ender land
Apr 10, 10:54 AM
For the record, I am sad that 2 is winning (or even close) to 288. But it does help explain one thing - a reason why so many people I try to tutor/help with math cannot seem to understand basic algebra operations is because nearly 50% of people do not understand order of operations (this was roughly the same percentage on the physics poll linked to earlier) :(
No wonder people have so much trouble with doing algebra correctly :eek:
No wonder people have so much trouble with doing algebra correctly :eek:
jholzner
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
Both the iMac and the MBP have been out longer than the Mini. The MBP has received slight CPU updates but the iMac has been out going on 8 months with no update at all.
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
Both the iMac and the MBP have been out longer than the Mini. The MBP has received slight CPU updates but the iMac has been out going on 8 months with no update at all.
the vj
Apr 18, 03:13 PM
So Ford and Sony and Boing will suit everyone for making products that looks and works like theirs? Just to give a wild example.
linuxcooldude
Apr 22, 01:41 PM
Half of their profit comes from the sale of one device. Say that the iPhone 6 was a flop, imagine having to tell your investors you're losing 50% projected profit nearly overnight.
I would not think it would be fair comparing cell phones to computers as their designed for much different markets. As more adults own cell phones then computers you would expect higher profits off of it. Apple was doing quite well even before they entered the phone market.
A more realistic comparison would be phone to phone or computer to computer.
I would not think it would be fair comparing cell phones to computers as their designed for much different markets. As more adults own cell phones then computers you would expect higher profits off of it. Apple was doing quite well even before they entered the phone market.
A more realistic comparison would be phone to phone or computer to computer.
kre62
Apr 18, 04:32 PM
You are crazy. If anything, this might indicate that iPhone 5 will be delayed for a year or two. Apple will have to build it's own factories for LCD panels, RAM and flash memory chips.
If they keep using Samsung...
I'm suggesting they may not be.
If they keep using Samsung...
I'm suggesting they may not be.
Eldiablojoe
May 5, 01:51 PM
Thou incessant need for sandwiches tis why thou dost not �get lucky."
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
'Twould 'splain me predicament well, as I was certain 'tweren't me grace, charm, good looks, manners, nor bedchamber prowess 'twere lacking.
lucabrasi
Mar 30, 06:04 PM
Will this work on the 2011 mbp's?
I sure hope so, downloading now to try but it's coming rather slowly...
I sure hope so, downloading now to try but it's coming rather slowly...
iliketyla
Mar 29, 01:46 PM
Yeah, but you have to think that Apple also sells outside the US. And then their products would be more expensive worldwide. I would not pay a premium to have a product that was built in the US. And I don't think the Europeans or Asians would either, to be honest.
All the companies competing with Apple would have to do the same, otherwise Apple could never come even close to competitors' prices.
There is nothing wrong with companies using resources abroad. It's called specialization. Why produce something for more money and less efficiently when it can be done better and cheaper elsewhere?
I avoid most american made products, half of them are crap. Prime examples are the cars made by Chrysler and GM between 2000-2008. This however are drastically improving though, not sure if we (Americans) could produce all of these things with taxes, restrictions, trade barriers etc. I am sure there are very good reasons why the parts are made there and not here. Plus there is a plethora of unknown pollution aspects of producing tech products. Tree hugger's would freak
You guys got me there, don't really have an answer for that one. I wasn't aware that other countries looked down on products manufactured here, that's a shame.
:(
Well hopefully the companies that manufacture products here step their game up in the near future!
All the companies competing with Apple would have to do the same, otherwise Apple could never come even close to competitors' prices.
There is nothing wrong with companies using resources abroad. It's called specialization. Why produce something for more money and less efficiently when it can be done better and cheaper elsewhere?
I avoid most american made products, half of them are crap. Prime examples are the cars made by Chrysler and GM between 2000-2008. This however are drastically improving though, not sure if we (Americans) could produce all of these things with taxes, restrictions, trade barriers etc. I am sure there are very good reasons why the parts are made there and not here. Plus there is a plethora of unknown pollution aspects of producing tech products. Tree hugger's would freak
You guys got me there, don't really have an answer for that one. I wasn't aware that other countries looked down on products manufactured here, that's a shame.
