mr.barkan
Aug 11, 10:36 PM
i thought i read somewhere that you needed like 4 gazillion gigs of ram to actually run 64 bit programs... so wouldn't merom be more for bragging rights than actual usability?
i've been waiting since may for merom to come out so i can buy a mbp... but now i'm actually thinking of waiting til santa rosa comes out...
If you keep waiting next gens you'll wait your whole life!! =)
I know it sucks but I agree that this next MBP with Merom is a good buy for the next 3 months...
I guess it just varies on your needs... I mean, I have to buy a laptop from aug/27 till aug/31 for this work I'm doing.. if the rumors are strong, maybe I'll buy some compaq 64bit 600-700 laptop(amd), then sell it as soon as the new MBP comes out... i dunno... just speculating... It's going to be a hard week for me... hate when I need things that don't just depend on me... buying a 1st gen a week before 2nd gen comes out... the worst thing you can do in Computer market.... =PPP
i've been waiting since may for merom to come out so i can buy a mbp... but now i'm actually thinking of waiting til santa rosa comes out...
If you keep waiting next gens you'll wait your whole life!! =)
I know it sucks but I agree that this next MBP with Merom is a good buy for the next 3 months...
I guess it just varies on your needs... I mean, I have to buy a laptop from aug/27 till aug/31 for this work I'm doing.. if the rumors are strong, maybe I'll buy some compaq 64bit 600-700 laptop(amd), then sell it as soon as the new MBP comes out... i dunno... just speculating... It's going to be a hard week for me... hate when I need things that don't just depend on me... buying a 1st gen a week before 2nd gen comes out... the worst thing you can do in Computer market.... =PPP
irbdavid
Nov 26, 10:46 AM
A tablet would be awesome, if it could handle a) my crappy handwriting, and b) equations and the like, since the only reason I would have to use one of these would be note-taking in lectures. AFAIK no tablet software about at the moment can do the latter.
bedifferent
Apr 24, 10:24 AM
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
flopticalcube
Apr 16, 11:36 AM
It seemed like a cogent point to me. Your perspective will change if you do any number of things. Bet on horse races for a living and you'll never look at a horse in the same way that other people do.
Earlier itcheroni said ...
Now I don't mean to be cruel, but he isn't making anything, creating anything or contributing anything to society through this livelihood. He's merely siphoning off the flow. And he wants to talk about perspective? It seems to me that making a living that way is guaranteed to give you a warped perspective.
It's a perspective I'm glad I don't share.
Sure he is. He is creating liquidity in a financial market. He is the grease in the financial cogs. Just because you do not understand how a process works is no excuse to be dismissive of it.
Earlier itcheroni said ...
Now I don't mean to be cruel, but he isn't making anything, creating anything or contributing anything to society through this livelihood. He's merely siphoning off the flow. And he wants to talk about perspective? It seems to me that making a living that way is guaranteed to give you a warped perspective.
It's a perspective I'm glad I don't share.
Sure he is. He is creating liquidity in a financial market. He is the grease in the financial cogs. Just because you do not understand how a process works is no excuse to be dismissive of it.
vand0576
Aug 11, 09:47 AM
I agree except I think they will put Conroe in the iMac.
It's funny, cause right after I read what I had posted, I thought, oh damnit, i forgot about Conroe, and edited what I had posted. (all these damn codenames)
It's funny, cause right after I read what I had posted, I thought, oh damnit, i forgot about Conroe, and edited what I had posted. (all these damn codenames)
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
-aggie-
May 6, 06:42 PM
I don't understand how it would be quicker either.
How about stick with me and we lose the clod you have for a husband? :)
How about stick with me and we lose the clod you have for a husband? :)
jonnysods
Apr 24, 03:32 PM
Can't imagine the price of those panels. Maybe these will be for the new macbook airs. Just imagine!
ol4ERTH
Mar 27, 07:16 AM
I think a Fall release of iOS5 has the ring of truth.
The iPod music event is becoming a bit of a non event as traditional iPod's become less relevant. So instead Apple will introduce iOS5 which will include one big music feature: cloud streaming and storage of your music!
