.jpg)
xVeinx
Nov 16, 01:11 PM
Part of this might also be involved in other components aside from processors. As AMD now includes ATI, there are other products that might require the mentioned passive components. I'm willing to bet these capacitors might be required for a more robust video iPod or new graphics options in the current processor/laptop lineup. The Intel GMA 950 graphics are functional, but reviews on the integrated graphics included in the P965 desktop chipsets are just short of apalling. Apple would probably have seen this comming and might be trying to incorporate a form of integrated graphics from ATI without dropping the whole Intel chipset base for Santa Rosa. So yes, "AMD" would be involved, and more capacitors would be needed, but not for some new laptop. Sure, I'm flying blind, but it's fun to speculate anyways :p
DTphonehome
Oct 19, 04:00 PM
Original Investment - $94,070.00 for 11,500 shares
11,500 x 2 after the split last summer = 23,000 shares
23,000 x 78.71 at todays rate = $1,810,330.00
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
11,500 x 2 after the split last summer = 23,000 shares
23,000 x 78.71 at todays rate = $1,810,330.00
$1,810,330 - $94,070.00 = $1,716,260.00 stock worth.
I have not sold one share. Now who is laughing. Thank you iPod.
Damn, man, I'd hate to see your tax bill when you finally sell!
Anyway, share-dropping is not very gentlemanly, so I'll keep my figures to myself...but at this point I too have to hold back from selling simply to avoid the huge tax hit. Would be nice if Apple issued dividends though, especially now that they're flush. Make some cash without divesting of the principal.
chuckles:)
Oct 10, 09:39 PM
yawn.
Gugulino
Mar 24, 04:11 PM
Cheers! I wish Mac OS X a long and successful life! Keep going on�
more...
sunfast
Sep 25, 12:43 PM
The reasons people HATE this new version so much:
1. It adds a lot of features and answers requests.
2. It's a free update.
3. This is a photography event, and people were caught off guard when Apple showed their photography product, despite the Aperture image right on the invitation.
4. Apple never releases hardware on Tuesdays, so there is no hope for any MacBook Pro updates tomorrow.
5. There will never be another chance for new MacBook Pros. We now know that the current models will be sold forever and ever, even after Apple goes out of business, which will happen by the end of the year.
:p
This is a FANTASTIC post.
1. It adds a lot of features and answers requests.
2. It's a free update.
3. This is a photography event, and people were caught off guard when Apple showed their photography product, despite the Aperture image right on the invitation.
4. Apple never releases hardware on Tuesdays, so there is no hope for any MacBook Pro updates tomorrow.
5. There will never be another chance for new MacBook Pros. We now know that the current models will be sold forever and ever, even after Apple goes out of business, which will happen by the end of the year.
:p
This is a FANTASTIC post.
lorductape
Nov 16, 02:33 PM
i think it would be a great idea for apple to merge with AMD
more...
SeaFox
Oct 29, 01:00 AM
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
Matthew Yohe
Mar 28, 10:22 PM
I think we are headed towards a "locked down" OS X, FWIW.
Uh, no.
Uh, no.
more...
Popeye206
Apr 8, 04:20 PM
I think I get it now. They save inventory so they can advertise they have iPad2 in stock on date x. Date x comes a long and hordes of people flock to their stores, buying all of their iPad2s in minutes. They now have an opportunity to try and move some of their Xoom inventory on thr more gullible in the group. I am sure most buys are trying to figure what pieces of the Xoom can be recycled.
Obviously that strategy isn't working with only 100K in Xoom sales so far! :p
Obviously that strategy isn't working with only 100K in Xoom sales so far! :p
twoodcc
Aug 15, 12:11 AM
Ooooh! great, it will be good to get the points on our team from that 465!
thanks. so far this thing is smoking. but it is using different units. i'm not sure what the ppd for the card itself is, but it's gotta be 10K ppd or more.
2 more :eek: farout man! how do you afford all that hahaha!
well only 1 465 gtx. the other was just another 9800 GT. but when i run 3 of them in the same computer, one of them overheats - to 104C! but if i take one out, then it runs fine
thanks. so far this thing is smoking. but it is using different units. i'm not sure what the ppd for the card itself is, but it's gotta be 10K ppd or more.