:(
Well hopefully the companies that manufacture products here step their game up in the near future!
thisisahughes
Mar 29, 09:25 AM
Dang... I feel like $80 a month is a LOT of money for 1TB of space. Especially when you can pay $70 ONCE and get your own 1TB drive.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822324041&cm_re=1tb-_-22-324-041-_-Product
Of course there are many benefits of having your data "in the cloud," but I think their prices are way too high.
I'm waiting for this. http://www.lacie.com/us/technologies/technology.htm?id=10039
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822324041&cm_re=1tb-_-22-324-041-_-Product
Of course there are many benefits of having your data "in the cloud," but I think their prices are way too high.
I'm waiting for this. http://www.lacie.com/us/technologies/technology.htm?id=10039
Aldyn
Aug 4, 09:07 AM
ug, i just really hope that the imac is updated soon. i've waited all summer for the imac to be updated, and it still hasnt -- i have no computer for school this year as of now, and i'm just praying apple updates the imac before mid august. so i can have one ordered and at my house before school starts. :mad:
rdowns
Apr 14, 09:44 AM
Long and very interesting article on taxes. Very good read. (http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-17350-9_things_the_rich_dont_want_you_to_know_about_taxes.html)
As millions of Americans prepare to file their annual taxes, they do so in an environment of media-perpetuated tax myths. Here are a few points about taxes and the economy that you may not know, to consider as you prepare to file your taxes. (All figures are inflation-adjusted.)
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That�s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don�t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes.
The 2004 American Jobs Creation Act, which passed with bipartisan support, allowed more than 800 companies to bring profits that were untaxed but overseas back to the United States. Instead of paying the usual 35 percent tax, the companies paid just 5.25 percent.
The companies said bringing the money home��repatriating� it, they called it�would mean lots of jobs. Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican, put the figure at 660,000 new jobs.
Pfizer, the drug company, was the biggest beneficiary. It brought home $37 billion, saving $11 billion in taxes. Almost immediately it started firing people. Since the law took effect, Pfizer has let 40,000 workers go. In all, it appears that at least 100,000 jobs were destroyed.
As millions of Americans prepare to file their annual taxes, they do so in an environment of media-perpetuated tax myths. Here are a few points about taxes and the economy that you may not know, to consider as you prepare to file your taxes. (All figures are inflation-adjusted.)
The Internal Revenue Service issues an annual report on the 400 highest income-tax payers. In 1961, there were 398 taxpayers who made $1 million or more, so I compared their income tax burdens from that year to 2007.
Despite skyrocketing incomes, the federal tax burden on the richest 400 has been slashed, thanks to a variety of loopholes, allowable deductions and other tools. The actual share of their income paid in taxes, according to the IRS, is 16.6 percent. Adding payroll taxes barely nudges that number.
Compare that to the vast majority of Americans, whose share of their income going to federal taxes increased from 13.1 percent in 1961 to 22.5 percent in 2007.
(By the way, during seven of the eight George W. Bush years, the IRS report on the top 400 taxpayers was labeled a state secret, a policy that the Obama administration overturned almost instantly after his inauguration.)
A corporate tax rate that is too low actually destroys jobs. That�s because a higher tax rate encourages businesses (who don�t want to pay taxes) to keep the profits in the business and reinvest, rather than pull them out as profits and have to pay high taxes.
The 2004 American Jobs Creation Act, which passed with bipartisan support, allowed more than 800 companies to bring profits that were untaxed but overseas back to the United States. Instead of paying the usual 35 percent tax, the companies paid just 5.25 percent.
The companies said bringing the money home��repatriating� it, they called it�would mean lots of jobs. Sen. John Ensign, the Nevada Republican, put the figure at 660,000 new jobs.
