roland.g
Aug 11, 02:16 PM
True, but 64-bit in a 32-bit envrionment is still going to run only at 32-bit or not at all. But mlrproducts is right, they do have a while.
it doesn't matter if you have a 64-bit processor and OS, you have to have 4Gb of RAM to run in 64-bit.
it doesn't matter if you have a 64-bit processor and OS, you have to have 4Gb of RAM to run in 64-bit.
%2BDisney.jpg "Magic Kingdom Trolley (c)")
WildCowboy
Aug 3, 11:23 PM
are people not expecting merom to go immediately into the macbook as well? i don't see a reason for apple to purposely gimp their best-selling notebook when a merom chip is supposed to cost the same as its yonah counterpart.
Why not? They did it with the iBooks for quite some time...
Why not? They did it with the iBooks for quite some time...
Jbgloss
Apr 21, 09:46 PM
I think the iMac will take care of gamers and builders.. the mac pro is NOT a gaming device, it is a high class workstation that is designed for use with using and manipulating multi-threaded pro and audio apps.. Personally, I could care less about a new case design.. right now I just care that I can prolong the 6-core machine I have now.. and for my purposes, which are far and few between, the 6 core does everything I throw at it for a DAILY, email based machine.. I use it for dvd encoding, NO VIDEO EDITING(this area does not interest me one iota). If anything, i would use it for photography and everyday stuff, such as internet surfing, researching, writing books, etc.
I only got this for its expandability, as I despise an all in one machine like the iMac - if the screen goes, the whole thing needs to be replaced or repaired.. all in one desktops such as the imac are a dead end as one can't upgrade the processor easily if not at all..
Everyone please excuse me for my attitudes, I am going through a real tough time right now and have 103 temperature at the moment.
AMEN - 2 months into my Hex 3.33 I do minimal FCP and love this machine....I do just about what you do writing, ton's of internet work, my podcast, etc.... Same thoughts as you....
DRINK a lot of fluids bro and get well
JB
I only got this for its expandability, as I despise an all in one machine like the iMac - if the screen goes, the whole thing needs to be replaced or repaired.. all in one desktops such as the imac are a dead end as one can't upgrade the processor easily if not at all..
Everyone please excuse me for my attitudes, I am going through a real tough time right now and have 103 temperature at the moment.
AMEN - 2 months into my Hex 3.33 I do minimal FCP and love this machine....I do just about what you do writing, ton's of internet work, my podcast, etc.... Same thoughts as you....
DRINK a lot of fluids bro and get well
JB
Gatorman
Jul 21, 03:31 PM
I'm just burnin' doin' the Merom Dance!
Sing it with me, now! :D
Regardless of what happens on the 7th, I'm ordering a MBP. Though, things look like they're shaping up for that! Apple would be nuts not to put that chip in the MBP now that it's shipping.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Can't wait....
Sing it with me, now! :D
Regardless of what happens on the 7th, I'm ordering a MBP. Though, things look like they're shaping up for that! Apple would be nuts not to put that chip in the MBP now that it's shipping.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed! Can't wait....
ihaveNFC
May 7, 03:22 PM
Before the nostalgia wore off? You must mean novelty...
Yes, you're right. Novelty, not nostalgia. My brain is a little fried afta writin my dissertation.
Yes, you're right. Novelty, not nostalgia. My brain is a little fried afta writin my dissertation.
ravenvii
May 3, 09:23 PM
EDIT: Read above. Don't panic got it.
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:30 AM
what are the odds that apple, in order to reinvent the mobile experience, has teamed with a voip chip maker etc. to provide mobile voice and video (ichat mobile) over IP?
this somehow makes more sense than co-branding a unit or "piggy backing" onto current carriers... then again, failure on this scale would be the biggest "jump the shark" moment in their history.
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
this somehow makes more sense than co-branding a unit or "piggy backing" onto current carriers... then again, failure on this scale would be the biggest "jump the shark" moment in their history.
You'd have to have an open WiFi network anywhere you wanted to make a phone call. WiFi is not NEAR the coverage level of cell service. In my opinion, VOIP cell phones are way overhyped. When WiBro is widespred and ubiquitous, then maybe.
iTravis
Mar 26, 11:49 PM
As long as I can upgrade at the lowest 2 year price (of course ;)) in June/July, a fall release
wouldn't be that bad.
