Mac-Addict
Oct 24, 05:47 PM
going to get there at about 1730; coming to london from uni by train, lectures finish at 4ish, just want to get a tshirt; already ordered lepoard online.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
akbc
Nov 8, 06:40 PM
Here in South Korea, all the RFID equipped phones are so useful.
I use it as a metropass, credit card, debit card AND i can ride taxi's with them and pay with it, too.
Heck, I don't even have to carry my bank card because most of the bank machines are RFID equipped too.
I am using iPhone 3GS here, but I miss my old phone that could do all that.
And if iPhone can do that, it'd be great for all the east asian countries that have RFID stuff in their everyday life; like Japan, Hong Kong/China and such.
I use it as a metropass, credit card, debit card AND i can ride taxi's with them and pay with it, too.
Heck, I don't even have to carry my bank card because most of the bank machines are RFID equipped too.
I am using iPhone 3GS here, but I miss my old phone that could do all that.
And if iPhone can do that, it'd be great for all the east asian countries that have RFID stuff in their everyday life; like Japan, Hong Kong/China and such.
Rodimus Prime
May 5, 07:55 PM
The iMac 27" is my favorite.. none of the all-in-ones it's compared to are even the same size on that chart. Even if you build a computer with the same equipment it's more:
---------------------------------------------------------
$1100+ for the 27" IPS monitor from Dell (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&sku=224-8284&redirect=1)
$150-250 for the processor (i5 2390(I think)) according to Intel (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211)
$120+ for the graphics card (desktop version, not sure about the mobile) according to Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102940&cm_re=Radeon_6770-_-14-102-940-_-Product)
Anywhere from $100 to $500+ for the tower and necessary equipment ( just depends on what tower, cooling etc. you purchase)
$180 for the Windows license :P according to Newegg Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116716)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1550 at the minimum if you do it yourself, probably more if you buy it from a manufacturer. Slightly more expensive than the $1500 iMac, and not everything comes in a nice looking package. Plus the hours you get to spend putting it together.
I did the math for at least that one Microsoft, stick to making Windows 8 as awesome as Windows 7 instead of making terrible ads like this.
Umm do not use retail cost of the OS. You need to use the OEM cost. That is 100 bucks.
---------------------------------------------------------
$1100+ for the 27" IPS monitor from Dell (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&cs=04&l=en&s=bsd&sku=224-8284&redirect=1)
$150-250 for the processor (i5 2390(I think)) according to Intel (http://ark.intel.com/Product.aspx?id=52211)
$120+ for the graphics card (desktop version, not sure about the mobile) according to Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814102940&cm_re=Radeon_6770-_-14-102-940-_-Product)
Anywhere from $100 to $500+ for the tower and necessary equipment ( just depends on what tower, cooling etc. you purchase)
$180 for the Windows license :P according to Newegg Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16832116716)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
$1550 at the minimum if you do it yourself, probably more if you buy it from a manufacturer. Slightly more expensive than the $1500 iMac, and not everything comes in a nice looking package. Plus the hours you get to spend putting it together.
I did the math for at least that one Microsoft, stick to making Windows 8 as awesome as Windows 7 instead of making terrible ads like this.
Umm do not use retail cost of the OS. You need to use the OEM cost. That is 100 bucks.
MacBandit
Sep 15, 12:58 PM
Originally posted by King Cobra
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
I'm sorry about that double post it won't let me delete them and things went crazy for me there for a couple moments and I accidentally pressed the back and forward arrow.
I feel that Macs are competitively priced now. I just configured a Dell which I feel is the cheapest of the major name brand PC's and also know for there lack of quality. I ended up with a 2Ghz PC no monitor with similar hardware except no firewire and less expansion possibilities in the future because of used up PCI slots etc. for $1,288. I made the comparison to a Dual 867 and modified the Apple config. when I couldn't make the two match any other way. I personally feel that OS X and the whole Mac experience is worth the difference for a computer that will without a doubt whip the pants off that Dell and continue to do it after it the Dell is dead and gone.