Pfizer, the drug company, was the biggest beneficiary. It brought home $37 billion, saving $11 billion in taxes. Almost immediately it started firing people. Since the law took effect, Pfizer has let 40,000 workers go. In all, it appears that at least 100,000 jobs were destroyed.
sth
Apr 20, 02:08 AM
People underestimate how big of a change the 3GS was on the hardware side. It was based on a whole different architecture (ARM Cortex A8 CPU + PowerVR SGX535 GPU, same as the later A4-based devices but at a lower clock speed).
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:31 PM
Ok, so you don't know how jailbreaking works. Here's the deal:
Jailbreakers find a flaw in the OS and find a way to break in. That same flaw could be used by hackers to attack my non-jailbroken phone.
So Apple has to fix that hole to protect me. That has the side effect of not making the jailbreak anymore, but what do you want them to do? They have to protect me, the customer, when they find a security flaw. Right?
So that's what they do. Anyone who argues that Apple should just leave secuity holes in their OS isn't really being realistic.
While I agree in a sense, it's commonly known that there's no way to plug every hole, so you're scooping out water from a sinking ship with a cup. Every iOS device has been jailbroken since release, many several times using several exploits. There will never be a day when a software company will be smarter than the hacking community... software companies can't afford to buy them all :-)
Jailbreakers find a flaw in the OS and find a way to break in. That same flaw could be used by hackers to attack my non-jailbroken phone.
So Apple has to fix that hole to protect me. That has the side effect of not making the jailbreak anymore, but what do you want them to do? They have to protect me, the customer, when they find a security flaw. Right?
So that's what they do. Anyone who argues that Apple should just leave secuity holes in their OS isn't really being realistic.
While I agree in a sense, it's commonly known that there's no way to plug every hole, so you're scooping out water from a sinking ship with a cup. Every iOS device has been jailbroken since release, many several times using several exploits. There will never be a day when a software company will be smarter than the hacking community... software companies can't afford to buy them all :-)
Dumbledorelives
Mar 26, 11:36 PM
You're right about sales and its still very popular but to keep up with the competition they need to release one every year and maybe even sooner if they can IMO.
Android and win mobile come out with new phones every few months and lots of better hardware and other stuff trying to take away from the iphone.
They're flooding the market with cheaper and more powerfull smartphones, the longer Apple takes the more marketshare they will lose.
No, they come out with new phones every WEEK, and you actually mean "cheaper and ********". This is not coming from a fanboy, I own and use daily an android device.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
Android and win mobile come out with new phones every few months and lots of better hardware and other stuff trying to take away from the iphone.
They're flooding the market with cheaper and more powerfull smartphones, the longer Apple takes the more marketshare they will lose.
No, they come out with new phones every WEEK, and you actually mean "cheaper and ********". This is not coming from a fanboy, I own and use daily an android device.
I would very highly doubt if they actually delayed the release. Techcrunch doesn't have an amazing track record, if I remember right.
ravenvii
Jul 29, 11:34 PM
The Apple iPhone would have to be better in functionality than a Blackberry to be considered useful, unless they can work out a better input device method or utilize Microsoft's Vista speech recognition program.
Hurray! Exactly what I'm thinking.
If Apple accomplishes this, I'll sell my Blackberry and buy Apple's phone in a flash.
But please, no speech recnogization... have you seen Microsoft's demo of their technology? Hilarious.
Hurray! Exactly what I'm thinking.
If Apple accomplishes this, I'll sell my Blackberry and buy Apple's phone in a flash.
But please, no speech recnogization... have you seen Microsoft's demo of their technology? Hilarious.
jayhawk69
Mar 26, 10:06 PM
A new ios update is like getiting a new device so i hope itis amazing and is a major revamp
VenusianSky
Nov 3, 01:28 PM
I may get one if I happen to come upon a gift card, or if they show up on ebay at a cheaper price.
reflex
Jul 22, 11:43 AM
Not those competing with the MacBook.
A quick search at CompUSA reveals that every manufacturer (as well as Dell, obviously not represented) have Core Duo machines in competition with the MacBook's price and size.
Every pc laptop being sold at a lower price than the MacBook is also competing with the Macbook. Some people look at price before features.
