Chundles
Oct 24, 08:28 AM
aswitcher, could you explain a bit more to me what you mean by
"802.11n pending firmware upgrade..." since you're the first to mention this at all? Does anyone know if this new MBP will have 802.11n at all (for the iTV)?
802.11n isn't due for ratification until 2008. There is a "Draft N v 2.0" due out next year that is supposedly close to what 802.11n will be but there's no guarantee anything will work until the final spec is released in 2008.
"802.11n pending firmware upgrade..." since you're the first to mention this at all? Does anyone know if this new MBP will have 802.11n at all (for the iTV)?
802.11n isn't due for ratification until 2008. There is a "Draft N v 2.0" due out next year that is supposedly close to what 802.11n will be but there's no guarantee anything will work until the final spec is released in 2008.
thogs_cave
May 3, 07:44 AM
The previous-gen i7 iMac was tempting me to replace my 2008 8-core Pro, as the 27" I have at work is pretty fast. Since I want to save space and was planning on a new screen, I'm right on the edge. Thunderbolt really eliminates my need for PCIe slots, and I would love to regain some desk space.�
I'll never say, "too fast", but for the audio work I do, these are plenty fast enough.
I'll never say, "too fast", but for the audio work I do, these are plenty fast enough.
applefan27073
May 3, 07:57 AM
Awesome! But how do I get it????
Don't say go to the apple store, just did that
Check the link
http://store.apple.com/au/browse/home/shop_mac/family/imac/select?mco=MjIwNTQyNjE
Don't say go to the apple store, just did that
Check the link
http://store.apple.com/au/browse/home/shop_mac/family/imac/select?mco=MjIwNTQyNjE
cvaldes
Apr 24, 02:14 AM
A few clarifications that pertain to AT&T/T-Mobile and this story:
* The most valuable thing T-Mobile has is it's *spectrum*. The network itself, while quite valuable, isn't the key here at all. Oh, it's a factor, but it's not the reason why the Death Star is after it.
* T-Mobile has not been bought. There's just a stated intent for AT&T to buy T-mobile. The purchase process will take many months, and there are many regulatory hurdles to overcome. Since this will mean reducing the number of national (or near national) carriers, it will get heavy scrutiny, and there's more than a small chance that the deal will be rejected, or come with so many conditions that AT&T will withdraw the offer.
* Between now and the actual purchase, the companies can do some exploratory work with each other but they cannot operate in any way as if the deal has already taken place. AT&T cannot ask APPL to test the iPhone at T-Mobile bands.
There are probably some ways around the last bullet (called "gun jumping") but with a deal with this level of scrutiny, nothing is going to happen which jeopardizes the deal.
T-Mobile USA has spectrum, but also cell towers. AT&T's can benefit from the short term from cell tower access. Spectrum will come later, after an orderly migration of current T-Mobile USA customers using devices that access the AWS band.
It is highly likely that Apple has been testing devices on a variety of carriers, many of them who are unofficial/unannounced. It is likely that this T-Mobile testing unit is such a device.
Lastly, APPL is the stock symbol for Appel Petroleum. The stock symbol for Apple Inc. is AAPL.
Frankly, you shouldn't use stock symbols to talk about a company, unless you are specifically referring to shares. Only dorks do that. It's the same as using an airport code to talk about a city. San Francisco isn't SFO. Los Angeles isn't LAX. Portland isn't PDX. Paris isn't CDG.
* The most valuable thing T-Mobile has is it's *spectrum*. The network itself, while quite valuable, isn't the key here at all. Oh, it's a factor, but it's not the reason why the Death Star is after it.
* T-Mobile has not been bought. There's just a stated intent for AT&T to buy T-mobile. The purchase process will take many months, and there are many regulatory hurdles to overcome. Since this will mean reducing the number of national (or near national) carriers, it will get heavy scrutiny, and there's more than a small chance that the deal will be rejected, or come with so many conditions that AT&T will withdraw the offer.
* Between now and the actual purchase, the companies can do some exploratory work with each other but they cannot operate in any way as if the deal has already taken place. AT&T cannot ask APPL to test the iPhone at T-Mobile bands.