I did the same thing with a 2.4Ghz Compaq and it has Firewire and it came up to $1,455. I repeat myself again in everything I said above about the Dual867 being a better deal because of OSX and I still believe it would be faster at most tasks especially multitasking and it still having a longer life without failure.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
>Does this include everything that comes standard on a Mac box?
You certainly don't get the most stable OS with a PC.
:D
scem, I think in due time the price of Apple's hardware will come down. Take a look at the prices of the Macintosh/Apple product line. The Macintosh II was valued at I think over $6000. The G4/G3 motherboard was worth up to $3500 I think. Now, the Dual 1.25GHz model sells for around $3300, if you don't feel like chugging in THAT much RAM.
My guess is that in a couple of years Apple's PowerMacs will be reduced to near equivalent prices as when the first dual GHz PowerMacs came out, topping out at $3000.
I'm sorry about that double post it won't let me delete them and things went crazy for me there for a couple moments and I accidentally pressed the back and forward arrow.
I feel that Macs are competitively priced now. I just configured a Dell which I feel is the cheapest of the major name brand PC's and also know for there lack of quality. I ended up with a 2Ghz PC no monitor with similar hardware except no firewire and less expansion possibilities in the future because of used up PCI slots etc. for $1,288. I made the comparison to a Dual 867 and modified the Apple config. when I couldn't make the two match any other way. I personally feel that OS X and the whole Mac experience is worth the difference for a computer that will without a doubt whip the pants off that Dell and continue to do it after it the Dell is dead and gone.
I did the same thing with a 2.4Ghz Compaq and it has Firewire and it came up to $1,455. I repeat myself again in everything I said above about the Dual867 being a better deal because of OSX and I still believe it would be faster at most tasks especially multitasking and it still having a longer life without failure.
more...
steelfist
Nov 14, 12:47 PM
hope it's on the A380. that would be awesome! I agree, ipod video abuse will go pretty far though, as far as pornography goes.
EvilC5
Mar 25, 04:02 AM
I read this on slickdeals yesterday morning and went and got one at my local store. I figured for that price, my wife and son could play games and watch movies on it rather than always ask for my iphone when we are out....lol
more...
Pistol Pete
Oct 26, 02:55 PM
whatever we just need rosetta for our PPC Macs ;)
velocityg4
Mar 21, 09:03 AM
I usually get the battery life as advertised by Apple. Though I turn the screen down to two or three bars (usually three since it often flickers at two). The Macbook is also mostly used for light computing such as web browsing with Flash disabled via the Flashblock add-on for Firefox, viewing documents in MS Word or Adobe Reader and rarely watching a DVD ripped to the hard drive (only when flying).
I could see people easily getting less battery life by leaving the brightness up, playing games or leaving Flash enabled when web browsing.
I could see people easily getting less battery life by leaving the brightness up, playing games or leaving Flash enabled when web browsing.
more...
Abstract
Sep 17, 07:14 AM
Is this a joke or what? Are people that work in retail different to the rest of us? Am I missing something here?
Think different. Think about long-term discounts........and relationships (with Apple!)
Think different. Think about long-term discounts........and relationships (with Apple!)
Diatribe
Oct 27, 09:19 AM
I always assumed it was monkeys, so I guess interns would be a step up.
Yeah, for a $99/yr offering, it's stunningly meager.
Well that would explain a lot. :D
But seriously though, it's not that much that is missing from .mac to make it worth the $99 without regrets.
Like:
- fully editable web calendar
- fully editable address book
- spam management
- more storage (2GB would be sufficient)
- make the Finder fast so iDisk is actually usable
- web editable blog synched back to iWeb
- possibility to show subscribed iCals in web interface without having to visit their site
- integrate stickies into .mac and synch them
With those things, that would be fairly easy to do I don't think a lot of people would complain anymore.
And it's not really something completely new, just evolution of the existing.
Yeah, for a $99/yr offering, it's stunningly meager.
Well that would explain a lot. :D
But seriously though, it's not that much that is missing from .mac to make it worth the $99 without regrets.
