brewser
Apr 7, 11:50 PM
This notion that Best Buy is the only one hoarding stock is typical of the stereotypical Apple fan. And once again, I've never bought Apple or Mac products at Best Buy because the staff are not knowledgeable in most cases, the same way I never bought a Mac at Circuit City for the short period they carried Macs.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
But which stores are well stocked the best with iPads?
See if you can guess. I'll give you a hint, it begins with an A.
Sure you can say, those are Apple's rules, deal with it, but that doesn't make it right.
The truth probably is that some Best Buys are probably near Walmarts and Targets so they don't want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks while Apple hoards stock at its stores. I'm sure none of them want to be out of stock for 2-3 weeks and suspect that Best Buy is the not the only offender of conserving stock due to Apple's inability to meet demand.
Not one of these chains wants to be known as the chain that didn't have iPads for 2-3 weeks giving consumers the impression they don't carry it anymore!
The only difference is Best Buy got CAUGHT!
I would bet that this directive came from corporate and applied to a limited number of stores that were faced with the possibility of being out of stock for an extended period of time.
People can conjecture here all they want, but no one really knows the details of Apple's supply promises vs. what it delivered with any of these chains.
You are an idiot to believe any of that. BB wants to save stock for their Sunday ads. That is the drive to bring customers in. They do this with any limited product. It's their nature. They need a certain number that matches their ad. They will tell you they are out of stock but they are waiting for Sunday.
calderone
Mar 25, 10:47 PM
This is known as a release candidate. No reason to be throwing around "Golden Master" at this point, it is clearly just confusing people.
Benjamins
Mar 31, 06:14 PM
I completely agree, but let's be honest, Apple and Microsoft fans are no different.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
true, but the smugness and self righteousness of Google fanboys are so much worse.
BlizzardBomb
Jul 27, 02:15 PM
Remember that the G5 is 64 bit. While the consumer apps may not be too directly affected at first, (speed increases, but nothing else), as more memory is required, 32 bit will hit a brick wall at 4GiB, whereas 64 bit can go along happily to 2,305,843,009,200,000,000GiB.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
But with only 2 RAM slots in most current Macs (apart from obviously the Power Mac G5 which has 64-bit processor anyway), getting past 4GB is basically impossible/ ridiculously expensive at the moment.
Realistically, it will take some time to get to that level, but with the last G5 supporting 16GiB, 32 then 64 wouldn't be too far off. within 10 years, I'm sure 1TiB will start to become common.
But with only 2 RAM slots in most current Macs (apart from obviously the Power Mac G5 which has 64-bit processor anyway), getting past 4GB is basically impossible/ ridiculously expensive at the moment.
vincenz
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
Looks like we'll be waiting in line in the cold instead of the heat. Can't really complain...
iWonderwhy
Mar 22, 07:25 PM
D.O.A.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
iOS 5 will only further put these wannabes back in their place.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 12:06 PM
Not as a separate thing. It's the grid IN COMBINATION with the other things that constitutes the trade dress.
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. Is the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
Then it sure doesn't apply to all models then if the trade dress claim is an AND'd combination. Is the trade dress claim only applicable to certain models in the ones listed in the complaint ?
Popeye206
Mar 31, 03:43 PM
Oh, Lordy! The Fandroids were always delusional, but reading some of these comments�this seems to have pushed them over the line into some sort of clinical psychosis.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
It's because they're learning that offering a commercial product like a college science project is good for developers, but stinks for consumers and the real world. Basically... Google is learning this too.
I've always believed that if Google doesn't start imposing some limits and "walls" the Android OS will get out of control and you'll have 20 versions of it out there all running in their own direction.
milo
Jul 27, 03:29 PM
Actually, the merom in not completely compatible with the yonah chips. There will have to be some redesign on Apple's part that is supposed to delay the new MBPs. This article somewhat explains it:
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
I don't know that I buy that, especially considering they have no source, and people have already done merom swaps on shipping machines. If there is an issue, I'd guess it's only an issue in the soldered version.
As far as the 2nd optical slot goes, don't you think it's a pain to have only a single drive?
And especially when a second one probably adds less than $50-$75 to the system cost to the customer? (And extra profit potential for Apple?)
Not really. My last machine had two, and I rarely used both. I think most people in the market for two optical drives are probably going to want the full pro tower anyway, and there's not that much profit from the second slot since most people will add the drive themselves instead of from Apple.
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development
But didn't MS sign a multiyear contract with apple committing to support?
I'm not sure why you're saying this price is way too low. The specs, so far as I can see, are quite similar to the current bottom-end iMac, which has an integrated screen, and it's price is only $300 more. It seems to me that this price is actually about right.
Also, I think that the name 'Mac' is a distinct possibility. Not saying I like it (or that I don't), or that it isn't simplistic, but I think that it's not unreasonable. FWIW, 'Mac Express' is nice, too, but I don't see Apple jumping on a name like that as quickly.
