63dot
Jan 5, 12:31 AM
NICE!!! I use to have a '71 2002. Granted it had rotted rockers, faded paint and a leaking rear main seal. But the thing started on the coldest day of the year. I loved that car. I'll try to dig up pics.
That's the old BMW for you, tough as nails. I wish BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes still made cars like they used to but building cars that rugged and long lasting is terrible for the bottom line.
I see more '70s BMWs than '80s models out there and it's probably around then that they got smart and built in obsolescence. That being said, I loved the look of the '80s BMWs and at the time, and I thought they were making a huge step up from the 2002. Little did we know.
That's the old BMW for you, tough as nails. I wish BMW, Volvo, and Mercedes still made cars like they used to but building cars that rugged and long lasting is terrible for the bottom line.
I see more '70s BMWs than '80s models out there and it's probably around then that they got smart and built in obsolescence. That being said, I loved the look of the '80s BMWs and at the time, and I thought they were making a huge step up from the 2002. Little did we know.
Kristenn
Mar 25, 04:48 PM
This is great news and all but I still don't get why people keep comparing an iMac (All in One) to a PC Tower and not something like the Gateway One or those Sony AIO computers. Its comparing apples to oranges.
The iMac isn't crippled anymore than those PC AIO computers from Sony, Dell, HP, or Gateway. In fact, the iMac is the fastest AIO you can buy, at the moment. I don't get it. People seem to think the iMac is "underpowered" because it isn't the speed of a tower computer. Well, duh. Instead of comparing an AIO to a tower, compare it to another AIO. THEN you'll see that the iMac isn't "underpowered" or anything close to the meaning of the word.
The iMac isn't crippled anymore than those PC AIO computers from Sony, Dell, HP, or Gateway. In fact, the iMac is the fastest AIO you can buy, at the moment. I don't get it. People seem to think the iMac is "underpowered" because it isn't the speed of a tower computer. Well, duh. Instead of comparing an AIO to a tower, compare it to another AIO. THEN you'll see that the iMac isn't "underpowered" or anything close to the meaning of the word.
mc68k
Jan 7, 04:19 PM
yeah it was between super sprint, eisenmann, and remus. the shop wanted to do remus so i wasn't gonna argue. turned out real nice, a lot better than the stock look. quiet on the highway. loud but not obnoxious around town
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9144153/IMG_0160.JPG
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/9144153/IMG_0160.JPG
nonameowns
Mar 25, 05:39 PM
king of mobile games right there folks
what PSP and N3DS gonna do!?
what PSP and N3DS gonna do!?
Porco
Sep 6, 09:04 AM
What do you mean by "G5"??? PowerPC is long gone from Macs.
I think he's [quite obviously] talking about the iMac G5 exterior (as opposed to the 'sunflower' iMac G4, or the original G3-based CRT iMac), the form factor, which didn't really change much from PPC to intel. He even mentioned the intel chip in his post, I think no small amount of pedantry is involved in the "???"s :)
I think he's [quite obviously] talking about the iMac G5 exterior (as opposed to the 'sunflower' iMac G4, or the original G3-based CRT iMac), the form factor, which didn't really change much from PPC to intel. He even mentioned the intel chip in his post, I think no small amount of pedantry is involved in the "???"s :)
wizard
Mar 24, 02:17 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
That is exactly what I'm thinking! Seriously there is no need for that many GPUs in the Pro and IMac requires a custom card. So where would all of these cards go - XMac is my guess.
Or it could simply be a sign of a unified driver from AMD. That would make sense as it is a smarter approach than the highly targeted drivers of the past.I don't see why Apple would want to start supporting older 5000 cards for said machine? *shrug*
How is it silly ? We're talking about a GPU. Even at 1280x800, the Intel GPU sucks, why would it be silly to want to run games on high settings
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4205/the-macbook-pro-review-13-and-15-inch-2011-brings-sandy-bridge/8
It outperforms the 320M under OS X. It certainly doesn't "suck" as much as you make it out to be.
Don't fall for anandtechs crap. Those tests where designed to make Intels GPU look good. The minute you do anything demanding the GPU falls flat on it's face. By this I mean turn on all the latest features to get the best on screen results.
For many other reasons I don't consider anandtech to be a credible web site. It has become an extension of Intels marketing team. A lot of people don't want to hear that but there is a trend in the articles that indicate that they have become a fan site and have lost the ability to report objectively.
nospeed411
Apr 21, 06:57 PM
Ok all I want to know is why the hell is Al Freaktard still allowed to breathe my air???
![bieber terminator. LEGO Terminator. [via.]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_T_JachDW9ag/S-MwEUrdRxI/AAAAAAAAHjA/Do89tL40Rts/s800/terminator-lego-model-image-2.jpg "LEGO Terminator. [via.]")
aafuss1
Aug 29, 09:05 PM
X3000 is the integrated graphics component of GMA965. It basically solves the problem of the GMA950 graphics having no hardware T&L. Hence why UT2004 scores sit in the toilet on Mac mini's and Macbooks.
It'll never challenge a midrange Nvidia or ATI card, but it'll make the mini and macbook a reasonable enry level gaming platform, which it ain't now.
See http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/G965/index.htm
for some juicy technobabble.
M.
Totally agree-even low end PC's have at least a option for a add-in T&L capable card. Plus the GMA 3000 will do Core Image and Animation very well.
It'll never challenge a midrange Nvidia or ATI card, but it'll make the mini and macbook a reasonable enry level gaming platform, which it ain't now.
See http://www.intel.com/products/chipsets/G965/index.htm
for some juicy technobabble.
M.
Totally agree-even low end PC's have at least a option for a add-in T&L capable card. Plus the GMA 3000 will do Core Image and Animation very well.
kiljoy616
Mar 26, 01:49 AM
In the future, your controller will cost �400, require a 10ft HDMI cable, a �25 adapter, and have the graphics of a PS2.
PS2 how so? Those graphics are better than the ps2 maybe not up to par with a desktop like mine but still I was impressed imagine the power of a 4 core ipad 3 with 1 gig of memory
PS2 how so? Those graphics are better than the ps2 maybe not up to par with a desktop like mine but still I was impressed imagine the power of a 4 core ipad 3 with 1 gig of memory
roland.g
Aug 30, 12:42 PM
$100 off from $949 down to $849
IMO, not worth it.
IMO, not worth it.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:49 PM
No, but having features like face detection does suggest that it's a 'consumer' orientated product.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Eh. People bitched about Aperture getting these features too, but so far Aperture's never grabbed me by the neck and forced me to use them. I assume Final Cut will be the same.
EagerDragon
Oct 23, 06:16 PM
At this rate the PowerBook G5 will be here before the Merom.
DavidLeblond
Aug 16, 07:34 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
macthetiger85
Apr 26, 01:12 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
Actually "windows OS" was a generic term to describe GUI OS - that is an OS that uses windows on a desktop for organization and simplicity. Yes, Microsoft Windows has nothing to do with window panes but in this case, they did trademark a generic term with the exact same meaning.
Here we go again
"what about windows being generic?!"
-well Microsoft isn't actually selling window panes
"app store is generic"
-if it were 'mobile software store' or 'application store', it would definitely be generic, but 'app store' is arguable
"this is stupid, apple being such a girl"
-they've built a name with 'app store', and it would be to the competitions advantage to use it. Otherwise, they would just use something else.
"apple didn't invent the word app"
-well they made it popular
"nuh-uh, I've been using app, since blah blah..."
-congratulations (but we're talking about millions, not 1 and a few friends)
Actually "windows OS" was a generic term to describe GUI OS - that is an OS that uses windows on a desktop for organization and simplicity. Yes, Microsoft Windows has nothing to do with window panes but in this case, they did trademark a generic term with the exact same meaning.
kuwisdelu
Apr 12, 09:47 PM
Well I really can't judge it until I'm actually able to touch and use it myself, but from the looks, they've gone consumer.
Not judging from the crowd's reaction :eek:
There's no video, but from the audio, these pros sound like kids in a candy store.
ETA: These reactions really make me wish there were a video feed!
Not judging from the crowd's reaction :eek:
There's no video, but from the audio, these pros sound like kids in a candy store.
ETA: These reactions really make me wish there were a video feed!
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:54 AM
Is it just me, or does the $599 mini *not* let you configure it with a DVD burner?
You're right and that sucks. :(
You're right and that sucks. :(
iMeowbot
Nov 29, 11:38 AM
I was in a Brookstone at a pretty upscale mall where the manager told me they were selling well - much better than their other MP3 players. Brookstone doesn't carry iPods so take it for what it's worth.
Is what they show here (http://www.brookstone.com/store/thumbnail.asp?sid=194&wid=2&cid=67&search_type=subcategory&cm_re=C*MP3*MP3%20Players) the whole selection they have in their stores? If so, it wouldn't be too surprising that the Zune did better there.
Is what they show here (http://www.brookstone.com/store/thumbnail.asp?sid=194&wid=2&cid=67&search_type=subcategory&cm_re=C*MP3*MP3%20Players) the whole selection they have in their stores? If so, it wouldn't be too surprising that the Zune did better there.
SwiftLives
Jun 22, 12:33 PM
Just from a pragmatic standpoint...
Fingerprints on the screen would be difficult to get around - even with Apple's "oleophobicc" display. Fingerprints still show.
Secondly - why? Is taking your hand off of a mouse to touch the safari icon on the screen somehow easier than just clicking on it with the cursor? Is there some advantage to typing by touching the screen rather than a keyboard?
Personally, I don't see much advantage to having a touch interface on any device that isn't portable.