Like:
- fully editable web calendar
- fully editable address book
- spam management
- more storage (2GB would be sufficient)
- make the Finder fast so iDisk is actually usable
- web editable blog synched back to iWeb
- possibility to show subscribed iCals in web interface without having to visit their site
- integrate stickies into .mac and synch them
With those things, that would be fairly easy to do I don't think a lot of people would complain anymore.
And it's not really something completely new, just evolution of the existing.
more...
runplaysleeprun
Oct 9, 03:11 PM
Disney's Present of Home Entertainment....
Disney's President perhaps?
Disney's President perhaps?
KnightWRX
Apr 30, 05:45 PM
web applications that don't require install of real programs, then I'll grant "mac-users" that one.
How is a web application not a real program ? It's written in a programming language, it executes instructions based on how the code is compiled/interpreted, and it displays results by processing some user input.
Sounds like a real program to me.
Anyway, "installing" a computer program or application is savvy ? Then what does it mean when you compile your applications straight from the source code ? Better yet, write them yourself ?
Considering that nearly all "Pro IT" overwhelmingly used Windows
Please, all the guys who are any good at IT are Unix users. "Windows" sysadmins suck. It's a dirty secret and don't tell my boss : I probably know more about Windows than they do. I just don't want to work with it.
not to mention that "gamers" are one of the most comptuer-savvy consumers
Laughable. Gamers are good at one thing : Buying parts and jamming them together. It's not like they even come close to understanding what is meant by sub-pixel tessellation and what that means on their screens (or even what a sub-pixel is).
How is a web application not a real program ? It's written in a programming language, it executes instructions based on how the code is compiled/interpreted, and it displays results by processing some user input.
Sounds like a real program to me.
Anyway, "installing" a computer program or application is savvy ? Then what does it mean when you compile your applications straight from the source code ? Better yet, write them yourself ?
Considering that nearly all "Pro IT" overwhelmingly used Windows
Please, all the guys who are any good at IT are Unix users. "Windows" sysadmins suck. It's a dirty secret and don't tell my boss : I probably know more about Windows than they do. I just don't want to work with it.
not to mention that "gamers" are one of the most comptuer-savvy consumers
Laughable. Gamers are good at one thing : Buying parts and jamming them together. It's not like they even come close to understanding what is meant by sub-pixel tessellation and what that means on their screens (or even what a sub-pixel is).
more...
kallisti
Mar 19, 05:23 PM
In response to all the "Recommend Me a Camera/Lens/Editor etc" threads, I offer this. Comments or additions?
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
Original stolen from PIXIQ... (http://www.pixiq.com/article/how-to-work-hard-at-photography-and-still-suck)
Dale
Oh my. I feel like I posted this myself. I would add one more to the list:
Get disgusted after spending a boatload of money on a DSLR setup and then spend another boatload of money on a rangefinder setup. Obviously the DSLR system didn't work for you, so the problem must still be a gear issue-- but in this case it's because you chose the wrong system. Time to start all over again, but this time with an artistically "proven" format.
Too funny. Always easy to point the accusatory finger for bad images everywhere except where it really belongs--at the photographer. Certain images can really require specific gear (including lighting gear), but often a bad image isn't about the gear but about the choices made by the photographer at the time of capture.
I somehow agree, at least as long as those others have nothing to show that they did that you clearly find impressive. The comments of others rarely help you improve your own work.
That certainly is better than reading Macrumors or other non-photographer blogs when photography is what you're interested in.
Actually, you should buy a camera that does not even have an "auto" switch. I strongly recommend something like an old (analog!) Pentax K-1000 as the first camera. There was a time when photography schools did not accept cameras with automatic features. With K-1000, you have to do EVERYTHING manually - and that is the best way to actually learn how to take photos.
Better gear does not make anyone a better photographer. HOWEVER, it can drastically improve the TECHNICAL aspects/results. If you want to make large posters of your pictures, then there are natural limits to what you can do with, let's say, a 6 MP camera.
Photoshop is a tool for graphics designers and the print business. For almost all photography needs, Aperture or Lightroom provide as much features as one will probably ever need. But none of those digital toys make you a better photographer.