There are probably some ways around the last bullet (called "gun jumping") but with a deal with this level of scrutiny, nothing is going to happen which jeopardizes the deal.
T-Mobile USA has spectrum, but also cell towers. AT&T's can benefit from the short term from cell tower access. Spectrum will come later, after an orderly migration of current T-Mobile USA customers using devices that access the AWS band.
It is highly likely that Apple has been testing devices on a variety of carriers, many of them who are unofficial/unannounced. It is likely that this T-Mobile testing unit is such a device.
Lastly, APPL is the stock symbol for Appel Petroleum. The stock symbol for Apple Inc. is AAPL.
Frankly, you shouldn't use stock symbols to talk about a company, unless you are specifically referring to shares. Only dorks do that. It's the same as using an airport code to talk about a city. San Francisco isn't SFO. Los Angeles isn't LAX. Portland isn't PDX. Paris isn't CDG.
more...
lbro
Oct 25, 12:14 AM
One thing I want is a new phone, my old one's battery is so crappy it lasts for a couple of hours and than it starts beeping to signal that the battery is dead. Very annoying.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 28, 04:29 PM
The story continues gets more confusing. Apparently white Verizon iphones are thicker but white AT&T iphones are thinner. :rolleyes:
more...
jaigo
Oct 24, 09:10 AM
Estimated
Shipped By
Oct 30, 2006
Estimated
Delivered By
Nov 1, 2006
MBPRO 15/2.16 CTO
:D
Shipped By
Oct 30, 2006
Estimated
Delivered By
Nov 1, 2006
MBPRO 15/2.16 CTO
:D
kamek
Oct 2, 12:01 AM
My calls drop all the time.
more...
ECUpirate44
Apr 14, 12:28 PM
I'm not touching this. I'm perfectly fine on my jailbroken 4.2.6 :D
NoExpectations
Sep 30, 07:03 PM
Thanks for the replies...
Ok, so AT&T definitely drops calls; that's a given it seems...but for current customers is the dropped calls enough of a pain to leave AT&T/iPhone and go to another carrier??
Thank you,
olimits7
I recommend trying it yourself.....you have 30 days to try it and see if you experience dropped calls in your area.
Ok, so AT&T definitely drops calls; that's a given it seems...but for current customers is the dropped calls enough of a pain to leave AT&T/iPhone and go to another carrier??
Thank you,
olimits7
I recommend trying it yourself.....you have 30 days to try it and see if you experience dropped calls in your area.
more...
TimmyDee
Apr 28, 04:42 PM
"A colleague of mine just picked up a 16 GB iPhone 4 in white. I was a bit surprised when I picked it up off his desk (I had my black 32 GB in my other hand at the same time) � it immediately felt thicker."
LOL, that's absolutely ridiculous.
Also, why is everyone feeling so sorry for the case makers...like Apple is screwing them over? It's not their responsibility to cater to the case makers.
I completely agree. No one can pick something up and "immediately" tell that it's 0.25 mm thicker than another object. I call BS.
LOL, that's absolutely ridiculous.
Also, why is everyone feeling so sorry for the case makers...like Apple is screwing them over? It's not their responsibility to cater to the case makers.
I completely agree. No one can pick something up and "immediately" tell that it's 0.25 mm thicker than another object. I call BS.
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 07:47 PM
Historical Mac shipments by quarter.
<snip>
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 876,000
4Q2004 - 836,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
4Q2006 - 1,610,000
<snip>
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
1Q2000 - 1,377,000
2Q2000 - 1,043,000
3Q2000 - 1,016,000
4Q2000 - 1,122,000
1Q2001 - 659,000
2Q2001 - 751,000
3Q2001 - 827,000
4Q2001 - 850,000
1Q2002 - 659,000
2Q2002 - 813,000
3Q2002 - 808,000
4Q2002 - 734,000
1Q2003 - 743,000
2Q2003 - 711,000
3Q2003 - 771,000
4Q2003 - 787,000
1Q2004 - 743,000
2Q2004 - 749,000
3Q2004 - 876,000
4Q2004 - 836,000
1Q2005 - 1,046,000
2Q2005 - 1,070,000
3Q2005 - 1,182,000
4Q2005 - 1,236,000
1Q2006- 1,254,000
2Q2006- 1,112,000
3Q2006- 1,327,000
4Q2006 - 1,610,000
more...