Fingerprints on the screen would be difficult to get around - even with Apple's "oleophobicc" display. Fingerprints still show.
Secondly - why? Is taking your hand off of a mouse to touch the safari icon on the screen somehow easier than just clicking on it with the cursor? Is there some advantage to typing by touching the screen rather than a keyboard?
Personally, I don't see much advantage to having a touch interface on any device that isn't portable.
orangerizzla
Apr 3, 01:51 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Very nice... now about that iCal leatherette refresh... Blah blah blah ;-)
Very nice... now about that iCal leatherette refresh... Blah blah blah ;-)
deadlystriker
May 3, 12:26 AM
Poor lion has to accommodate all these iOS features. I'll stay with snow leopard.
Small White Car
Mar 22, 03:58 PM
The eMac hung around for a long time.
I'd certainly believe that Apple will keep selling these things online for several years, long after they take them out of the retail stores.
Sales to dance club DJs alone probably makes it worth it to keep making them.
This does make sense. It's also a nice opportunity to add Thunderbolt to a device.
Why?
The big problem with hard drives is that they're slow. How would a faster connection help an iPod Classic in any way?
I'd certainly believe that Apple will keep selling these things online for several years, long after they take them out of the retail stores.
Sales to dance club DJs alone probably makes it worth it to keep making them.
This does make sense. It's also a nice opportunity to add Thunderbolt to a device.
Why?
The big problem with hard drives is that they're slow. How would a faster connection help an iPod Classic in any way?
twoodcc
Apr 16, 09:07 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
apb3
Aug 18, 07:42 PM
I wish they would make wireless ipods soon. But I just dont think that it's gonna happen.
You can guess my feelings on this from the above discusssion but why do you want the wireless? I have seen one (maybe two) ideas that caught my eye; but not enough too change my opinion on the negative cost/benefit impact including wireless as envisioned by many here would have on my beloved device. I'm just curious as to your possible ideas or is it just cuz wireless is the latest buzzword - regardless whether it is actually useful, beneficial, effective, having a positive impact on the device in question?
So, why do you "...wish that they would make wireless iPods soon,"? What would you like to see in particular, why and how would it work technically?
I know I'm new here and I must seem a negative ass, but I just don't get why many of you would want this, let alone be frothing at the mouth. Do you not see the negatives (or, if not "negatives," at least the redundancy, bloat, PR Hype to get a few extra bucks out of you for something IMO not really worth it, etc? See my voluminous comments above). I really do love apple and it's all I really use when posible in my line of work (that must sound like the "I have black friends," line but it's true in this case). When I'm home, I won't even allow my wife's lab PC to sound the startup/shutdown chime. It's muted or it goes out the window...:D
I've even made inroads with one of the most resistant to change institutions as noted above and an SOB CO who at first laughed at apple then nearly shite himself when I presented a REAL analysis of apple's price/security/abilities/etc benefits vs the crap PCs we're forced to use backed up by my real world work product that he had praised to no end, had officially commmended me for in the past and had no clue the praise was due to the fact that I was skirting the current sec reqs by using my own machines and apps (apple) to blow him and others away at briefings.
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
You can guess my feelings on this from the above discusssion but why do you want the wireless? I have seen one (maybe two) ideas that caught my eye; but not enough too change my opinion on the negative cost/benefit impact including wireless as envisioned by many here would have on my beloved device. I'm just curious as to your possible ideas or is it just cuz wireless is the latest buzzword - regardless whether it is actually useful, beneficial, effective, having a positive impact on the device in question?
So, why do you "...wish that they would make wireless iPods soon,"? What would you like to see in particular, why and how would it work technically?
I know I'm new here and I must seem a negative ass, but I just don't get why many of you would want this, let alone be frothing at the mouth. Do you not see the negatives (or, if not "negatives," at least the redundancy, bloat, PR Hype to get a few extra bucks out of you for something IMO not really worth it, etc? See my voluminous comments above). I really do love apple and it's all I really use when posible in my line of work (that must sound like the "I have black friends," line but it's true in this case). When I'm home, I won't even allow my wife's lab PC to sound the startup/shutdown chime. It's muted or it goes out the window...:D
I've even made inroads with one of the most resistant to change institutions as noted above and an SOB CO who at first laughed at apple then nearly shite himself when I presented a REAL analysis of apple's price/security/abilities/etc benefits vs the crap PCs we're forced to use backed up by my real world work product that he had praised to no end, had officially commmended me for in the past and had no clue the praise was due to the fact that I was skirting the current sec reqs by using my own machines and apps (apple) to blow him and others away at briefings.
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
savar
Nov 15, 11:57 AM
31% is a little disappointing for 2x the number of cores. I'm hoping that particular benchmark isn't particularly tuned for multiple cores. I was thinking 60-70% would be more likely. I don't see where all the overhead is coming from. Or it because these aren't true quad-core, but really just dual-duals on the same wafer?
