john123
Sep 19, 08:59 AM
Does it even MATTER if Apple keeps up? Do we actually WANT Apple to release a new computer every month when Intel bumps up their chips a few megahertz?
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
See, it's easy to get lost in the specs war. The Mac Pros came out and I was salivating, even though I have a dual 2.0GHz G5 sitting at home. And then one day, as I was editing some HD footage, it occurred ot me that my G5 here - my now outdated G5 - was editing 1080p high-def footage without so much as a flinch. It was SO fast it was not even necessary at all.
So I really have to ask - does Apple really need to get into that stupid-ass PC specs war? Is it really hurting you guys that Apple has been slow to update? Are you really doing tasks that the current computer lineup cannot do?
AMEN!!!! This whole thread has the tone of a spoiled 13 year old's "I want" tirade. All the benchmarks show little difference between Merom and what you can buy today...and the 64 bit argument is really moot for most users because....(ready for it)....it's a laptop! Very few will have more than 2GB RAM on it anyway, and addressing larger RAM partitions is the #1 64 bit advantage.
JAT
Mar 22, 06:34 PM
To whom do they outsource?
I'm genuinely curious since they've been advertising related jobs lately.
Thanks for any links or other info!
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
I'm genuinely curious since they've been advertising related jobs lately.
Thanks for any links or other info!
It runs Android. Pretty sure that's what he meant. So, Google, Android developers, Android marketplace.
mr.steevo
Apr 28, 04:51 PM
This thread is Still rattling on about this?
The Titanic is still sinking...
The Titanic is still sinking...
SuperCachetes
Mar 22, 06:53 PM
Oh yeah... and here's a fun little nugget for those who like to tout Obama's coalition:
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
Here's a little fun little nugget for those who say "Obama's just Bush all over again."
UN Resolution 1441 (2002) was drafted by the US and UK, and presented at the UN by Bush.
UN Resolution 1973 (2011) was drafted by France, Lebanon, and the UK, and not presented by the US.
Like you, I would rather us not be involved at all - but we hardly have quite the same hand in this latest business as we did when we went WMD-hunting...
gnasher729
Aug 26, 04:12 PM
That doesn't make sense, marketing wise. If they do anything to the MacBooks and iMacs they would at least bump their speeds. It doesn't matter f the 2GHz Merom chip is faster than the 2GHz Yonah chip, the consumers don't give a crap about the chip... they want to see "them GHz numbers" go up.
We are talking here about Macintosh buyers, not about idiots.
Just sell Merom as "64 bit", that's twice as much as "32 bit".
We are talking here about Macintosh buyers, not about idiots.
Just sell Merom as "64 bit", that's twice as much as "32 bit".
Chaszmyr
Aug 15, 01:00 PM
I would have thought that the Final Cut Pro benchmark would have really blown away the G5 - not so much, right?
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
I couldn't say for sure, but I would guess that the current version of FCP was carefully optimized for the G5, and has not yet undergone the same treatment for Intel chips.
tekmoe
Aug 27, 11:00 PM
Core 2 Duo is here. Looks like Toshiba is first out of the gate with Core 2 Duo laptops:
http://www.toshibadirect.com:80/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=347885&coid=-30600&seg=HHO
wish apple would pony up and do a 1920x1200 like that toshiba...
http://www.toshibadirect.com:80/td/b2c/pdet.to?poid=347885&coid=-30600&seg=HHO
wish apple would pony up and do a 1920x1200 like that toshiba...
Major Majors
Aug 7, 08:45 PM
I had no idea what the "open in dashboard" image was for, but I called it out on the Apple Discussion board 9 months ago. Apparently this has been in the works for Safari for QUITE some time
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=987980#987980
http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=987980#987980
Squire
Aug 7, 06:31 AM
this is me going out an a limb here.
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
but do you think the desktop lineup could become this?
Mac mini (2 models)
the Mac
iMac
Mac Pro
I'd like to see your "Mac" model bumped up past the iMac. I think a lot of people, myself included, would pay a premium for the ability to upgrade. In fact, I wouldn't care if they didn't offer a completely new model as long as they offer some "affordable" manifestations of the Mac Pro. So how's this (and go easy on me here because I rarely delve into the technical aspect of things):
Eventually (i.e. by November), Core 2 Duo/Woodcrest across he board:
1) Mac mini: 2 models both with the 1.86 GHz Core 2 Duo
2) iMac: 2 models with 1.86 GHz and 2.13 GHz Core 2 Duo
3) Mac Pro: 4 models; 2 Core 2 Duo-based systems (2.40 GHz and 2.66 GHz) and 2 Xeon-based systems (2.80 GHz and 3.0 GHz). The higher-end Xeon systems would sport the same enclosure as the Core 2 Duo systems (similar to the PM G5) but would come in an anodized charcoal black enclosure.
Any takers?
-Squire
NAG
Mar 31, 04:17 PM
I look ace in a Trilby.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
Well at least you are an honest troll. Can't say that about everyone who starts attacking groups of people over their OS choice. *shrug*
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
Well at least you are an honest troll. Can't say that about everyone who starts attacking groups of people over their OS choice. *shrug*
deconai
Aug 11, 12:16 PM
I really don't put too much stock in what ThinkSecret has been saying. They've really missed the mark a lot lately as far as the redesigned Mac Pro casing and other things too numerous to mention. It's almost as if they'll just publish anything that even vaguely refers to Apple. The only thing ThinkSecret is good for is keeping up with Apple lawsuit against them.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
Gamoe
Mar 31, 06:43 PM
Open doesn't necessarily mean "supported". All it means is that the source code is available and you can do whatever you want with it (as long as you keep that same source open as well). If some other group or company wants to take on and support an Android variant, they can do so and support it with updates. As far as I understand open source licences, Google can't prevent this.