Apple OC
Apr 24, 07:29 PM
And how about if she has men's parts down there? Where does she belong then?
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
IMO the Men's washroom ... until he finishes with the transformation ... he is still just a cross dresser
macinhand
Apr 15, 08:45 AM
I have got to admit with others! the battery drain is horrendous!!!! :mad:
I took my iPhone 3GS of charge at 9:30am, all apps are closed down, location services off and the battery has dropped down to 58% already within 5 hours!!
The phone has just been sat on my desk without being touched, no phone calls, texts or internet use what so ever! :confused:
I took my iPhone 3GS of charge at 9:30am, all apps are closed down, location services off and the battery has dropped down to 58% already within 5 hours!!
The phone has just been sat on my desk without being touched, no phone calls, texts or internet use what so ever! :confused:
more...
Number10Shirt
Jan 30, 08:45 PM
Went to Ikea to buy a few things for the new apartment I'll be moving into next week. Went pretty cheap.
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/poang-chair-black-beech__46194_PE142936_S4.jpg
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/vika-amon-vika-curry-table-black-walnut-effect__0105864_PE253687_S4.JPG
18 piece set
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/dinera--piece-dinnerware-set-brown__0097468_PE238081_S4.JPG
16-piece set
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/bonus--piece-flatware-set-stainless-steel__50134_PE146092_S4.jpg
And a few other random things for the kitchen.
Just need a tv and a bed.
God I'm poor. :(
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/poang-chair-black-beech__46194_PE142936_S4.jpg
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/vika-amon-vika-curry-table-black-walnut-effect__0105864_PE253687_S4.JPG
18 piece set
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/dinera--piece-dinnerware-set-brown__0097468_PE238081_S4.JPG
16-piece set
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/images/products/bonus--piece-flatware-set-stainless-steel__50134_PE146092_S4.jpg
And a few other random things for the kitchen.
Just need a tv and a bed.
God I'm poor. :(
FireStar
Nov 16, 03:42 PM
Did you google the Panerai?
Unfortunately...... :p
Unfortunately...... :p
more...
alexf
Oct 18, 07:16 PM
Aaaand in 3 ... 2 ... 1:
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
He he... I told you this would get emotional! :)
And by the way, you may want to look up "cash cow" in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with a product representing the MAJORITY of a company's income.
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
He he... I told you this would get emotional! :)
And by the way, you may want to look up "cash cow" in the dictionary. It has nothing to do with a product representing the MAJORITY of a company's income.
bpw
Apr 29, 12:37 PM
As the owner of a 1GHz eMac that will be 8 years old this summer, I've been targeting this as the year to upgrade to a 27" Core i7 iMac. We also have a MacBook that is getting up there in computer age. I'm really looking forward to this refresh, but I'll be waiting until this summer when they are shipping with Lion installed. I figure I've waited this long already, what's another few months?! I can't wait to do some home video editing on a machine that can easily handle it and dabble in some gaming on games that aren't 8-10 years old (even if most of my gaming will still be on the Xbox 360).
commander.data
May 3, 08:12 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.
Full of Win
Apr 29, 03:26 PM
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
Pillar
Sep 13, 11:20 AM
coffee from chevron. i can't recall the make
olimits7
Sep 30, 05:10 PM
True, that's a good point...I guess the issue is partly due to the iPhone and AT&T's network.
tny
Oct 6, 04:23 PM
You are assuming that the amount of spectrum available will never change. There's a reason they just shut off analog TV. Yes, spectrum is a finite resource, but they're shifting more to mobile voice/data very soon.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 10:07 PM
Apple has had a phenomenal run. They are doing this on all fronts. They have 2 Billion CASH! That is a big deal. It keeps the R&D funded.
Actually they have over $6 billion in cash and another almost $4 billion in liquid, short term investments...so they really have $10 billion in cash, up from just over $8 billion a year ago.
Actually they have over $6 billion in cash and another almost $4 billion in liquid, short term investments...so they really have $10 billion in cash, up from just over $8 billion a year ago.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น