But if you're going to introduce cloud streaming and sync, then the current iPod touch is not a great device because it has no persistent internet connection, so they're going to introduce an iPod Touch with 3G, which (obviously) won't be called the iPod Touch, but will instead be a cheaper, thinner, lighter iPhone! It might even only have 4GB of storage (probably 8GB) as standard, but the cloud services will make that less of an issue.
The iPhone 5 will still be introduced in the summer with iOS4x and will remain the high end iPhone with NFC, 1080p video recording, 4inch Screen, 8mp still camera, A5 chip, 64GB storage option, maybe they'll introduce Facetime over 3G too at that time too... Same basic physical package as the iPhone 4.
Apple needs to make a cheaper iPhone to compete with Android. For too many people now trading up from feature phones to their first smartphone (at least in the UK) the leap from what they're paying now up to an iPhone is too big. Instead they're getting a low end Android device (e.g. HTC wildfire etc). Apple are not stupid, they know they need to get into that part of the market and soon. It seems like the right time frame. And they need a big event (like their traditional fall music event) to do it.
The iPod music event is becoming a bit of a non event as traditional iPod's become less relevant. So instead Apple will introduce iOS5 which will include one big music feature: cloud streaming and storage of your music!
But if you're going to introduce cloud streaming and sync, then the current iPod touch is not a great device because it has no persistent internet connection, so they're going to introduce an iPod Touch with 3G, which (obviously) won't be called the iPod Touch, but will instead be a cheaper, thinner, lighter iPhone! It might even only have 4GB of storage (probably 8GB) as standard, but the cloud services will make that less of an issue.
The iPhone 5 will still be introduced in the summer with iOS4x and will remain the high end iPhone with NFC, 1080p video recording, 4inch Screen, 8mp still camera, A5 chip, 64GB storage option, maybe they'll introduce Facetime over 3G too at that time too... Same basic physical package as the iPhone 4.
Apple needs to make a cheaper iPhone to compete with Android. For too many people now trading up from feature phones to their first smartphone (at least in the UK) the leap from what they're paying now up to an iPhone is too big. Instead they're getting a low end Android device (e.g. HTC wildfire etc). Apple are not stupid, they know they need to get into that part of the market and soon. It seems like the right time frame. And they need a big event (like their traditional fall music event) to do it.
techfreak85
Apr 23, 04:34 PM
Would this mainly be for notebooks? I assume it would be too expensive to achieve a high enough PPI on a 22inch+ display, no?
Eidorian
Aug 7, 02:44 PM
The baseline is actually somewhere around $2100, you can lower some of the options when configuring.$1962 for US Education. w/2 GHz and 160 GB hard drive.
ihaveNFC
May 7, 11:25 PM
How is it a novelty?
Turned out not to have any particular value "for me" as I continued to use it.
Turned out not to have any particular value "for me" as I continued to use it.
bloodycape
Apr 18, 03:41 PM
Yes, the interface do looks similar, but one thing most people are forgetting here is that it's not the home screens that look alike it is the Touchwiz app drawer that looks similar to the home screen, not the Touchwiz home screen.
okboy
Apr 23, 06:08 PM
We should stop using this as proof. Remember the iPad 2 was supposed to have a Retina display because of this? To make it worse, it's a beta. Slow news day I guess, but look how worked up people get about it. Just stop.
alent1234
Mar 28, 09:55 AM
Maybe not at WWDC, but I don't see them waiting till Fall to put out new iPhone hardware, hold iOS5 till then, maybe, but not new hardware.
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
depends how many people are eligible to upgrade
last year AT&T opened the floodgates on early upgrades and locked a lot of people in who wouldn't have been eligible until later in the year
apple knows how many people are eligible so it doesn't make sense to release a phone with a smaller eligible customer base. i bet apple and AT&T will work out another financial arrangement to allow early upgrades starting in september or so
They risk losing people to Android, WebOS, etc... as the remaining iPhone3GS people all start coming off of contract, and nobody will go iPhone4 knowing 5 is just months away.
This waiting around also gives 3GS users a few months to check out other products (new Pre w/WebOS, etc). Apple does not want people looking around during that break time.
depends how many people are eligible to upgrade
last year AT&T opened the floodgates on early upgrades and locked a lot of people in who wouldn't have been eligible until later in the year
apple knows how many people are eligible so it doesn't make sense to release a phone with a smaller eligible customer base. i bet apple and AT&T will work out another financial arrangement to allow early upgrades starting in september or so
hexor
Apr 26, 03:17 PM
It's not *that" deceptive... they did include "US smartphone usage" in the headline.
I'll bet you money they include Android tablets in the same chart if an Android tablet ever actually sells significant numbers. And it IS deceptive because they did not point out that the chart is completely different if you included all Apple iOS devices, whereas if you included all other Android devices besides phones the chart wouldn't change.
I'll bet you money they include Android tablets in the same chart if an Android tablet ever actually sells significant numbers. And it IS deceptive because they did not point out that the chart is completely different if you included all Apple iOS devices, whereas if you included all other Android devices besides phones the chart wouldn't change.
zed
Apr 25, 09:23 AM
I spent two weeks in Ireland with my iPhone 4 and had location services + data and cell service turned off and it did not track my location at all during the entire stay. I did use wifi almost every day while there... and really only had my phone b/c the camera in the iPhone4 is much much better than my old Fujifilm point-and-shoot.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 5, 03:05 PM
There should be an app to regain control of the breaks in a toyota.
A panic button app.
A panic button app.
djrod
Mar 31, 01:36 AM
Is frontrow back?
Bengt77
Aug 4, 06:55 PM
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
ravenvii
May 2, 03:22 PM
First of all, welcome to the newest game brought to you by ravenvii and chrmjenkins. We will be referred in the rules and during the game as Game Masters. I will chiefly run the thread, while chrmjenkins will chiefly correspond with the Villain (as explained below). We will share equal burdens for story-telling.
The rule set is completely different than anything you have seen before, so please read the whole post carefully. If you have any questions or thoughts regarding the rules, please feel free to ask in the thread. Official answers to questions will be added to the bottom of this post.
***
RULES:
In General:
The game begins with 1 villain and 7 heroes. The villain and each of the heroes have their own story and motivations that are PMed to them and not unveiled publicly.
The roles will be known to all from the beginning - there will be no secret roles. The only secrets in this game are: the full map (only the Game Masters and the villain has access) and the secret agencies and powers of the Couple, the Wizard and the Adventurers.
The map will be slowly revealed to the heroes as they move through the mansion.
The Villain:
The villain made a deal with Satan in which he takes over the mansion and it's many treasures and take control of The Artifact. The villain is the only player to have knowledge of the full map at the onset of the game.
With The Artifact, the villain is able to place monsters and traps anywhere in the mansion except the room in where the heroes are located during that round. Only one monster and trap can be set in a room. A monster and a trap can both coexist in a room, however. The Artifact also enables the villain to self-heal (1 HP per turn). The Artifact can only be accessed in the Lair. If the villain moves away from the Lair, he will not be able to use it to set monsters or traps or self-heal.
The villain starts at level 16, with 16 HP and 16 AP, and cannot level up whatsoever. His stats were determined by how many heroes there are in the game (two levels per each playing hero).
His Goal: to kill each and every hero invading his mansion.
The Heroes:
They all start at level 1. Their stats begin at 1 HP and 1 AP. Each time they level up, 1 HP and 1 AP will be added to their stats.
Certain heroes have special powers known only to them, and revealed to the other heroes at their own discretion.
The Couple: Two heroes who are the parents of a child who is suffering from a loathsome disease. To save their daughter, they must obtain The Artifact and call forth it's powers.
The Wizard: He was sent in by the King to slay the villain. He has awesome magical powers.
Adventurers: Here for glory and treasure.
Heroes’ Goal: the endgame is slightly different for the different classes, but they always requires killing the villain and retrieving The Artifact.
The rule set is completely different than anything you have seen before, so please read the whole post carefully. If you have any questions or thoughts regarding the rules, please feel free to ask in the thread. Official answers to questions will be added to the bottom of this post.
***
RULES:
In General:
The game begins with 1 villain and 7 heroes. The villain and each of the heroes have their own story and motivations that are PMed to them and not unveiled publicly.