I voted negative but now that I think about it, this could be a good thing!
IF THEY release something truly "magical" in the Fall (use this time wisely if true).
A larger screen, faster (dual) processor and a new camera (not as dire), will get me by until the Fall.
New notification system PLEASE!!! :apple:
wouldn't be that bad.
I voted negative but now that I think about it, this could be a good thing!
IF THEY release something truly "magical" in the Fall (use this time wisely if true).
A larger screen, faster (dual) processor and a new camera (not as dire), will get me by until the Fall.
New notification system PLEASE!!! :apple:
trip1ex
Apr 23, 05:28 PM
I could take this or leave it at this stage.
Would rather have upgradeable hard drive and even upgradeable gpu instead of twice resolution.
Would rather have anti-glare option too.
But if this means some sort of resolution independence then I'm all for it now.
Would rather have upgradeable hard drive and even upgradeable gpu instead of twice resolution.
Would rather have anti-glare option too.
But if this means some sort of resolution independence then I'm all for it now.
H00513R
May 7, 10:10 AM
I don't want more people bogging down the system. I want them to improve their mail service with tagging, grouping and searching options. Oh, and I want .mac back! :)
mojohanna
Jul 30, 09:12 AM
Why on earth should Apple "go with" a company like Verizon or anybody else?
Just sell the phone unlocked and let anybody with GSM service pop their sim into their iPhone. Perhaps make an unlocked CDMA phone as well.
If they have it right with this phone and there is then therefor the sort of demand for it that we have seen for the iPod, the providers will be forced to offer it according to how Apple dictates (can put music on using computer, etc.), rather than disabling the phone to suit the company's marketing schemes, and the providers will offer it at a discount to attain/retain customers.
You guys seem to think that the service providers dictate what phones we use. Beyond having to be compatible with the network that we choose to use (GSM or CDMA), they don't. I haven't gotten a phone from a service provider for years as I need a phone that I can pop a sim into that is appropriate for whatever country I am in.
I'm with you I think this is the most likely scenario for a release of an Apple branded phone. That way you will get all of the cool features available to you and YOU can pick the carrier you want or the one that works best in your state, city, area.
Just sell the phone unlocked and let anybody with GSM service pop their sim into their iPhone. Perhaps make an unlocked CDMA phone as well.
If they have it right with this phone and there is then therefor the sort of demand for it that we have seen for the iPod, the providers will be forced to offer it according to how Apple dictates (can put music on using computer, etc.), rather than disabling the phone to suit the company's marketing schemes, and the providers will offer it at a discount to attain/retain customers.
You guys seem to think that the service providers dictate what phones we use. Beyond having to be compatible with the network that we choose to use (GSM or CDMA), they don't. I haven't gotten a phone from a service provider for years as I need a phone that I can pop a sim into that is appropriate for whatever country I am in.
I'm with you I think this is the most likely scenario for a release of an Apple branded phone. That way you will get all of the cool features available to you and YOU can pick the carrier you want or the one that works best in your state, city, area.
roland.g
May 4, 02:52 PM
I would get a new iMac now if I knew that Lion would run SL pricing at $29. Otherwise I will wait for a preload. But obviously pricing and a release date won't be forthcoming prior to WWDC at the earliest. Guess we will know more in about 5 weeks.
Neo Utopia
Apr 24, 07:08 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Can't wait, a MBA with double the res, drawl.
Can't wait, a MBA with double the res, drawl.
islanders
Jul 23, 11:01 PM
Not likely.
In the "old days" (i.e. pre-Intel) Apple could do this, keep selling outdated technology to clear out inventory before updating processors, graphics cards/chips, etc.
They had no other choice� g3 or g4.
But now that they're competing head-to-head with PC technology, this won't EVER happen. It was not accidental that Yonah debuted on MBP's before Dell, HP and Sony started selling them. No, Apple will have them out of the chute as soon as anyone else does (Intel probably won't give Apple first dibs this time - that was probably a Yonah bribe to get Apple to commit to Intel), which means there's no way we'll be waiting until Christmas (unless some production snafu makes EVERYONE wait that long.)
Announcement in August, shipping in September maybe?
:cool:
iBorg
September �maybe� is not to far from November!
Someone had to take a pragmatic position. Might as well be me.
Ok. Merom is going to happen for MBP September (maybe), October and Novermber (probably) December (maybe).
However, it has always been my conviction that not even Apple knows these exact dates. If sales are strong they put off updates, if they are slack they roll out new stuff.
This time Intel jumped the gun so Apple may take longer to respond.
In the "old days" (i.e. pre-Intel) Apple could do this, keep selling outdated technology to clear out inventory before updating processors, graphics cards/chips, etc.
They had no other choice� g3 or g4.
But now that they're competing head-to-head with PC technology, this won't EVER happen. It was not accidental that Yonah debuted on MBP's before Dell, HP and Sony started selling them. No, Apple will have them out of the chute as soon as anyone else does (Intel probably won't give Apple first dibs this time - that was probably a Yonah bribe to get Apple to commit to Intel), which means there's no way we'll be waiting until Christmas (unless some production snafu makes EVERYONE wait that long.)
Announcement in August, shipping in September maybe?
:cool:
iBorg
September �maybe� is not to far from November!
Someone had to take a pragmatic position. Might as well be me.
Ok. Merom is going to happen for MBP September (maybe), October and Novermber (probably) December (maybe).
However, it has always been my conviction that not even Apple knows these exact dates. If sales are strong they put off updates, if they are slack they roll out new stuff.
This time Intel jumped the gun so Apple may take longer to respond.
vand0576
Aug 11, 09:32 AM
If they are truly planning this for the MacBook, then they are surely planning to bump the iMac to this chip too or better the Conroe. They continually refer to the MacBook and iMac as their "consumer line". I have been planning to buy an iMac for some time now, and this is definately an upgrade I would like to see. I'm most likely waiting until after MacWorld Expo to see what updates they will have for the iMac. The chip should be upgraded much before then, but I bet by that time they will have a few more upgrades for the iMac.
Mac Pro and Xserve have the Xeon (Woodcrest).
MacBook Pro, MacBook, and iMac will be upgraded to the Core 2 Duo (Merom) with iMac possibly being Conroe.
Mac Mini will probably keep the Core Duo (Yonah).
This sounds perfectly reasonable. Things are definately more interesting with the Intel chips because they are being rolled out so fast, unlike the PowerPC chips from Freescale/Motorola. It has only been about 6-7 months since the Core Duo was unveiled, now Core Duo 2 is here. Since Apple prides themselves on using advanced hardware, it only makes sense that they should upgrade the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and iMac to the Core 2 Duo (iMac=Conroe), and continue to upgrade to the best available chips Intel is offering at the time (aside from the 'extreme' editions).
Mac Pro and Xserve have the Xeon (Woodcrest).
MacBook Pro, MacBook, and iMac will be upgraded to the Core 2 Duo (Merom) with iMac possibly being Conroe.
Mac Mini will probably keep the Core Duo (Yonah).
This sounds perfectly reasonable. Things are definately more interesting with the Intel chips because they are being rolled out so fast, unlike the PowerPC chips from Freescale/Motorola. It has only been about 6-7 months since the Core Duo was unveiled, now Core Duo 2 is here. Since Apple prides themselves on using advanced hardware, it only makes sense that they should upgrade the MacBook, MacBook Pro, and iMac to the Core 2 Duo (iMac=Conroe), and continue to upgrade to the best available chips Intel is offering at the time (aside from the 'extreme' editions).
aswitcher
Aug 7, 02:28 PM
Hmm... Cinema displays also got a bump.
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Oww.I saw the rpice drop but not the spec boost. I thought Apple was trying to clear older stock but now I think this is the new monitor and we caren't going to see one with an iSight built in. New iSight maybe...
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Oww.I saw the rpice drop but not the spec boost. I thought Apple was trying to clear older stock but now I think this is the new monitor and we caren't going to see one with an iSight built in. New iSight maybe...
davegoody
Apr 27, 02:57 AM
Some designs changes i'd like to see (all the rest i'm fine with):
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
How exactly is a PSU at the bottom going to aid cooling? Heat Rises . . . . so anything above the PSU gets even hotter, this is why traditionally PSUs are at the top of the case.
