kalsta
May 3, 11:27 AM
That's sort of like asking, "aside from saving lives, what makes vaccines so great?" Base-10 is exactly what makes metric superior. Having a system of units based entirely on decimals is extremely powerful. You can convert between units simply by moving a decimal point, express very small/large numbers in scientific notation, and clearly see the greater of two numbers with precision clearly expressed.
For example, which is greater? 5/16 or 7/18
Nicely put. Not only that, but there are some pretty neat relationships between different types of units, where one can be derived from another. For example, one litre of water weighs 1 kg and is contained within a 10 x 10 x 10 cm volume. That makes for some relatively simple mental conversions if you're ever stuck without your iPhone unit-conversion app one day. :)
For a country that prides itself on technological advancement, I find it truly perplexing that the USA can't fully embrace so brilliant a system.
Sure, change is painful… It's a bit like getting into cold water. But the best way is just to jump in and get it over and done with quickly, like Australia did back in the 70s.
Stop dabbling your toes in and fart-arsing around America! Just dive in and join the rest of the world! The water is great once you get used to it.
For example, which is greater? 5/16 or 7/18
Nicely put. Not only that, but there are some pretty neat relationships between different types of units, where one can be derived from another. For example, one litre of water weighs 1 kg and is contained within a 10 x 10 x 10 cm volume. That makes for some relatively simple mental conversions if you're ever stuck without your iPhone unit-conversion app one day. :)
For a country that prides itself on technological advancement, I find it truly perplexing that the USA can't fully embrace so brilliant a system.
Sure, change is painful… It's a bit like getting into cold water. But the best way is just to jump in and get it over and done with quickly, like Australia did back in the 70s.
Stop dabbling your toes in and fart-arsing around America! Just dive in and join the rest of the world! The water is great once you get used to it.
eric_n_dfw
Aug 7, 01:52 PM
Excellent. Now it's time to wait for the sub-$2000 "Pro" desktop announcement. There's a suspicious gap in their lineup. Mac Pro Cube (http://macprocube.com), perhaps?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. (although the Mac Pro is VERY tempting right now.)
I was thinking exactly the same thing. (although the Mac Pro is VERY tempting right now.)
antic
Apr 24, 04:44 AM
Ok, I'll try this question, which is a fair question...............
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
In the not too distant future we will be getting convertible iMac's. You have all seen the patents that Apple have applied for, where the screen tilts into a more horizontal position on your desk and is usable as a touch screen device.
When in this mode the screen will be a lot closer to your eyes and would greatly benefit from being higher resolution
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
In the not too distant future we will be getting convertible iMac's. You have all seen the patents that Apple have applied for, where the screen tilts into a more horizontal position on your desk and is usable as a touch screen device.
When in this mode the screen will be a lot closer to your eyes and would greatly benefit from being higher resolution
DavidLeblond
May 4, 02:53 PM
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
grapes911
May 2, 08:02 PM
I understand the benefits of the SI system. I honestly think it's a better system and we should use it. That being said, I don't like change. Heck, many people don't like change. I understand our system. I know when I've driven about 10 miles. I'd struggle guessing when I've driven 10 kilometers. Why change now?
And fyi, we actually use United States customary units, which are very close to imperial units.
And fyi, we actually use United States customary units, which are very close to imperial units.
Al Coholic
Apr 25, 09:34 AM
Jobs reportedly responded, turning the tables...
LOL!
Yep, them tables sure were turned because the CEO is in the trenches blessing every line of iOS code that goes into every product. Steve knows best. Rumor dispelled. Next item.
Seriously... the audacity of Apple in this day and age is mind-boggling. Everything they do lately seems to be a PR nightmare just waiting to happen.
LOL!
Yep, them tables sure were turned because the CEO is in the trenches blessing every line of iOS code that goes into every product. Steve knows best. Rumor dispelled. Next item.
Seriously... the audacity of Apple in this day and age is mind-boggling. Everything they do lately seems to be a PR nightmare just waiting to happen.
dhc
Nov 26, 10:47 AM
I see this being used as the interface remote for iTV. As a full-blown PDA device, no.
I think this is likely, too, though I'm sure it would have additional functionality that has yet been discussed.
I think this is likely, too, though I'm sure it would have additional functionality that has yet been discussed.
applefan27073
Apr 24, 05:01 PM
WOW!
This would be AWESOME!
I can't imagine my 27" iMac with the same resolution as an iPhone 4!:eek:
This said, it could potentially make macs more expensive in the future.....:(
Well Done Apple! You've done it again!
This would be AWESOME!
I can't imagine my 27" iMac with the same resolution as an iPhone 4!:eek:
This said, it could potentially make macs more expensive in the future.....:(
Well Done Apple! You've done it again!
Nightarchaon
Apr 23, 04:34 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
pmz
May 4, 03:06 PM
i intend to get mine on a disc rather then a download.
Why can't you just download it and back it up on a USB key, or a thousand USB keys?
Give me one good reason why you can't do that. If you're posting on Macrumors you have enough bandwidth to get it, just may have to wait a few minutes.
Why can't you just download it and back it up on a USB key, or a thousand USB keys?
Give me one good reason why you can't do that. If you're posting on Macrumors you have enough bandwidth to get it, just may have to wait a few minutes.
aptar
Sep 16, 07:25 PM
Ok people, how's this? I ordered a 17" MBP on Sep 8. I upgraded the ram and hard drive. It was supposed to ship yesterday, the 15th.
I checked my order status today and the ship date has changed to October 2! I also received an e-mail from Apple stating that there were unexpected delays.
I held out hoping for a C2D but broke down and bought on the 8th. I was all excited that it was going to ship yesterday. I don't even care so much about a C2D, I just want my Mac. But here's hoping anyway.
Just wanted to add, for everyone reading a lot into shipping dates etc., I ordered mine on Sep 11 and got the notice of delays, then notice it was shpped out today (was planning on cancelling after this news).
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?
I checked my order status today and the ship date has changed to October 2! I also received an e-mail from Apple stating that there were unexpected delays.
I held out hoping for a C2D but broke down and bought on the 8th. I was all excited that it was going to ship yesterday. I don't even care so much about a C2D, I just want my Mac. But here's hoping anyway.
Just wanted to add, for everyone reading a lot into shipping dates etc., I ordered mine on Sep 11 and got the notice of delays, then notice it was shpped out today (was planning on cancelling after this news).
Now, it will probably be around the 25th before I get, and I won't open it, but considering I have upgrades (so customization = no return) how hard do you guys think it would be for me to exchange it for an updated one?
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
aohus
Apr 18, 04:53 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.
Check your sources before trying to 'correct' someone. You just got outcorrected buddy.
Seeing how ridiculous this lawsuit is, I think LG should sue all smartphone makers that have a capacitive touch display on their phones. LG was the first to do it with the LG Prada. I think they have a case :P /sarcasm.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.
Check your sources before trying to 'correct' someone. You just got outcorrected buddy.
Seeing how ridiculous this lawsuit is, I think LG should sue all smartphone makers that have a capacitive touch display on their phones. LG was the first to do it with the LG Prada. I think they have a case :P /sarcasm.
JAT
Apr 25, 11:24 AM
Well, I think it's great - I have just been able to track business mileage accurately, even when I have lost the exact date and route - I also can retrace my steps from that holiday 8 months ago where I went to a really nice place and forgot the name of it.
Neither of those uses is supported by the information in question.
Neither of those uses is supported by the information in question.
Multimedia
Aug 4, 07:29 PM
The company that really deserves criticism is intuit. They recently released quicken 2007 and it was not UB. They were releasing a new product and they chose to ignore intel Mac users. Makes you wonder if they are going to stay in the mac market at all. Maybe in the future they will just recommend running parallel and windows, to use quicken on an intel mac.That version of Quicken doesn't run fast enough in Rosetta? Seems like it would. :confused: :eek:
roadbloc
Apr 26, 04:31 PM
Fourth, these numbers are for the US only. The worldwide picture is very different.
You do realise that America is the country where iOS is most used, right?
You do realise that America is the country where iOS is most used, right?
Eidorian
Jul 22, 11:14 PM
Maybe the low end MacBook will keep Yonah and get a price drop, while the higher end MacBook, black and white, will get Merom. That might lead to the most sales, to both those looking for a cheaper MacBook, and those waiting for Merom.I don't think Apple should divide a single line between Core Duo and Core 2 Duo. The average idiot customer won't be able to conprehend why Merom is performs better at the same clock speed as Yonah. Between two entirely separate product lines it's not a problem. Unless you start throwing in products with Yonah/Merom at the same clock speed. Watch those heads spin.
ChazUK
Apr 18, 05:11 PM
The galaxy tab looks like a cheap knockoff of the 3G, look at the pics comparing them in the article. As I stated, at first look my mum thought the samsung was an iPhone. To the general public they look extremely similar, thus why this is happening.
Despite the design differences mentioned earlier and massive difference in size they're identical then?
What would you and Leguna have Samsung do to the Galaxy Tab to make it less "identical"?
Despite the design differences mentioned earlier and massive difference in size they're identical then?
What would you and Leguna have Samsung do to the Galaxy Tab to make it less "identical"?
PeterQVenkman
Apr 25, 10:34 AM
News Flash: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
Here is how your quote appears on the iOS:
News: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
;)
Here is how your quote appears on the iOS:
News: You just lied about Steve Jobs.
;)
Zeos
Nov 2, 02:48 PM
We use Sophos at work and love it! Can't wait to start using it at home too.
UPDATE: Nevermind. What a pain. It kills my Time Machine backups and freezes my computer.
UPDATE: Nevermind. What a pain. It kills my Time Machine backups and freezes my computer.
bursty
Aug 7, 02:24 PM
I absolutely cannot believe airport and bluetooth are still options on the Pros. They are standard on EVERY other model. What the hell, Apple?
onigami
May 6, 02:10 AM
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
LagunaSol
Apr 7, 04:51 PM
I'm not rooting for MS' demise -- far from it.
I am. Microsoft was the biggest barrier to technological innovation over the past couple of decades. I would be happy to see them absent from the new mobile computing OS world. Let them make apps. :)
I am. Microsoft was the biggest barrier to technological innovation over the past couple of decades. I would be happy to see them absent from the new mobile computing OS world. Let them make apps. :)
opeter
May 6, 02:53 AM
Actually you all forget something: Windows 8 (or whatever it will be) is being made for ARM too ... :)