The roles will be known to all from the beginning - there will be no secret roles. The only secrets in this game are: the full map (only the Game Masters and the villain has access) and the secret agencies and powers of the Couple, the Wizard and the Adventurers.
The map will be slowly revealed to the heroes as they move through the mansion.
The Villain:
The villain made a deal with Satan in which he takes over the mansion and it's many treasures and take control of The Artifact. The villain is the only player to have knowledge of the full map at the onset of the game.
With The Artifact, the villain is able to place monsters and traps anywhere in the mansion except the room in where the heroes are located during that round. Only one monster and trap can be set in a room. A monster and a trap can both coexist in a room, however. The Artifact also enables the villain to self-heal (1 HP per turn). The Artifact can only be accessed in the Lair. If the villain moves away from the Lair, he will not be able to use it to set monsters or traps or self-heal.
The villain starts at level 16, with 16 HP and 16 AP, and cannot level up whatsoever. His stats were determined by how many heroes there are in the game (two levels per each playing hero).
His Goal: to kill each and every hero invading his mansion.
The Heroes:
They all start at level 1. Their stats begin at 1 HP and 1 AP. Each time they level up, 1 HP and 1 AP will be added to their stats.
Certain heroes have special powers known only to them, and revealed to the other heroes at their own discretion.
The Couple: Two heroes who are the parents of a child who is suffering from a loathsome disease. To save their daughter, they must obtain The Artifact and call forth it's powers.
The Wizard: He was sent in by the King to slay the villain. He has awesome magical powers.
Adventurers: Here for glory and treasure.
Heroes’ Goal: the endgame is slightly different for the different classes, but they always requires killing the villain and retrieving The Artifact.
rxse7en
Aug 11, 10:56 AM
Have you seen the size of the heat sink in the Mac Pro? ;)
What's the difference? My PB G4 fried my testicles years ago...
:D
What's the difference? My PB G4 fried my testicles years ago...
:D
islanders
Jul 23, 09:36 AM
If Apple is really trying to stay state-of-the-art, they will lose Yonah as soon as Intel's supply can keep up with Apple's production volume. On the MacBook front, this should be able to happen by October-November, I imagine.
If Apple doesn't put Core 2 Duo in MacBooks @ 1.83 & 2GHz by November, the competition on the PC front is going to make Apple look like they are selling outdated products as if they are current. This will not fly among savy buyers and MacBook sales might falter - perhaps even tank without such a switch. :eek:
Almost all mobile computers selling for more than $1k by November will be Core 2 Duo. So for the holiday shopping season, Apple has got to put them inside MacBooks by then.
This seems to be a realistic approach� how long can Apple wait?
Just because Intel is shipping Merom, who are they shipping to? Apple? Dell? Sony?
When are these chips going to be delivered to Apple for at least one line of MBP?
Is it possible we are getting ahead of ourselves here? After all Apple was the last player to sign with Intel.
Or has Intel already produced enough chips to satisfy demand before shipping to any single company?
If Apple doesn't put Core 2 Duo in MacBooks @ 1.83 & 2GHz by November, the competition on the PC front is going to make Apple look like they are selling outdated products as if they are current. This will not fly among savy buyers and MacBook sales might falter - perhaps even tank without such a switch. :eek:
Almost all mobile computers selling for more than $1k by November will be Core 2 Duo. So for the holiday shopping season, Apple has got to put them inside MacBooks by then.
This seems to be a realistic approach� how long can Apple wait?
Just because Intel is shipping Merom, who are they shipping to? Apple? Dell? Sony?
When are these chips going to be delivered to Apple for at least one line of MBP?
Is it possible we are getting ahead of ourselves here? After all Apple was the last player to sign with Intel.
Or has Intel already produced enough chips to satisfy demand before shipping to any single company?
cdallen
Mar 30, 03:38 AM
This must be the number 1 concern on all of Japans minds right now... How will everyone survive without an ipod.
Wait... How did we ever survive without it!
I'M FREAKING OUT ! ! !
Wait... How did we ever survive without it!
I'M FREAKING OUT ! ! !
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario