heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Amazing Iceman
Apr 7, 10:50 PM
Don't be a troll :rolleyes:
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
Obviously you know little about trolls... :D (JK!)
SactoGuy18
Apr 27, 08:41 PM
yg17, I hate to say this but Obama HAD to do this to avoid the entire "birther" issue from turning into a major distraction that ends up wasting everybody's time during the election cycle next year. Heck, it's already wasted everybody's time for the last three years anyway. :rolleyes:
RedTomato
Jul 20, 07:48 PM
Orgy-core.
That gets my vote.
Or Octopussy.
http://www.affichescinema.com/insc_o/octopussy.jpg
That gets my vote.
Or Octopussy.
http://www.affichescinema.com/insc_o/octopussy.jpg
Ubik1981
Apr 6, 12:26 PM
I am shocked that anyone finds this as a positive.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
So you all want a drop from 1.86/2.13 to 1.4GHz CPUs in your 13" MBA? That is a 30% drop.
Then you want another drop of approaching 50% in graphics performance? Remember these IGPs clock in much lower than the STD voltage SB used in 13" MBP.
I find this completely backwards from Apple's current position on both CPU and graphics, and I don't think anyone would end up with a faster or better 13" MBA than the current generation. Apple would certainly have to bring back the backlit keyboard and introduce Thunderbolt to sucker anyone into buying such inferior junk! I would recommend people buy the current generation on clearance rather than lose performance everywhere like this. If this is the chip Apple uses in the 13" MBA, prepare for a big drop in capabilities!
I am still in shock anyone finds this a positive? Have you all read the clock speed? The facts about the chip and IGP in ultra low voltage variants?
I think most ppl here do not seem to realize the number 1 problem of MBA: overheating. I am the proud owner of a Rev. C MBA, which I would not exchange for anything else (especially the new models). The only problem I can complain abt is frequent overheating, which makes apps and the OS slow down consistently or (very rarely) even freeze.
I believe that the processor downgrading, as well as the elimination of backlit keys, are mostly in order to avoid such problem (as well as improve battery life). Otherwise, they would not make sense.
MBA is not MB Pro. If u want less weight/space, u must be willing to compromise.
bousozoku
Nov 28, 10:16 PM
I would assume that Microsoft agreed to pay Universal just because it could cause Apple problems, not because they felt any need to pay.
Universal tried to sue Sony back in the 1970s over videocassette recorders. They were somewhat successful in scaring people from buying Sony VCRs, even though they weren't really successful in court.
I can't see as how they'll be pushing Apple too far. It seems every day, Universal and its subsidiaries lose ground to competitors.
Universal tried to sue Sony back in the 1970s over videocassette recorders. They were somewhat successful in scaring people from buying Sony VCRs, even though they weren't really successful in court.
I can't see as how they'll be pushing Apple too far. It seems every day, Universal and its subsidiaries lose ground to competitors.
ThinkingMac
Sep 19, 10:01 AM
umm, how about more than a simple basic update.
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
I agree and dont forget express card 54 so we can get our CF card readers
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
I agree and dont forget express card 54 so we can get our CF card readers
dvswede
Mar 26, 11:48 AM
I'm curious to see what Lion will bring. While the current OS looks great I would like to see a user interface update. The only thing higher on the list then that is a iTunes break up into more manageable pieces. iTunes was the reason I stayed away from apple for several years. I didn't like it's look/performance/stability and bulk. I still don't even if I have accepted it now. It's the one program that seem to crash more then adobe SW (ok not more then but still).
AppleDroid
Apr 10, 02:46 PM
I know people here (from reading) aren't fans of Blu-ray because Steve doesn't like it but it has it's place. Right now there isn't a better way to give people HD video (Not everyone has the ability to, or wants to, stream it via online)
That said I will wait and see what they have to offer officially, although the back and forth her is entertaining. ;)
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
That said I will wait and see what they have to offer officially, although the back and forth her is entertaining. ;)
Based on the video I'd be betting the other way; that DVD SP will not get updated. It will be supported, but on the way out.
Physical media's relevancy is waning by the day. And if Apple has a "be where the puck will be" attitude then it's not going to put energy in propping up a dying war horse.
If you need a one-off Blu-Ray disc you can already out put to Blu-Ray via Compressor then burn via Toast. I can see Apple declaring hard media dead before I see it enhancing support BD-R.
jwp1964
Sep 18, 11:10 PM
Please Apple put out a new 12" or smaller notebook and I'm in! My iBook is about to be 3 years old and it's time to upgrade.:D
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
CFreymarc
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
I'd rather buy like a tablet running a modified version of Windows 7 or something similar. Not an Android tablet. Unfortunately I don't think I've seen anything like that released :(
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
zap2
Apr 6, 04:22 PM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
Honestly, they aren't very comparable. Yes, the iPad takes the place of many people's general computing, but I couldn't survive well with just my iPad. My Air in the other hand does a great job replacing my 15" MBP.
Honestly, they aren't very comparable. Yes, the iPad takes the place of many people's general computing, but I couldn't survive well with just my iPad. My Air in the other hand does a great job replacing my 15" MBP.
BWhaler
Aug 26, 07:11 PM
Note: I believe I accidentally merged someone's (possibly a couple of people's) posts into BWhaler's post (3 above this post). Sorry. :o
jsw, thanks for merging my postings.
Didn't mean to spam the thread. (Just wasn't thinking...)
jsw, thanks for merging my postings.
Didn't mean to spam the thread. (Just wasn't thinking...)
DakotaGuy
Aug 11, 02:05 PM
The only way this iPhone or whatever it is called will be successful is if they team up with a carrier or carriers and offer promotions on it like all the other cell phone manufactures do. I am not sure about Europe or other parts of the world, but people are used to getting a decent phone for not much money either at their initial contract or every 2 years when the contract is up. Selling an unlocked phone at some outrageous price ($200-300) is not going to cut it when I can go down and get a decent phone for around $50 with rebates from the cell provider and whoever made the phone.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
Now I know there are plenty of people who would buy an Apple phone no matter the price, but if you are going to compete with companies like Motorola, Nokia, Samsung, etc. you have to work with carriers and provide great contract prices.
The whole CDMA v. GSM debate is kind of like the PowerPC v. x86 debate.lol Actually from everything I have read CDMA is actually the newer of the 2 technologies and actually has a lot of benefits over GSM. In then end however, both work fine. I think in the US you will find CDMA has a lot better coverage if you look at the coverage maps on the providers websites. With GSM you hit a lot of dead space especially in the rural areas. CDMA pretty much covers the entire US. Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
The Beatles
Apr 12, 02:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
Just picked up a Atrix 4G and on my way checked out the iPhone 4 - it looks decidedly antique and bland in front of the competition
If you're going to judge "looks," the Atrix looks (and feels) like cheap junk next to the iPhone. Just like practically every other Android phone on the market. The iPhone looks like a Rolex sitting next to the Casio of the Android offerings.
Enjoy the plastic. ;)
That's what I was think but decided, if that's his taste live and let live.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:22 AM
I still don't think this means new MacBook Airs in June. Can anyone really see Apple releasing new hardware before Lion is released?
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
I bet you that you'll see Air's refresh before June.
glassbathroom
Jul 28, 03:18 AM
It absolutely will!!! Leopard is just going to be mostly beneficial for dual-core machines. Read this article:
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
MOSR is always good for a laugh, but don't be fooled into believing any of it.
http://macosrumors.com/20060710A1.php
Leopard sounds FAST!
MOSR is always good for a laugh, but don't be fooled into believing any of it.
teme
Sep 19, 03:45 AM
PowerBook G5 by the holidays.
I wish this board would block automatically "PowerBook G5" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
I wish this board would block automatically "PowerBook G5" and replace it with "************" so this tired so-called-joke would end someday.
Bill Gates
Aug 6, 01:53 PM
Domain Name: MAC-PRO.COM
epitaphic
Aug 18, 06:09 AM
A whole 9 months? Those systems are supposed to last four years.
~Shard~
Jul 14, 02:37 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Silentwave
Jul 15, 03:29 AM
10. Reasonably priced. Check out current PC boxes!
You know the more I think about it the more I question Apple's ability to make anything with a Xeon particularly cheap. I've been pricing all sorts of Dell workstations with the 5100 series Xeon-Woodcrest cores... even the single chip versions are not cheap. Granted, they may have inflated prices due to targeting at the large business market, but still they wouldn't be cheap. We'll see, but the more I think about it maybe we will see Conroe at the low end.
You know the more I think about it the more I question Apple's ability to make anything with a Xeon particularly cheap. I've been pricing all sorts of Dell workstations with the 5100 series Xeon-Woodcrest cores... even the single chip versions are not cheap. Granted, they may have inflated prices due to targeting at the large business market, but still they wouldn't be cheap. We'll see, but the more I think about it maybe we will see Conroe at the low end.
jholzner
Aug 7, 06:00 PM
Time Machine won't mean much when the HD fails. Back that azz up!
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.
I keep reading stuff like this. I don't think Time Machine works with the reagular harddrive. You have to use it with an external drive.