- Dust filters
- Thunderbolt ports, front and back (instead of one of the firewire ports)
- Usb 3.0 replacing usb 2.0 ports
- PSU on bottom to keep it cool
- HD's on bottom to keep them cool too
- At least one dedicated SSD bay
How exactly is a PSU at the bottom going to aid cooling? Heat Rises . . . . so anything above the PSU gets even hotter, this is why traditionally PSUs are at the top of the case.
Apple OC
May 2, 08:10 PM
Don't you guys in the great white north buy milk in bundles of 4 1 liter bags anyway. :p
B
usually 3 one litre bags ... for the price of 4
B
usually 3 one litre bags ... for the price of 4
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
Moyank24
May 2, 11:10 PM
Inzo
andy845
Mar 29, 09:27 AM
This was one qtr, not total devices or did I miss somthing?
overall figures at http://androidandme.com/2011/03/devices/android%E2%80%99s-market-share-depicted-with-a-whole-lot-of-colors/
This is the US market only.
I'm no android fan but don't think apple will be market leaders (by share) because the are not, and will not be.
overall figures at http://androidandme.com/2011/03/devices/android%E2%80%99s-market-share-depicted-with-a-whole-lot-of-colors/
This is the US market only.
I'm no android fan but don't think apple will be market leaders (by share) because the are not, and will not be.
maccompaq
Jan 5, 04:20 PM
With full respect for your decisions, if you'll pardon me, I think that's a little bit crackers. :D
How do you know if your machine isn't part of a botnet? Have you eschewed only AV and simply subsist on your router f/wall and software firewall? Only run as user not admin? None of the above? Something else?
I have a bunch of Windows and Mac computers in my house. Everything is backed up onto every computer. If I should ever get a virus, I would just go to another computer. The infected computer would be reformatted later without a worry about losing anything.
I would know immediately if ever infected by a botnet.
How do you know if your machine isn't part of a botnet? Have you eschewed only AV and simply subsist on your router f/wall and software firewall? Only run as user not admin? None of the above? Something else?
I have a bunch of Windows and Mac computers in my house. Everything is backed up onto every computer. If I should ever get a virus, I would just go to another computer. The infected computer would be reformatted later without a worry about losing anything.
I would know immediately if ever infected by a botnet.
Small White Car
Apr 26, 02:39 PM
Can the iPhone succeed when devs start to divert resources to Android development? Will the "cool" factor of owning an iPhone save it when the next "Angry Birds" type game is only available on Android?
That's a funny example you've got there since Angry Birds (one of the biggest success stories on any platform) has had extreme trouble figuring out how to earn money directly from Android users.
If THEY can't even do it easily then what does that mean for other Android developers?
That's a funny example you've got there since Angry Birds (one of the biggest success stories on any platform) has had extreme trouble figuring out how to earn money directly from Android users.
If THEY can't even do it easily then what does that mean for other Android developers?
SeaFox
Nov 26, 06:02 PM
2002 called, they want their platform idea back. :rolleyes:
Seriously, does anyone here even hear about tablet PCs anymore? Nope.
What happened with Microsoft Origami? Nothing.
What are people wanting to use for computing on the go? A smart phone.
Apple didn't get involved when this was "the rage" and I couldn't be happier. The idea never became anything more than a niche product in health care, manufacturing, and perhaps education. It bombed. And Apple wasn't left holding the bag on a bunch of unsold product. Another "failure in this companies beleaguered history" as it would be used as fodder in the press.
Seriously, does anyone here even hear about tablet PCs anymore? Nope.
What happened with Microsoft Origami? Nothing.
What are people wanting to use for computing on the go? A smart phone.
Apple didn't get involved when this was "the rage" and I couldn't be happier. The idea never became anything more than a niche product in health care, manufacturing, and perhaps education. It bombed. And Apple wasn't left holding the bag on a bunch of unsold product. Another "failure in this companies beleaguered history" as it would be used as fodder in the press.
No comments:
Post a Comment