I agree. And you probably shouldn't start with taking photos of models/people -- it's demanding and can easily become frustrating. Try mastering your camera and training your eye(!) first. Get a feel for what a photo will look like before you even begin processing/developing it. There's usually a big difference between what you see and what your camera sees; try to get your tool in sync with your eye and imagination. It requires a lot of practice, so shoot a lot. The beauty of digital photography is that you can shoot as much as like without depleting your bank account - analog photography was more expensive to learn.
I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with you Winni. What's more it is the first constructive post I have seen from you on this site. Most of your posts seem to fall into the curmudgeon category. This one is actually positive, helpful, and full of "win" :) I'd love to see more posts like this from you....
Never Show Your Work To Anyone
Read Only "Expert Photographer" Blogs, Articles, and Books
Leave Your Camera On Auto...:eek:...
Buy A New and More Expensive Camera Because It'll Make Better Pictures
Spend Too Much Time Mastering Photoshop
Mine is this: Fixate on one style of photography or subject.
Original stolen from PIXIQ... (http://www.pixiq.com/article/how-to-work-hard-at-photography-and-still-suck)
Dale
Oh my. I feel like I posted this myself. I would add one more to the list:
Get disgusted after spending a boatload of money on a DSLR setup and then spend another boatload of money on a rangefinder setup. Obviously the DSLR system didn't work for you, so the problem must still be a gear issue-- but in this case it's because you chose the wrong system. Time to start all over again, but this time with an artistically "proven" format.
Too funny. Always easy to point the accusatory finger for bad images everywhere except where it really belongs--at the photographer. Certain images can really require specific gear (including lighting gear), but often a bad image isn't about the gear but about the choices made by the photographer at the time of capture.
I somehow agree, at least as long as those others have nothing to show that they did that you clearly find impressive. The comments of others rarely help you improve your own work.
That certainly is better than reading Macrumors or other non-photographer blogs when photography is what you're interested in.
Actually, you should buy a camera that does not even have an "auto" switch. I strongly recommend something like an old (analog!) Pentax K-1000 as the first camera. There was a time when photography schools did not accept cameras with automatic features. With K-1000, you have to do EVERYTHING manually - and that is the best way to actually learn how to take photos.
Better gear does not make anyone a better photographer. HOWEVER, it can drastically improve the TECHNICAL aspects/results. If you want to make large posters of your pictures, then there are natural limits to what you can do with, let's say, a 6 MP camera.
Photoshop is a tool for graphics designers and the print business. For almost all photography needs, Aperture or Lightroom provide as much features as one will probably ever need. But none of those digital toys make you a better photographer.
I agree. And you probably shouldn't start with taking photos of models/people -- it's demanding and can easily become frustrating. Try mastering your camera and training your eye(!) first. Get a feel for what a photo will look like before you even begin processing/developing it. There's usually a big difference between what you see and what your camera sees; try to get your tool in sync with your eye and imagination. It requires a lot of practice, so shoot a lot. The beauty of digital photography is that you can shoot as much as like without depleting your bank account - analog photography was more expensive to learn.
I think this is the first time I have ever agreed with you Winni. What's more it is the first constructive post I have seen from you on this site. Most of your posts seem to fall into the curmudgeon category. This one is actually positive, helpful, and full of "win" :) I'd love to see more posts like this from you....
MacManiac1224
Sep 13, 04:23 PM
Can the G4 beat the Pentium 5? You are probably scratching your heads on this one. Yep, the Pentium 5 is very real, and it is coming soon. 2nd quarter of the Pentium 5 debuting at 3.2GHZ is going to come out. It will have 100 million transistors on it and it will be manufactured at .09 microns. Also, here is the doozy, it will have 1 mb of L2 on die cache, and it will support 333mhz bus speeds, with the addition of DDR, that is a possible 667mhz bus speeds. By the way, if you were wondering, the Pentium 4 has 42 million transistors.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
Now, for the G4: I am not sure how many transistors the G4 has, but I imagine it is way less then 100 million, or even 42 million, considering the P4 came out after the G4. Anyway, the cache on the G4 is higher on the high-end, 2mb of cache. But: the speed: 1.25Ghz? Can that really stand up to a P5 with 333mhz bus, and 3.2Ghz clock speeds? My opinion: most likely not.