A quick search at CompUSA reveals that every manufacturer (as well as Dell, obviously not represented) have Core Duo machines in competition with the MacBook's price and size.
Every pc laptop being sold at a lower price than the MacBook is also competing with the Macbook. Some people look at price before features.
Rocketman
Nov 26, 12:23 PM
700 MHz processor equivalent
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
I think a successful device would need
0.7 GHz processor equivalent
16 GB flash
60 GB HD storage
4 hours of battery life playing an iTunes movie
12 hours as a remote
estimated cost to consumer:
included with iTV breakout box. $500
included with HDMI widescreenTV's $1500
separately as a "True video iPod" $300
Rocketman
16 GB storage
256 MB ram
3 hours of battery life (1.5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $999.
I think a successful device would need
1.2 GHz processor equivalent
80 GB storage
1 GB RAM
8 hours of battery life (5 playing an iTunes movie)
estimated cost to consumer $699.
I think a successful device would need
0.7 GHz processor equivalent
16 GB flash
60 GB HD storage
4 hours of battery life playing an iTunes movie
12 hours as a remote
estimated cost to consumer:
included with iTV breakout box. $500
included with HDMI widescreenTV's $1500
separately as a "True video iPod" $300
Rocketman
toujames
Apr 21, 11:22 PM
Steve: "Introducing, the new iRack!" :D
djpic
May 6, 06:49 AM
If they do that, and will no longer buy apple computers. I may keep the iPhone but no more iMacs for me. Also with this, I will seriously start conidering selling my stock. Apple has tried to use a custom processor before, and looked how that turned out. There is no way they can catch up to Intel's and AMD's experience making chips. Intel I believe are some the best and AMD is right there with them. All I could see happening is performace dropping and apple profit margins growing. I don't think this would be a smart move for apple, but what do I know, I am just a consumer.
I believe they are starting to move into the "I am big, I am selling a crap load of devices. I know what I am doing."
When they purchased ARM chip manufactures, I knew this is where they were going to be taking it. Just a matter of time.
-- Side note --
I am NOT completely against this, I just hope if they do make the move, I want to see benchmarks against Intel and AMD processors...if performance & relibility surpasses them, then I may reverse opinion....this is my intial reaction.
I believe they are starting to move into the "I am big, I am selling a crap load of devices. I know what I am doing."
When they purchased ARM chip manufactures, I knew this is where they were going to be taking it. Just a matter of time.
-- Side note --
I am NOT completely against this, I just hope if they do make the move, I want to see benchmarks against Intel and AMD processors...if performance & relibility surpasses them, then I may reverse opinion....this is my intial reaction.
NebulaClash
Apr 25, 08:58 AM
there's a big difference between the device knowing where it is/has been and that information actually being uploaded to "the mothership".
Correct, and that's why Steve is telling the truth unlike the trolls pretending this is an Apple conspiracy. That file is stuck on your hard disk and goes nowhere. Delete it and you don't even have that (as I did months ago when this story first broke). I tried the mapping tool and it won't work on my machine because consolidated.db cannot be found. Yet my iPhone works just fine, and Location Services works fine too.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
Correct, and that's why Steve is telling the truth unlike the trolls pretending this is an Apple conspiracy. That file is stuck on your hard disk and goes nowhere. Delete it and you don't even have that (as I did months ago when this story first broke). I tried the mapping tool and it won't work on my machine because consolidated.db cannot be found. Yet my iPhone works just fine, and Location Services works fine too.
Apple has never grabbed this information.
Android, on the other hand, exists so that it can serve advertiser's needs. Apple has been Opt In, but Android is Opt Out, which means your data gets transmitted to advertisers by default. You bet they track you on Droids. That's the entire business model.
davisjw
Aug 7, 05:43 PM
Time to sell the wife and kids...
Works4Me
Apr 21, 03:05 PM
totally gonna happen
It's totally maybe gonna happen! Seriously, I can see both pros and cons to this.
It's totally maybe gonna happen! Seriously, I can see both pros and cons to this.