up to 1600x1200 :mad: Had to buy the Apple one. Still worth the attempt.
spicyapple
Jul 30, 11:15 AM
All of the reviews of the Core 2 Duo say that it crushes AMD in the desktop arena. This is good news, now we just need new iMacs, MacBook Pros, and Mac Pros.
Can't wait to hear Steve Jobs' spin on the Core 2 Duos at WWDC. He makes everything sound so good, and with the C2Ds really good, it should be fantastic! :)
Can't wait to hear Steve Jobs' spin on the Core 2 Duos at WWDC. He makes everything sound so good, and with the C2Ds really good, it should be fantastic! :)
brsboarder
Apr 11, 06:35 PM
Apple is already starting to fall behind in the cell phone market, the iphone 4 has the best gui, but not the best specs...waiting till Christmas will only push them farther behind
Tailpike1153
Apr 27, 08:58 AM
I think it was not a bug, nut data waiting to be sent to Apple for profit generating purposes.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
But if Apple has been using this acquired data, why on earth is it allowing Google and others to eat away at its mobile & tablet marketshare? Why collect data if it isn't relevant to you business.
brianus
Sep 14, 10:23 PM
AnandTech is putting a lot of emphasis on this FB-DIMM issue. Their Conroe vs Xeon comparisons are poor given that they maximize the FB-DIMM latency "problem" by using a Mac Pro with only two RAM slots occupied. Seems as though they have an agenda to exaggerate the importance of this technical issue.
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
I have noticed this emphasis as well; not being an expert on this issue myself though, would you care to shed light on how their coverage is an exaggeration and why we shouldn't be worried about it?
The comments about separate platforms in the NT era I took to refer to NT3.x/4 vs Win9x.
Yes, this is what I was getting at. ("arse about face"? What is that, Swedish? :rolleyes: ). Noone other than a vintage Windows IT person would know there were further differences between versions of NT itself. Also when making comparisons I never mentioned Server 2003 (about which I know almost nothing); I was talking about XP and 2000 being relatively similar whereas, for example NT and 98 were not.
New micro-arch -- Nehalem is due 2008.
Really, completely new? As in, to Core 2 what the G5 was to G4? In just two years?? I guess they're really ramping things up... Core 3 Hexa Mac Pros, anyone?
jmgregory1
Mar 22, 04:01 PM
I can assure that doubling the 256MB of the first iPad is not enough for people that need a lot of multitask, like me.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
This is a simple look at a complex process. Adding more ram may be good in a system that doesn't control app usage well, but it's something completely different when the system can control for app processes. If you have a product that works perfectly well with a certain spec, is there a need to add more of a certain thing? What benefit does it offer? Apple is a smart company - why build more cost into hardware if you can make your software make up any potential shortcomings in hardware?
Of course the competition has to market its products as being different in some way compared to Apple and convince you, the buying public, that it means something to have double this or less of that.
Frankly, I think these companies should be trying to come up with the next thing - instead of just trying to compete against the iPad - but they won't do that. They'll wait until Apple releases the next new thing and just copy that. It's pitiful really.
I don't need to own an iPad 2.
The competitors have 1GB RAM, iPad 2 has 512MB.
It's simple: Apple is always behind hardware-wise because they like to priorize esthetics and appearance (besides the "so wonderful OS" ad). It's been this way for Macs, it seems to be the same way for iPads.
Android phones are selling more than iPhone.
iPhone has started a market, competitors are improving it.
iPad has started a market, competitors are improving it.
If you just can't recognize how multitask works better with 1GB RAM and true background apps (QNX, Honeycomb), then you deserve to use a limited thing like an iPad.
I've only bought the first iPad because there were no competitors at that time (and I hate netbooks), but now things are different. To be honest, A LOT different.
People said that the iPhone was going to be the best phone out there, but the market is showing something different.
People say the iPad is the best tablet out there, but it seems that the market is going to show something different.
There are 2 sides: Apple fanboys and realistic people.
I like products, not brands.
This is a simple look at a complex process. Adding more ram may be good in a system that doesn't control app usage well, but it's something completely different when the system can control for app processes. If you have a product that works perfectly well with a certain spec, is there a need to add more of a certain thing? What benefit does it offer? Apple is a smart company - why build more cost into hardware if you can make your software make up any potential shortcomings in hardware?
Of course the competition has to market its products as being different in some way compared to Apple and convince you, the buying public, that it means something to have double this or less of that.
Frankly, I think these companies should be trying to come up with the next thing - instead of just trying to compete against the iPad - but they won't do that. They'll wait until Apple releases the next new thing and just copy that. It's pitiful really.
ifjake
Nov 29, 12:25 AM
here's my 2� without reading the rest of the thread:
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
maybe if they set aside the funds for cultivating new, compellingly good music from upandcoming artists. kinda like how the big movie studios own independent-esque branches. something nice. something a little more risky than your usual cookie-cutter pop-hit. i dunno maybe that's already there sort of. maybe.
Mikey7c8
Mar 31, 08:47 PM
John Gruber's take:
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
So here�s the Android bait-and-switch laid bare. Android was �open� only until it became popular and handset makers dependent upon it. Now that Google has the handset makers by the balls, Android is no longer open and Google starts asserting control.
Andy Rubin, Vic Gundotra, Eric Schmidt: shameless, lying hypocrites, all of them.Can't say I disagree.
I completely disagree.
Going open sounded like a great idea in the beginning. Fast forward to today, and manufacturers have used the openness against the platform by creating custom versions of android that aren't readily upgradable.
This has hurt the platform more than 'being open' helped it and google is right to start regulating what can and cannot be done.
I think we're all pretty lucky to have experienced both sides of the spectrum to be honest :)
tf843364
Aug 26, 04:36 PM
I happen to have a Yonah Macbook, and im a little concerned.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
well im hoping to sell this one next year, and thatll get me most of the way to my santa rosa beast, cuz i KNOW santa rosa is that good.
I wonder, if merom does make it into the Macbooks did i make a mistake by buying my computer before i had to (as in next friday is the cutoff)
I wonder if Merom is really that good. *it sucks that macbooks dont have PGA slots*
well im hoping to sell this one next year, and thatll get me most of the way to my santa rosa beast, cuz i KNOW santa rosa is that good.
chasemac
Aug 7, 04:47 PM
Whats the point? Its history.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
Because it is a 64 bit proccessor that's the point.
My guess is, that its how Tiger is now.
Because it is a 64 bit proccessor that's the point.
Pro31
Mar 31, 04:36 PM
Maybe they should have thought of focusing on integration a little more than putting out a phone every week.
dwero
Jun 9, 03:29 AM
When called #639*, I got the news that 16GB for $199 and 32GB for $299.
That's suck
That's suck
emotion
Jul 20, 09:05 AM
Where you are going to see the difference is when you multi-task.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
You're going to run into the hard disk being the bottle neck then. In principle though I agree with you.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
You're going to run into the hard disk being the bottle neck then. In principle though I agree with you.
No comments:
Post a Comment