Maybe not way too low, but a bit low, especially when you compare specs to the $799 mini. The problem with MAC by itself as a name is that people will ask "what kind of mac" and the response is "Mac". It's a bad slapstick routine. It's like Ford selling a car called the Ford.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=249
I don't know that I buy that, especially considering they have no source, and people have already done merom swaps on shipping machines. If there is an issue, I'd guess it's only an issue in the soldered version.
As far as the 2nd optical slot goes, don't you think it's a pain to have only a single drive?
And especially when a second one probably adds less than $50-$75 to the system cost to the customer? (And extra profit potential for Apple?)
Not really. My last machine had two, and I rarely used both. I think most people in the market for two optical drives are probably going to want the full pro tower anyway, and there's not that much profit from the second slot since most people will add the drive themselves instead of from Apple.
MS will announce that they are dropping Mac development
But didn't MS sign a multiyear contract with apple committing to support?
I'm not sure why you're saying this price is way too low. The specs, so far as I can see, are quite similar to the current bottom-end iMac, which has an integrated screen, and it's price is only $300 more. It seems to me that this price is actually about right.
Also, I think that the name 'Mac' is a distinct possibility. Not saying I like it (or that I don't), or that it isn't simplistic, but I think that it's not unreasonable. FWIW, 'Mac Express' is nice, too, but I don't see Apple jumping on a name like that as quickly.
Maybe not way too low, but a bit low, especially when you compare specs to the $799 mini. The problem with MAC by itself as a name is that people will ask "what kind of mac" and the response is "Mac". It's a bad slapstick routine. It's like Ford selling a car called the Ford.
daneoni
Aug 27, 05:22 PM
I see where you're coming from.
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
...yeah no PowerBook G5 next tuesday?...say it aint so, say it aint so.
So does this mean there will be no Powerbook G5s next tuesday?
...yeah no PowerBook G5 next tuesday?...say it aint so, say it aint so.
whooleytoo
Sep 13, 07:22 AM
Man, I don't know why people keep saying this. On OS X, *all software utilizes the extra cores*. The only way it wouldn't is if you have less than 8 processes running, which I guarantee you that you don't. (System alone requires 20-30 processes to run.)
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
Actually, it's even less than 8 - as a process can have several threads each of which can be moved to idle processors. Safari alone on my Mac currently has 23 threads at the moment, my system overall 277.
chasemac
Aug 7, 07:00 PM
Yes, absolutely:
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don�t have to install separate applications for different machines. There�s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don�t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Excellent! Thanks for the info!:)
Enhanced 64-bit Support
Leopard delivers 64-bit power in one, universal OS. Now Cocoa and Carbon application frameworks, as well as graphics, scripting, and the rest of the system are all 64-bit. Leopard delivers 64-bit power to both Intel- and PowerPC-based Macs, so you don�t have to install separate applications for different machines. There�s only one version of Mac OS X, so you don�t need to maintain separate operating systems for different uses.
Bridge the Generation Gap
Now that the entire operating system is 64-bit, you can take full advantage of the Xeon chip in Mac Pro and Xserve. You get more processing power at up to 3.0GHz, without limiting your programs to command-line applications, servers, and computation engines. From G3 to Xeon, from MacBook to Xserve, there is just one Leopard.
Excellent! Thanks for the info!:)
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 9, 09:45 AM
I don't think 2IS is getting that IF Intel allowed Nvidia to continue making sandy bridge chipsets, Nvidia could've easily integrated a 320m successor into the south bridge. This would give you the best of both worlds, the downclocked Low-voltage Intel HD graphics when on battery or basic surfing, or the 320m successor in the south bridge when playing games or aperture photo editing. All this WITHOUT raising the motherboard chip count that putting a separate discrete (on it's own, not integrated into the chipset like 320m) would entail.
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
I thought the 320m was also integrated? Wouldn't that mean that would be your only graphics card were nvidia allowed to add them to sandy bridge? I don't see why you would have integrated intel hd 3000 along with an integrated 320m (or successor).
ChickenSwartz
Aug 7, 11:22 AM
Assuming they're released, they'd probably bring the Apple Store back online around 2:00pm.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
(They traditionally take it down during a keynote...)
