plinden
Jul 19, 03:53 PM
Other than recently, how often have Mac sales been in the million+ a quarter? Didn't 2002 or something only see that many shipped the entire year?
No - according to http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html Mac sales have been above 3 million since 1998. But it looks like Apple's on track for > 5 million in the highest sales figures ever.
Where are all you "Apple is doomed" sayers now?:p :D
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
No, please re-read the figures - it's 1.327 million Macs for the last quarter.
No - according to http://www.pegasus3d.com/total_share.html Mac sales have been above 3 million since 1998. But it looks like Apple's on track for > 5 million in the highest sales figures ever.
Where are all you "Apple is doomed" sayers now?:p :D
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
No, please re-read the figures - it's 1.327 million Macs for the last quarter.
MattSepeta
May 2, 05:42 PM
Another iOS feature implemented in a desktop OS.
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
Fan-frickin-tastic :(
aegisdesign
Sep 6, 06:08 PM
It costs me nothing to walk into town (about 10 minutes) or bike (5) and pick up a DVD at the municipal library for �1.50. Occasionally I'll copy it to my hard disk if I didn't have the time I thought I would have to watch it and watch it later, then delete it.
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
chutch15
Sep 12, 05:59 PM
I got Night Sky (very dark blue).
strabes
Apr 2, 07:15 PM
"Technology gets out of the way"
That's why I got a Mac/iPhone in the first place. Get out of my way, Windows/Android!
That's why I got a Mac/iPhone in the first place. Get out of my way, Windows/Android!
Benguitar
Nov 25, 08:58 PM
But it's a Ferrari.
Exactly.
But it's a Pelican.
Ferrari > Honda
Pelican > Normal Eyeglasses Case
;) :p :D
Exactly.
But it's a Pelican.
Ferrari > Honda
Pelican > Normal Eyeglasses Case
;) :p :D
vga4life
Apr 3, 01:08 PM
Cranking up the hype machine when the product is out of stock every where is classic Apple.
Annoying.
Annoying.
timmyOtool
Apr 4, 04:04 PM
I think the cut throat P.C. market will implode on it's self sometime in the future and Apple should stay out of that market. With that said I do hope that Apple can improve the consumer line up. $800 for an emac would be good if it had better specs. All the ilife apps should run well on all macs period. A better adveritising stratigy wouldn't hurt either. Let people know about osx, after all that is their best product imho. Apple is not going to die, but there is always room for improvement.
Troll
Apr 21, 04:41 PM
Why would Apple release an iMac refresh a couple of months before a new OS debuts? Also, this would be the FASTEST REFRESH IN APPLE HISTORY at 9 months.
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
You all fell for the hype and made Bri@n T0ng (eat that SEO) and Sea-NET advertising revenue. :rolleyes:
karlfranz
Nov 28, 10:49 AM
Last week I was at my local Best Buy with a friend and we stopped at the MP3 player display to see the Zune for the first time. They had a black and a brown model on display. We were commenting on the ugly brown color when the salesguy told us they had actually sold one of the brown ones. We asked him what he thought about the Zune and his response was that it really wasn't too bad a player and showed some potential. He then said that, unfortunately, both the units on display were already broken so he couldn't shows us any features. We couldn't stop laughing as we walked away.
Two days later I was at another friends' house for Thanksgiving dinner. I told him about the Zunes at Best Buy and how I couldn't try them out because they were broken. He disappeared into another room and reappeared with a brown Zune he had bought a few days earlier. My reply to him was "So you were the one that bought the brown Zune"!
Two days later I was at another friends' house for Thanksgiving dinner. I told him about the Zunes at Best Buy and how I couldn't try them out because they were broken. He disappeared into another room and reappeared with a brown Zune he had bought a few days earlier. My reply to him was "So you were the one that bought the brown Zune"!
guzhogi
Jun 22, 11:58 AM
I wouldn't mind an iOS-type OS on an iMac as long as it had some more features of a full-fledged desktop OS. As in:
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
Who wants to be touching a vertically standing screen all the time, that's tiring!
Maybe this is why we didn't see OS X 10.7 info because it might include support for this...
I was actually hoping to see a completely new mac Pro with new very high res screens and wireless trackpad.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
danielwsmithee
Nov 29, 03:32 PM
Yes, support for more formats and codecs than iTunes currently plays friendly with would be welcome.You know I originally thought that, but I kind of like the way it works now. I would much rather have a few codecs that work very well. Then play everything under the sun just not very well.
zap2
Aug 24, 06:02 PM
I'd be shocked if we saw Merom based Minis before Merom based MBP and MB.. maybe a Core Duo upgrade, to hold us over? A price drop and high speed Yonah?
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
OR wishful thinking from someone who doesn't want his Core Duo Mini to seem old(even though its not)
ntrigue
Jan 12, 03:00 PM
Why did everyone jump to the conclusion that its offical name is "MacBook Air"?
What is air-like about a small tablet laptop? This is obviously a proliferation on the 'world without wires' concept...
iTunes Rentals ... snatch them out of the thin air to your new AppleTV is much more logical.
What is air-like about a small tablet laptop? This is obviously a proliferation on the 'world without wires' concept...
iTunes Rentals ... snatch them out of the thin air to your new AppleTV is much more logical.
rasmasyean
Mar 31, 02:15 PM
To say any one country defeated the nazis really isn't true. It's as unreasonable a claim as rasmasyean's wargasmic fantasy :p
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa and then italy and western europe at the same time they were fighting the soviets? Would they have have beaten Hitler if he hadn't gone against the advice of his generals and made some disastrous decisions? Didn't the Persian supply corridor factor into the soviets being able to hold off the germans? etc etc etc
The reality is that the allied forces beat the nazis and not any one country.
But wargasm fantasy aside, I still think that even if the Americans didn't enter the war directly and assuming they didn't supply the Allies with weapons, and they were still able to hold off Nazis by themselves, the Manhattan project sequence was already on the way. It's no doubt that US would have "tested" them not only in Japan, but all over Europe. And I don't think any of the Axis would have kept going.
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa and then italy and western europe at the same time they were fighting the soviets? Would they have have beaten Hitler if he hadn't gone against the advice of his generals and made some disastrous decisions? Didn't the Persian supply corridor factor into the soviets being able to hold off the germans? etc etc etc
The reality is that the allied forces beat the nazis and not any one country.
But wargasm fantasy aside, I still think that even if the Americans didn't enter the war directly and assuming they didn't supply the Allies with weapons, and they were still able to hold off Nazis by themselves, the Manhattan project sequence was already on the way. It's no doubt that US would have "tested" them not only in Japan, but all over Europe. And I don't think any of the Axis would have kept going.
roadbloc
Mar 31, 08:33 AM
iCal looks awful. I hope this is temporary or an April fools joke.
iStudentUK
Apr 8, 04:31 AM
Well, they don't necessarily need to field troops that shoot rifles. Having a ground force can mean a lot of different things, including spec ops. I think one feasible solution may be to have US troops field artillery. This might be one of those opportunites to test "smart artillery" on those trenches near civilians and hospitals. They might also try to blow up more tanks so they can sell them more refurbished M1 Abrams later. I think smart artillery is more economical than aerial bombing runs to blow up some cheap russian tanks.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur
That would be one option. I've said all along that the amount of firepower available to NATO forces is overkill! They are fighting an outdated force which has suffered massive desertion. I've seen these smart shells before, they are very good.
Special Ops are already on the ground, although not officially of course! According to anonymous sources UKSF have been on the ground since well before the airstrikes began, I'm sure the US is the same. I don't really count special forces as having troops on the ground, they are quite different. The UK also has 800 Royal Marines (sort of half way between US Marines and Navy SEALS) on short notice to deploy in the case of a humanitarian crisis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M982_Excalibur
That would be one option. I've said all along that the amount of firepower available to NATO forces is overkill! They are fighting an outdated force which has suffered massive desertion. I've seen these smart shells before, they are very good.
Special Ops are already on the ground, although not officially of course! According to anonymous sources UKSF have been on the ground since well before the airstrikes began, I'm sure the US is the same. I don't really count special forces as having troops on the ground, they are quite different. The UK also has 800 Royal Marines (sort of half way between US Marines and Navy SEALS) on short notice to deploy in the case of a humanitarian crisis.
aafuss1
Aug 29, 09:07 PM
Huh? Why would a BR drive make any more heat than a 12x or 24x DVD drive? Hint: it won't. It's a disc that is the same size and weight and spinning at the same speeds... the only change is the wavelength of the laser reading the disc.
Decoding the data will take some juice, which will make some heat, but no more than any other CPU intensive task.
The tray load drives I've seen internal photos of have fans in the drive itself.
Decoding the data will take some juice, which will make some heat, but no more than any other CPU intensive task.