On the other hand, Google has no obligation to support every single variant out there, or put the Google stamp on something they don't approve because of quality, compatibility, consistency or any number of other concerns. That said, withholding the Honeycomb source may be stretching it.
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
On the other hand, Google has no obligation to support every single variant out there, or put the Google stamp on something they don't approve because of quality, compatibility, consistency or any number of other concerns. That said, withholding the Honeycomb source may be stretching it.
If you're going to licence your project as open source, then you do actually have to release the source. I know there's often a delay with commercial products. I suppose the tolerance of the open source community depends on the reason and the amount of time the code is held back.
blahblah100
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
slackpacker
Apr 25, 02:42 PM
Not guilty until proven guilty ... your turn to proof that they have the data. There is zero evidence for that, no matter how often you repeat the claim.
Its not that Apple is using this data its how its being used by others. Its Apples job to protect us not allow our private info to be used against us.
SEE >>>> www.cellebrite.com (http://www.cellebrite.com/forensic-products/ufed-physical-pro.html) - forensic-products
Its not that Apple is using this data its how its being used by others. Its Apples job to protect us not allow our private info to be used against us.
SEE >>>> www.cellebrite.com (http://www.cellebrite.com/forensic-products/ufed-physical-pro.html) - forensic-products
Trekkie
Sep 18, 02:19 PM
The Thinkpad X40 I'm typing from Bluescreened on me no longer than three weeks ago. My crime? coming out of suspend mode.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
Windows Crashes.
Believe it or not, Mac OS X can crash too. While it is prettier, it's still a crash.
Pretty funny reading the last few pages, thanks for the laughs.
VanNess
Aug 8, 12:02 AM
Running the preview now... some nice developer level stuff that I cannot ebelish on however beyond what was talked about in the keynote...Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
All of a sudden Macworld 07 just got a lot more interesting. :)
All of a sudden Macworld 07 just got a lot more interesting. :)
wizz0bang
Jul 15, 11:25 AM
I like your line of thinking. You know, what if Apple just released 4 Mac Pro models? Or offered 2 Mac Pro models and 2 iMac Pro models. The bottom two could have Conroe chips and the top two could have 2 x Woodcrest chips. Perhaps have an ever so slight case design difference between the two (i.e. slightly smaller on the low end or charcoal black on the upper end). Because, when you think of it, "prosumers" who already own a display are faced with a difficult buying decision with the current lineup.
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
That would be a good lineup: two Minis, two iMacs, two Macs, two MacPros. Perhaps then the spread from $1499 for a base model conroe Mac to a $3299 or even $3599 for a premo dual-woodcrest 3GHz MacPro would seem plausible? I really like having a Mac desktop option before stepping up to the MacPro (with a smaller format). Right now the iMac is your only option in a certain range.
I agree with another poster too, having both models silent would be most excellent!
Consultant
Mar 22, 01:46 PM
It won�t sell because the iPad lines will block the view in store.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
Exactly. And that the overpriced 7" RIM playbook basically tried to emulate the Samsung tab.
shawnce
Jul 14, 11:20 PM
AARGH MY EARS!
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
Whoever came up with that abomination should be SHOT! UGH! they could have put together a nice little slideshow or whatever...but no, they had to make some stupid video with a horrible song i'll NEVER be able to get out of my head!
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 08:58 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
sososowhat
Sep 13, 09:50 AM
One could run a Folding@Home process on each core :D
GermanSuplex
Jun 17, 02:01 PM
Why did Apple/RadioShack even bother? Even the manager told me the whole process was screwed up.
This is what I'm wondering. Why bother if this is how its going to be? I've seen several different outcomes to one situation: People trying to get an iPhone. My name was written on a piece of blank paper (apparantly I was the first one at my store to ask for the iPhone 4). The guy called me back an hour and a half or so later for my address and the make/model of the phone I wanted. I've gotten no further updates, no pin, etc.
*Update:
I just received an email from Radio Shack, an advertisement email with a 10% off coupon. Nothing about the iPhone though.
**Just called the store, and supposedly out of three stores in my area I was the only one who asked for a reservation before they were cut off. My reservation was supposedly successful. The guy said that the outlook is good that I'll get one on launch day, but it isn't definite. We'll see, I guess.
This is what I'm wondering. Why bother if this is how its going to be? I've seen several different outcomes to one situation: People trying to get an iPhone. My name was written on a piece of blank paper (apparantly I was the first one at my store to ask for the iPhone 4). The guy called me back an hour and a half or so later for my address and the make/model of the phone I wanted. I've gotten no further updates, no pin, etc.
*Update:
I just received an email from Radio Shack, an advertisement email with a 10% off coupon. Nothing about the iPhone though.
**Just called the store, and supposedly out of three stores in my area I was the only one who asked for a reservation before they were cut off. My reservation was supposedly successful. The guy said that the outlook is good that I'll get one on launch day, but it isn't definite. We'll see, I guess.
mmmcheese
Jul 14, 03:37 PM
As usual though they come with 50% of the necessary RAM :rolleyes:, why Apple can't get this right I don't know.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.
Also I'm surprised the top model doesn't have Intel's fastest chip, surely Apple want to say they have the fastest possible computers?
Dual Optical drives is OK, good if you want to have a blu-ray drive as well I suppose...
1) This is all rumour and speculation...
2) At the price that OEMs charge for memory, less RAM is better. We can fill it with whatever we pick.