Let's be honest, the P4 basically can beat the G4 in most tasks today, so a new faster version of the P4, the P5 can easily beat the G4, most likely in 95-99% of all tasks.
Ok, we have established that the G4 is, well, to slow against the P5, even though we don't know about it yet, I imagine it will be. Well, Apple just pulled the plug on OS 9 for January, what could this mean? I am not sure, only Steve knows. But Apple better come out with something that can at least compete with the Pentium 5, and it better come soon. I would not be surprised if Apple comes out with the G5 in January, just to say they were the first to have a generation 5 possessor, but I could be wrong.
Ok, I made my case, now, what do you guys think? By the way: I got this information about the Pentium 5 from eWeek, so it is reputable.
more...
aaaaaaron
Feb 18, 04:46 PM
Thats what I thought.
i mostly thought that there's a lot of white people at that table :) haha
i mostly thought that there's a lot of white people at that table :) haha
Huntn
Apr 27, 09:51 PM
After listening to the sound bite of Trump asking for both Obama's birth certificate and college records, he strikes me as a political opportunist grasping for straws or he is a raciest.
more...
OrangeSVTguy
May 2, 10:38 PM
It's pretty clear that the lens is in a deeper "well" in the white model. This is consistent with the rumor that light was impinging on the camera in the white model. What you need to do is limit all light that isn't coming from directly in front of the lens. No light from the side, and definitely no light from the inside of the camera. The way to fight it if you have an SLR? Invest in an old fashioned thing called a bellows, which shields the lens from any light that isn't coming from the area you can focus on, and which doesn't do anything but add glare or make blacks in the picture more like dark gray. This deeper camera acts like a bellows, I presume, blocking any light coming through the white, more translucent body.
I believe that's also what the little aluminum trim ring around the camera sensor is used for too to block out the light from the translucent body and the LED flash. The prototype iPhone 4 never had that ring I believe.
I believe that's also what the little aluminum trim ring around the camera sensor is used for too to block out the light from the translucent body and the LED flash. The prototype iPhone 4 never had that ring I believe.
ewinemiller
Sep 13, 10:17 AM
Originally posted by nuckinfutz
Pink Make Up! I got my trial
Natesac
Mar 10, 11:23 PM
My buddy Ryan and I are going to be at willow bend around 9am.
Burnsey
May 3, 12:26 AM
Hm, that pretty much sounds the same as the difference between conservatives and liberals in the US for the most part. Hope they don't try to take away your universal health care!
The Conservatives are for some privatization, or as they call it "alternative delivery", but I doubt the population will allow them to completely privatize healthcare. Normally I'm for a smaller government, but when it comes to healthcare you can only either trust the corporations who make lots of money off of you when you're sick, or you can trust the government. In this case I trust the government a lot more.
The Conservatives are for some privatization, or as they call it "alternative delivery", but I doubt the population will allow them to completely privatize healthcare. Normally I'm for a smaller government, but when it comes to healthcare you can only either trust the corporations who make lots of money off of you when you're sick, or you can trust the government. In this case I trust the government a lot more.
AppleScruff1
Apr 23, 11:44 AM
2010 FXDB (Street Bob). Used to have a 2005 XL1200C (1200 Sportster Custom).
Very nice.
Very nice.
maclaptop
Apr 24, 04:05 AM
Longer battery life
Geckotek
Apr 12, 07:47 PM
This is not surprising. All the Chinese resellers who were buying iPads in NYC are unlikely to buy the Verizon CDMA, because it cannot be used abroad. The GSM version (i.e. the ATT version) is one that can be used in most places abroad, as long as the iPad is unlocked.
Wrong, China has CDMA. Same CDMA we have. (they also have another proprietary form of CDMA as well)
However, the scalpers I've seen don't seem to be sending them to China.
Wrong, China has CDMA. Same CDMA we have. (they also have another proprietary form of CDMA as well)
However, the scalpers I've seen don't seem to be sending them to China.
Ommid
Apr 25, 08:10 AM
Surely if they do 1680 15inch, then a 1680 13 won't be unfeasible.
No comments:
Post a Comment