The tray load drives I've seen internal photos of have fans in the drive itself.
corywoolf
Nov 27, 01:30 PM
This may pave the way to larger wide-screens.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
I know you originally said 30" and then edited it before I could post. I doubt there will be a 40" any time soon. It is more likely that Apple introduces a 32" LCD TV and probably a 42" Plasma.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
I know you originally said 30" and then edited it before I could post. I doubt there will be a 40" any time soon. It is more likely that Apple introduces a 32" LCD TV and probably a 42" Plasma.
ohaithar
Nov 27, 12:48 AM
This poster
http://images5.cpcache.com/product/71837185v4_350x350_Front.jpg
http://images5.cpcache.com/product/71837185v4_350x350_Front.jpg
jav6454
Mar 24, 10:27 PM
Ehhh...you're right that it's no 1200watt corsair. But it supports dual CPUs, crap ton of ram, and 5770x2 or 5870...surely it could support a 6970(from a tdp perspective)
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
Nop... consider.
2x CPUs 130W rated. So thats 260W, right there. However, no CPU consumes the rated, so it's give or take ~260W.
Each 5770 is ~108W, given two, that's ~216 W. Right off the bat we have ~476 W being consumed. Not bad; however let's look at the side where its not a dual 5770 setup.
The PSU on the Mac Pro is rated for 980 W of power, but for simplicity sake let's say 1 kW. Now, factor in the Super drive, Ethernet, Airport, at least 1 HDD and peripheral docks/cards you are looking at ~100 W. Take into account a 20 W per 1GB of memory (assume 6GB) and you've got ~120 W more. So far ~ 220 W more.
Now we have ~480 W [~260W + ~220W]consumption leaving only ~520 W left for a GPU. Currently, the HD 6970 requires 2x 8-pin connectors to provide 150 W per pin. That's 300W right off. So we are left with ~220 W in the system. Now, factor in that PCIe slot power draw at 75 W and we've got a ~145 W left over. ~145 W is cutting it too close and something will yield (yes I do realize 145 W is a lot more, but read on). Now, the sad part, we were assuming 1kW PSU which is not the case; it's 980 W meaning there will be less power, ~125 W. Now, also take into consideration no PSU is 100% efficient, hence there will be greater power outlet draw and the PSU will be operating at high voltage/amps and its life span will decrease dramatically over very high usage.
In other words the current PSU may come up short. Add to that the fact that all current shipping and past model Mac Pros don't have extra dual 8-pin connectors. They have dual 6-pins. There is an adapter to make a 6-pin into an 8-pin, but it is risky at best, big no-no.
So as you can see an HD 6970 would be barely supported on current models. Future models? Perhaps yes assuming Apple bumps to 1.1kW or 1.2kW PSU.
Take into account this was calculated assuming 6GB of memory and 1 HDD, anymore RAM (20 W/1GB) or HDDs (10W/disc) and the consumption will go up. Also, assuming nothing is hooked up to peripheral ports; like a small external drive that draws 5-10 W.
jxyama
Mar 31, 07:01 AM
How about three options....
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
1) I was thinking of a cut down emac style for the 1st time, Dad and Mums, Student, Low income buyers. (eg: basic cut down version)
2) An expandable machine based on the above design (eg: middle of the road - same chip as 3 but much lower specs)
3) Macs for the professionals...and 2nd or 3rd time computer buyers (eg: high spec/price - Higher spec chip than 2)
problem is, what do you cut down in #1 and still make profit? it's clear that dirt cheap computer market is something apple's not interested in. they believe it makes no economic sense. apple is not a charity organization, it is NOT on some mission to spread the goodness of Mac OS... if they don't see an economic merit in offering dirt cheap Macs, they won't, just like any other businesses.
eMac is not meant to be cheap. iMac is not meant to be cheap. they are meant to be all-in-one. if you know enough to foresee that you may need to upgrade in the future, you get a PowerMac because all-in-one is not for you. if you want a cheap, upgradable machine, then, unfortunately, you are not within apple's target market. thus far, apple has been doing well with this philosophy and who's to tell them to change? (do note that "customers" wanting dirt cheap machines have far less economic leverage because, well, they are cheap. if $800 is too much for a complete computer/OS/bundled software, then nevermind what dell's offering, apple believes they are ok without catering to you. if $400 is your budget, then apple believes it won't matter to you whether you get a dell or a Mac. if you want a Mac for sure, apple is betting that you will put down $400 more and get an eMac.)
even if apple offered custom upgrade parts (and only apple parts will work with Macs - otherwise, people will just go out and buy stock parts), i doubt they will be well received - they will be "overpriced" afterall, just like their computers are "overpriced" especially according to these "cheap" customers.
ikir
Mar 22, 05:51 PM
Kill it!!!!!
lordonuthin
Mar 23, 04:50 PM
yes, congrats to designed for 1 million points!
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused:
and congrats to you, whiterabbit for 11 million points!
but why is it not showing you hit 11 million points for the team?
Thanks.
I don't know? :confused: