Kingsly
Aug 11, 12:40 PM
:eek: :)
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
I hope it is released sooner than later. My Z500 only has about a month of life left in it....
nagromme
Mar 22, 01:01 PM
Widescreen is great for movie watching, and the spec-lover in me is all over that... but it’s not very flexible for portrait use. (Which is how you hold a tablet one-handed, and is how you see the most content on a web page or scrolling document.)
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
A 10.1” 1280x800 screen is actually almost exactly the same screen area as an iPad: the iPad is 45.2 sq. in., and the 10.1 is 45.8 sq. in.
Held in portrait mode, the 10.1 is .75” taller... but .5” narrower than an iPad. I don’t think I’d care for that. (But with 1280x800 you do gain 32 pixels of width, and 256 pixels of height. Still not great for portrait use.)
The 8.9 display, though—which seems to save a few bucks—is an interesting option for dropping the price floor on “real” tablets. (Not that I’d settle for Android’s failings. As pointed out: specs alone don’t make a good car, nor a good computer, nor a good tablet!)
I hope these catch on enough that I can actually buy an iPad.
Ha ha :D Good thinking!
2nyRiggz
Dec 1, 09:41 AM
I'm enjoying the game so far, any racing wheel will make this game/simulator boss. I'm not into racing games so I skipped alot of them but I decided to buy a racing wheel & GT5 and its been great.
I didn't come into this game expecting true to life graphics but I knew the gameplay would be as close to reality as they could get and I'm not disappointed. My only gripe about this this game/simulator(cause I can't really class this as a game) is its made for hardcore car nuts and I really can't fault it for going AFTER ITS TARGET AUDIENCE(I'm completely loss trying to purchase parts to mod my car)
This game/simulator is the real bang for the buck...I haven't touch online/kart/Nascar yet and I'm enjoying the s*** out of it.
Poly simply went after their target audience and from what I'm hearing its still on point.
Bless
I didn't come into this game expecting true to life graphics but I knew the gameplay would be as close to reality as they could get and I'm not disappointed. My only gripe about this this game/simulator(cause I can't really class this as a game) is its made for hardcore car nuts and I really can't fault it for going AFTER ITS TARGET AUDIENCE(I'm completely loss trying to purchase parts to mod my car)
This game/simulator is the real bang for the buck...I haven't touch online/kart/Nascar yet and I'm enjoying the s*** out of it.
Poly simply went after their target audience and from what I'm hearing its still on point.
Bless
wpotere
Apr 27, 10:17 AM
Trump is a hero. :rolleyes:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/04/27/trump-takes-credit-for-release-of-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate/
I listened to the report and I can't understand a word he is saying. He babbles about nothing.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 17, 02:01 AM
A lot of folks are waiting for game benchmarks...bring 'em on!
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Yeah put up some World of Warcraft or Doom 3 results, that's what this is all about a Mac being the fastest gaming machine :cool:
Benjamins
Mar 31, 08:12 PM
HA HA. You have got to be kidding me.
LOL specially those who parade around using Microsoft fanboy as a buffer.
LOL specially those who parade around using Microsoft fanboy as a buffer.
Unspeaked
Sep 19, 10:56 AM
Just make a box on the front page that has a picture of a MBP and let it say "the fastest just got faster" or something.
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
The fastest?
If that were the case, no one here would be complaining...
SevenInchScrew
Dec 9, 01:09 AM
DoFoT:
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
It depends on what you want from a game. If you care more about driving and tuning than painting and whatnot go buy GT5. Its all about driving and not much else.
I love it because i'm a bit of a car nerd. If you like cars you will like GT5. If you love cars you will love GT5, its just that simple.
I guess I'll throw in my counterpoint to that then, just to give him another opinion to mull over, because I love cars and don't love GT5....
The game is not real good. Every time I've played it, I can't help but think of how it could have been SOOO much better, if they just trimmed back on the crazy feature list a bit. The game tries to be everything to everyone who likes cars. But the problem with that is, trying to do many things means you'll never excel at any of them. Often the implementation of things in this game is a little weak or unfulfilling because of that. For example...
NASCAR is in, but is pretty plain and boring, and doesn't feel like a real cup race. If you like NASCAR, you'd be better served with a full game based on that.
Same with WRC stuff. Yes, the rally is pretty decent. But, I've played a bunch of REALLY awesome rally games before, and this is nowhere near as good.
Day and Night cycles, and Weather effects look amazing.... on the very few tracks that you can actually have them function on.
The sounds of the cars, just as with every GT game that has come before it, is terrible. Very few cars actually sound like their real-world version, and when you tune them up, they get even less distinctive.
The car list, while huge, is FILLED with cars that I have absolutely no desire to drive in a racing game. I get Kaz's intention, bringing in cars from many eras and different parts of the automotive spectrum to see them, and maybe appreciate them more. But this is a racing game at its core, and I don't ever want to race a VW Kombi.
And lastly, the menus are just pitiful. It really feels like they designed them first, all those years ago, and then never touched them again. So many games have come and gone with great menu systems, and this game took nothing away from them, because they are just awful in this game.
This game really had the potential to be amazing. If they got rid of NASCAR, WRC, Karts, etc, and took out about 4-500 of the boring, crappy cars, we'd be getting somewhere. Use the time and effort that those removed things would have occupied to make some manageable menus, more Premium cars, and get the Day-Night cycle and Weather on all tracks. That would have been great. But that isn't what we got.
Don't get me wrong, it is a good game. But GT games aren't supposed to just be good, they are supposed to be GREAT. But even after a 6 year wait, we only got pretty good.
But hey, as I've said on many occasions, it does make some DAMN GOOD screenshots. Almost unreal at times...
Click to HUGE-size
http://imgur.com/hLJ12.jpg
http://imgur.com/V06hb.jpg
http://imgur.com/Vciun.jpg
http://imgur.com/ZGPiF.jpg
http://imgur.com/IMrhk.jpg
BGil
Aug 8, 04:32 AM
Have to agree with you on just about everything. If MS tried to release something like this, as anything other than a service pack, their user base would (quite rightly) crucify them.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
The TimeMachine mirrors the same functionality that was announced for Vista about a week ago,
It's kinda unfair to say Microsoft just announced PreviousDocs/Shadow Copy "about a week ago" because it's been in every build for the last year.
Winsupersite on build 5219:
Windows Vista build 5219 also includes an integrated Shadow Copy client, which you manage from the Shadow Copies tab of the Properties dialog for your hard drive (Figure). This feature, which first originated in Windows Server lets you cache older versions of data files so that you can recover information in the event of an error. So if you overwrite a critical file, or inadvertently change part of a document, you can "go back in time" and access older versions.
Let's see how this works. First, you need to enable Shadow Copies from the aforementioned dialog. Then, after you've mucked up a file, you can access its Properties dialog in Explorer and navigate to the Previous Versions pane (Figure). Here, you can select between various different versions of the document (and your time travel experience is complete). This is a great feature, and I'm glad to see it being added to the Windows client.
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-26.jpg
http://www.winsupersite.com/images/reviews/vista-5219-review-25.jpg
That build was released in September of 2005.
http://www.winsupersite.com/reviews/winvista_5219.asp
Even before that Bob Muglia, who head the Longhorn Server project, said it would be integrated into NTFS.
MS also ships a shadow copy client for XP.
If anything, Apple has known about Previous Docs for over a year now.
bobthedino
Apr 27, 10:03 AM
And how close do you have to be before a wifi is logged? they reach what, 10-100meters? Take the log and triangulate the cell towers, since your properly most at work or at home, those two places will stand out in the data.
No they won't stand out in the data, because each cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot is only included once in the database. And there is no information regarding how much time you spend in each location.
No they won't stand out in the data, because each cell tower or Wi-Fi hotspot is only included once in the database. And there is no information regarding how much time you spend in each location.
samcraig
Apr 27, 08:46 AM
Pot, meet kettle.
There's a difference in what I wrote and what the OP did. I said I THINK. Big difference between a declaritive statement and offering my opinion.
There's a difference in what I wrote and what the OP did. I said I THINK. Big difference between a declaritive statement and offering my opinion.
EETFUK
Apr 8, 12:01 AM
It's great that BB sells them. I just walked right in and bought my iPad 2 instead of waiting for a month or longer from Apple. BB was happy to take my cash. haha.
Peace
Aug 7, 11:32 PM
Woah! This is heavy stuff. Lot of eye candy in Core Animation :cool:
Did you go to WWDC or D/L Leopard?
Did you go to WWDC or D/L Leopard?
LightSpeed1
Apr 6, 12:08 PM
Looks as if I should hold off on getting an air now.
mc68k
Dec 23, 06:28 PM
well im a little stuck. my zonda r isnt fast enough for a lot of the top races, and the newly appointed online dealership has nice cars, but it doesnt rotate between them. so im really waiting for a nice car to come up in the used garage. either that or ill have to save up like 4M for a dealership car
Nuck81
Nov 25, 02:46 PM
Need For Speed: Shift looks better than GT5. Especially the in car Cockpit cam. The shadows of GT5 are a fickering jaggy especially in car. I'm hoping they can patch all that out. Not to mention the AI of GT5 is horrible. The cars just stay on the driving line like those old time cars at the amusement park. There is no regard to racing or competition. In Shift, the AI is trying to beat you. They bump you they pass you, they get too aggressive and make mistakes, causing wrecks and spin outs. There is no better console racer in that regard. GT5 AI only makes contact if you are in their line, not that they are actually trying to "beat" you.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
The Driving feels good though after I switched the brake/gas to the triggers and off the awkward right stick. GT5 would be better to be marketing as a Driving/Time Trial game. Not a Racing/Competition game. I'll put my time into GT5. and it will be a blast trying to beat my times on the tracks with the different cars, but I won't play the game looking to win races against competition. For that, I'm looking forward to Shift 2 already...
GT5 is a 8.5 for me.
Yebubbleman
Apr 6, 03:35 PM
Disagree, the Air is a niche product, and there is a noticeable difference in weight. 2KG 13" Pro is exactly 50% heavier than 1.3KG Air, and if you lug the laptop around all day long such weight difference is noticeable. It might be added that most Air users are never gonna need the extra computing power of the MBP. If your work requires a MBP you're never going to get an Air anyway.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
If you don't need the power of a MacBook Pro, then a white MacBook is the best bang for the buck. Period. The only two reasons why an Air would be desirable over a white MacBook are superficial aesthetic preferences (please people, these are computers, not fashion accessories) and weight, which brings me to...
I am going even further - I like the featherweight of the 11" and the fact that after the update it is going to be a very serious machine is not to be neglected.
After the update, it'll still be the slowest Mac in the line-up. Serious machine? Perhaps compared to a Core 2 Duo machine, but then again, at that point, they'll all have Sandy Bridge and will thusly all be serious compared to the Core 2 Duo Macs in every respect (save for the IGP in tow, of course). Featherweight? Sure, but at that point, do I really want to be editing my Microsoft Word documents or Photoshop files on a computer with an 11.6" screen? And for the same cost as a full featured Mac laptop (white MacBook)? No thanks.
Last but not least, those 2 pounds you're talking about can be crucial when deciding what to take in your hand luggage when traveling by plane. I've been up to such a decision when I had to take my 2.8kg PC laptop. That's where I guess the name of the computer comes from - Macbook Air, designed for use on an Airplane.
A 13" MacBook Pro wouldn't make travel THAT much harder. Seriously. I've traveled with a white MacBook for quite a while, and honestly, an Air would make the bag lighter, but not to the point where I'd take it over a white MacBook or a 13" MacBook Pro. Were I doing constant walking with the thing, maybe. As it stands I don't have that kind of mobile computing lifestyle, nor do I know many people that do.
The integrated Intel HD 3000 seems to be about equal to the integrated GeForce 320M when Barefeets did their tests on vidoe games.
On Portal, the HD3000 was 68FPS and the 320M was 65FPS.
On X-Plane, the HD3000 was 38FPS and the 320M was 43FPS.
Certainly worth moving to SB processors.
http://www.barefeats.com/mbps04.html
The 4Gig RAM limit is more critical than the change in graphics.
For every test that the HD 3000 beat the 320M or matched it, the CPU was largely at play. Jus' sayin'. Though really of the four Macs that ship sans a discrete GPU, the only one where it is sorely missed is the 13" MacBook Pro. For everyone else, the difference between the 320M and the HD 3000 won't matter at all.
I think you need to define very simple, because the MBA can run about everything. Lets face it, computers have been capable of running pretty much anything for the last decade, the upgrades stopped being as meaningful as they used to be quite some time ago.
I'm a Unix sysadmin, the MBA is my only computer. I do casual gaming on it, I use it to do graphics for my website using CS5, I use it for my work (using a VM), I use it to do my hobby coding, I use it to watch TV series and Anime in 720p. It has the upside of being light and small, so carrying it around on the motorcycle for when I'm on stand-by is less of a pain than 15" MBP or even a 13" MBP (which I had before, when it was called the Unibody Macbook).
Call me bat-**** crazy or my needs "simple", but it works for me as a stand-alone computer.
By "run everything", you can't possibly mean run games at "higher than medium" settings, nor edit lots of HD footage in something like Final Cut Pro. Though that's not what YOU use YOUR MacBook Air for, and really that's fine. I'm not trying to invalidate your purchase decision, man. I'm saying that on the whole, unless ultraportability ABSOLUTELY HAS TO BE A CONCERN, it's not the best of buys in an already over-priced Mac market. If you handed me $1000 and told me to buy a Mac laptop, I'd buy the white MacBook over the 11.6" Air every time. But that's a difference in opinion and frankly, I'd rather not argue difference in opinions.
NAG
Mar 31, 04:45 PM
I don't think it is evil. It is crazy for people to pretend like Google makes Android to be benevolent and help the world. They have financial motives, and they have to protect their interests. Removing Google as search is probably going to be a huge no-no. It is kind of dumb that anyone has even tried to do that... That is part of the problem. Some of the carriers/manufacturers are stupid.
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
They have disrespected what Google has done for them and forced Google to clamp down. When someone gives you something for free and does a lot of work for you, you can at least respect their position and understand when you do things that might be stepping on their toes.
That is the real problem with the android commodity market though. It is not google, it is all the second rate manufacturers who sucked at making smartphones before Apple and Google, and continue to do dumb things to this day.
You mix a more general usage based OS with a hardware marketplace filled with knuckleheads, and you end up with the mess that is the Android hardware market and ecosystem.
That was a hoot changing the search to Bing. Only thing gutsier would be to somehow replace every admob ad to a competitor.
I wouldn't leave Google completely blameless here. They knew who they were dealing with. They need eyeballs to sell (ad business) so they made their bed. Same reason why the software marketplace on android sucks, they designed it for their bottom line (eyeballs). They aren't making a product for people to use, they're making a channel to deliver a product (eyeballs) to their customers (advertisers).
Eidorian
Aug 26, 04:50 PM
A Merom thread? On my MacRumors?
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
amols
Aug 27, 02:28 AM
I don't give a rat's A** about Santa Rosa. What I do give a Rat's A** about is that Easy Access HD Bay. The ability to have multiple 160 GB HDs standing by for different field purposes can make for revolutionary work flow procedures.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
Exactly!! I did swap my MBP HD from 100GB (Seagate 5400.2) to 160GB (Seagate 5400.3) and almost cracked the top cover, not to mention destroyed the warranty (which I don't mind anyway). Its really funny that we can easily swap HD in MB but not in MBP. I hope they fix this in next release instead of silly Merom updates.
AoWolf
Sep 13, 10:05 AM
I remember thinking "My goodness what would I ever do with all this power" when playing with the apple store quad woodcrests. The future is very bright :-)
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.
takao
Dec 2, 04:53 PM
I love that i won a mini in the mini-only race. I'll never touch either of my minis again.
;) that's why i haven't bothered with that race. .. just like in the lupo race where you win an entry level lupo (i already have a lupo cup version)
thank you very much for providing me with a _another_ worthless < 90kw FF hatchback
;) that's why i haven't bothered with that race. .. just like in the lupo race where you win an entry level lupo (i already have a lupo cup version)
thank you very much for providing me with a _another_ worthless < 90kw FF hatchback
babyj
Sep 19, 09:52 AM
Like I said, 64 bit is pretty irrelevant for most users, and the speed and battery differences are quite negligible. And the argument that Apple is losing tons of sales to PC manufactuers is, frankly, laughable too.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.
The pre-release tests I saw reckoned Merom was about 25% faster with 7% longer battery life. Though they are pretty meaningless figures and we won't know until Merom is actually in a Macbook and a comparable test can be made.
I'd imagine there will be far bigger improvements to both with Santa Rosa and nand cache (which I presume Apple will support) than there is with Merom.