2 more :eek: farout man! how do you afford all that hahaha!
well only 1 465 gtx. the other was just another 9800 GT. but when i run 3 of them in the same computer, one of them overheats - to 104C! but if i take one out, then it runs fine
more...
kresh
Oct 31, 02:52 PM
What on Earth are you talking about? What are people stealing in the Arn's summary? The modified code isn't capable of running OS X, and until they closed the source, Darwin worked on most generic x86 platforms anyway.
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?
Because they fixed it with the intent to use it with Aqua. They will be stealing Aqua. I sincerely doubt anyone will go through the trouble just for command line only.
Even the blogger that was mentioned has a screen shot of Aqua running. There's the theft for ya :)
Someone fixes a lack of functionality that existed in previous public versions and you call it "stealing"? WTF?
Because they fixed it with the intent to use it with Aqua. They will be stealing Aqua. I sincerely doubt anyone will go through the trouble just for command line only.
Even the blogger that was mentioned has a screen shot of Aqua running. There's the theft for ya :)
lostprophet894
Apr 15, 05:16 PM
If they're going to go with an aluminum design, it should look like this, but maybe with rounded edges:
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
http://www.phonesreview.co.uk/2010/03/30/iphone-4g-aka-hd-mock-up-design-and-details-photo/
That homescreen is nice. Not sure how I feel about the casing.
more...
Hugh
Apr 5, 10:14 PM
I'm going to start a TV channel that only shows commercials.
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
Red star background added last
more...
a small star tattoo on her
Red Star Koi Belt Buckle –
more...
These star tattoos are exactly
small nautical star tattoo
Shuriken Style Star Tattoo
They already have it and it's actually quite popular. :D
In 2000 there was a web site that was nothing but ads. Ads from all around the globe. Why is it gone? It got to popular and they were having a hard time paying for the bandwidth. Not to mention that some of the companies wanted money or their ad pulled. It was a great site to see all the Super Bowl ads. :/
flopticalcube
Apr 21, 12:07 PM
Vote count before you vote: 2
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
Vote count after you vote down: 1 (net change: -1)
Vote count after you vote up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote down, then up: 3 (net change: +1)
Vote count after you vote up, then down: 1 (net change: -1)
The net effect of you voting is only a +1 or -1. Remember, you don't know who else clicked the vote button on that same post just before you did. When you load a page, the current vote loads. If you take a minute or even a few seconds to read a post and vote, others could have voted during that time. The vote counter doesn't dynamically update every time someone votes; it does only when you vote or refresh the page.
So it's a like/dislike system that nets the like/dislikes to a numerical value, assuming the dislikes are negative. That is why when you change from a vote down to an up, you are removing your dislike and adding a like. Correct?
EDIT: Counts are update after you make a selection so it may appear that your vote was not counted but the count may not be accurate on your page when you make the vote. Got it.
more...
Clive At Five
Oct 19, 05:14 PM
but we have a 4th user, the MS diehard who is running the beta and RC stuff and keep trying to work up enthusiasm. and nobody cares.
I hope you're not talking about me! I assure you I am no MS diehard. If anything, I'm the gamer/geek, but moreso the latter. I am a fan of technology... and while I wouldn't consider myself raving about Vista, I do recognize that it's a substantial piece of work. Just for reference, I was not impressed with 98, ME (HAH!), or XP, but I am mildly-so with Vista. Also for reference, I am WAAAAY more impressed with Mac OS X than I am with Vista. Maybe it's because I've come to expect pure crap out of MS but Vista is, instead, only a small turd. *shrugs* It's just a matter of perspective. ;)
but as you point out, they WILL sell million of copies. all OEM. if they didn't have their OEM channel so locked down with anti-competative measures, they would have perished after that dog release of windows ME......
I, personally, will buy a copy off the shelf... that is, after I buy myself a shiny new MacBookPro.
-Clive
P.S. Windows ME sucks. hehe. Idiots.
I hope you're not talking about me! I assure you I am no MS diehard. If anything, I'm the gamer/geek, but moreso the latter. I am a fan of technology... and while I wouldn't consider myself raving about Vista, I do recognize that it's a substantial piece of work. Just for reference, I was not impressed with 98, ME (HAH!), or XP, but I am mildly-so with Vista. Also for reference, I am WAAAAY more impressed with Mac OS X than I am with Vista. Maybe it's because I've come to expect pure crap out of MS but Vista is, instead, only a small turd. *shrugs* It's just a matter of perspective. ;)
but as you point out, they WILL sell million of copies. all OEM. if they didn't have their OEM channel so locked down with anti-competative measures, they would have perished after that dog release of windows ME......
I, personally, will buy a copy off the shelf... that is, after I buy myself a shiny new MacBookPro.
-Clive
P.S. Windows ME sucks. hehe. Idiots.
bpaluzzi
May 4, 10:22 AM
The first link seems to be saying 4% of doctors read their email on an ipad. Do you think that really matches up with what the advertisement says, is that ground breaking?
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
Are you talking about this link?
http://www.healthcareitnews.com/news/physician-mobile-use-grows-45-percent
If so, I'm not sure how you came up with your statement. It's not even a misreading / misunderstanding. Your statement is just plain wrong.
more...
flopticalcube
Nov 26, 05:21 PM
No, but it was fun! Was thinking about getting a MB for a few months, now I had no excuse! :)
extraextra
Oct 3, 01:29 PM
Like maybe a 12" MPB ?
I'm crossing my fingers.
I'm crossing my fingers.
patrick0brien
Jul 28, 01:39 PM
True on the economies of scale bit - although the batteries are always going to be pricey.
Well, they should research capacitors then, never wear out, and charge veeeeewy quick. Like EEstor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor)
keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
Very good point. And not without a bit of irony as Rudolf Diesel patented his engine in the U.S. (608,845), and we don't use it - though that's because of the Oil companies, not the car companies.
I agree we should use the diesel. After the apocalypse, you could make your own fuel from zombie bodies!
Well, they should research capacitors then, never wear out, and charge veeeeewy quick. Like EEstor (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EEStor)
keep hammering the same point here, but the Volt would see a quite significant fuel economy boost by switching to a diesel engine to charge the batteries and run the motors. Sort it out, US car companies...it's not like we don't sell diesel here.
Very good point. And not without a bit of irony as Rudolf Diesel patented his engine in the U.S. (608,845), and we don't use it - though that's because of the Oil companies, not the car companies.
I agree we should use the diesel. After the apocalypse, you could make your own fuel from zombie bodies!
twoodcc
Aug 1, 09:00 AM
well this doesn't seem too good. let's hope everything will get worked out
MartiNZ
May 4, 05:40 AM
If you ask Hastings101, he might call it cheesy.
Fantastic, from so early in the thread and it should really have been /thread right there :). And yet no one got on board!
The ad is definitely that, but that's not to say it doesn't do a great marketing job.
Personally (redundant word, I know), I'm still holding back from the device for having no idea for what I would use it. Small World not having been downsized to the iPhone really just doesn't seem like enough of a use case! Maybe when the sequel comes out lol.
Fantastic, from so early in the thread and it should really have been /thread right there :). And yet no one got on board!
The ad is definitely that, but that's not to say it doesn't do a great marketing job.
Personally (redundant word, I know), I'm still holding back from the device for having no idea for what I would use it. Small World not having been downsized to the iPhone really just doesn't seem like enough of a use case! Maybe when the sequel comes out lol.
NAG
Jan 12, 03:08 PM
Equating destruction of physical property to turning off tv sets is a stretch. Such hyperbole just makes more of the drama that they want. Why do you think they did this? They're attention whores.
miles01110
Apr 13, 06:37 AM
Don't know what is more ridiculous, the pat down of the little girl or the mother asking for a re-scan. I op out every single time I travel. It is not evident (and the TSA flunkies don't really know) whether a given device is a backscatter scanner or a an active or passive terahertz wave scanner. There is currently no long term evidence that backscatter or active terahertz wave scanners do not have side effects, especially for frequent travelers. Unless they switch all scanners to passive terahertz wave scanners, I will continue to opt out and if they ever make these scans mandatory without the opt out option, I will refuse to fly.
The radiation dosage from any properly maintained active scanner is still orders of magnitude less than what you get from a 4-hour flight at 10 km. Go ahead and opt out of your full-body scans... if you're doing it for the "health" reason you're tilting at a very small windmill.
The radiation dosage from any properly maintained active scanner is still orders of magnitude less than what you get from a 4-hour flight at 10 km. Go ahead and opt out of your full-body scans... if you're doing it for the "health" reason you're tilting at a very small windmill.
hamlin
Nov 8, 03:11 PM
I pre-ordered it for PS3 from ebgames. I'll pick it up after work tomorrow.
The best was COD 4: MW. That set the bar for COD games.
The best was COD 4: MW. That set the bar for COD games.