The store is down.
lorductape
Nov 28, 06:27 PM
it's as I feared would happen after microsoft was stupid with the zune marketplace. but honestly, who didn't see this coming?
death to microsoft. this just adds another reason.
basically, this is something that microsoft probably did on purpose. It set a precident in the recording industry that companies will be required to match in order to get recording deals. its only $1 in the zunes case, but that's a significant amount when you think of the iPod's popularity. now it will be expected that EVERY online music store will do this.
it would just go to the company.
exactly! who does universal think they are???
what does microsoft think they were doing???
death to microsoft. this just adds another reason.
basically, this is something that microsoft probably did on purpose. It set a precident in the recording industry that companies will be required to match in order to get recording deals. its only $1 in the zunes case, but that's a significant amount when you think of the iPod's popularity. now it will be expected that EVERY online music store will do this.
it would just go to the company.
exactly! who does universal think they are???
what does microsoft think they were doing???
dethmaShine
Apr 19, 02:37 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes, which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
Multimedia
Jul 27, 11:48 PM
Ahh so many announcments !!! Kill me now ! I'm waiting for the end of august then I'm buying whatever I can get.You might want to make that til Tuesday September 12 when the Paris Apple Expo opens with an Apple keynote.
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
"Otellini said the company expects to ship its 1 millionth Core 2 Duo processor in a little less than seven weeks after launch. In comparison, it took Pentium a year to reach that level of ramp-up. (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/27/core2duo/index.php)"
Two million cores shipped by this time in September. Wow!
Ivan P
Apr 8, 02:25 AM
Well right now I'm looking at both their online stores. Both sites have the Apple TV @ $99, so... uh.. Lol.
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
Wait ... I don't think I mentioned Best Buy paying customers to buy Apple products. I don't fully understand your post :/
I think what they're saying is it costs Best Buy (and I guess other resellers) $90 for each AppleTV unit they order in - and they sell it for Apple's set price of $99, meaning they make a measly $9 profit from the sale of one unit. They didn't mean that they are selling the unit to the consumer themselves for $90.
Edit. Original poster replied saying the exact same thing
JeffreyGreen
Apr 25, 03:09 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don�t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
ImNoSuperMan
Aug 12, 04:29 AM
I don't believe the rumor - Steve wouldn't blab, he just wouldn't.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
Exactly the same reaction I had when I first read the rumor. It just doesnt sound like the Steve we know.
But who cares. I just want the iPhone to be launched asap. I really hope it`s unlocked GSM phone so that I can use it in my country. It`ll really suck if it`s USA only.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
Exactly the same reaction I had when I first read the rumor. It just doesnt sound like the Steve we know.
But who cares. I just want the iPhone to be launched asap. I really hope it`s unlocked GSM phone so that I can use it in my country. It`ll really suck if it`s USA only.
shawnce
Jul 14, 11:20 PM
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
law guy
Aug 6, 04:28 PM
As Apple applied for the trademark, it will not be approved.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
It is up to Apple how they want to proceed. A fight that can't win, no matter how much money they have.
Mac Pro has been the premier Mac dealer in the same county as Apple since 1988. Out of all the names for this new line of computers, why choose one that they know they cannot have.
We are already getting countless support calls for the macbook pro. It seems they assume we made them When we can't help them, they seem to get very upset.
Mac Pro is in a position to file for a court order not to release any computer that bears our name.
So get ready WWDC, we will be watching.
Mike Ajlouny
President
MAC-PRO.com
Mike - I'm sure Apple had their IP counsel do an IP search prior to deciding on any names and filing for registration. That is the first and most basic step and is not going going to escape the experienced folks at whatever large firm Apple is using for IP these days. A TM approval from the USPTO doesn't take long at all, 10 to 18 months. Are you operating under the impression that Apple's registration hasn't already been approved? Did you protest the trademark during the time provided for the filing of protests during the trademark registration process? If you've registered mac-pro in the past, did you follow all the guidelines (e.g. providing notice that you were using the term within 6 months of your approval to the USPTO or request a six month extension with USPTO, etc.) have you renewed the registration? If you did file, had it approved, provided the notices of use to the the USPTO, and protested and lost on Apple's application, a bid for a TRO will be interesting as - assuming that last list of events - there are no rights being infringed. Of course, I'm not an IP att'y and there's a long list of assumptions here, and I'm sure if you did have an issue, a post on the MR forum wouldn't be your means of pursuing it.
Bilbo63
Apr 19, 02:45 PM
Xerox's Star workstation was the first commercial implementation of the graphical user interface. The Star was introduced in 1981 and was the inspiration for the Mac and all the other GUIs that followed.
Thanks for posting that Yamcha. Xerox's engineers were seriously brilliant.
Edit... stripped out the images... no need to show them again. My bad.
Thanks for posting that Yamcha. Xerox's engineers were seriously brilliant.
Edit... stripped out the images... no need to show them again. My bad.
QCassidy352
Jul 20, 03:53 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
What? Apple*differentiates the XServes by having them 1U thick and rackmountable. One buys a rackmount server not because it's faster but because it's smaller and fits in a rack.
yeah, what he said. Apple does not have to distinguish powermacs from servers with processor speeds. People (businesses) who need servers are not going to buy powermacs to do the job even if they are a little bit faster or cheaper; they are going to buy real rack-mounted servers.
