Vegasman
Apr 28, 10:36 PM
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now? Sure. However it is also mostly the reason Apple still only had 5% of that market.
Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now? Sure. However it is also mostly the reason Apple still only had 5% of that market.
munkery
Jan 14, 01:11 PM
Maybe theoretically you should do that, but I don't know anyone that actually does on Windows or OS X. In both cases you aren't actually running with your full powers all the time, and get prompted to escalate if something needs admin access.
The default account created in Mac OS X has password authentication. Your password is the unique identifier. Most people use the default account created by the OS for day to day computing.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
When the software is running with superuser privilege and connects to servers that can be controlled by anybody such as in many online games for Windows, the content downloaded from the server can be written anywhere in your system. This allows keyloggers, backdoors, and malware rootkits to be installed.
Why?
Why! (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11720477&postcount=182).
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
They count the number of items in each vendors security releases. Mac OS X includes Flash, Java, & etc by default so vulnerabilities in those are counted for Mac OS X because included in Apple security releases. Often these items constitute the majority of vulnerabilities in the security release. It is only valid if Windows users don't install Flash, Java, various ActiveX components, codecs, etc, etc, etc...
I'm not seeing why you're saying there's any difference. I don't use IE or Safari as my primary browser, though there may be some validity to including one or the other in the list of OS issues, but at any rate neither yet sandboxes plug-ins to my knowledge.
There's a flag that can be set for that, but I'm not sure where you're getting it from that article. Regardless 'some' is better than 'none'.
Except for Chrome which is sandboxed, all browser are susceptible to the security problems of the underlying OS but these issues arise in more than just the browser. An example of how they are different is Java has no security mitigations (DER or ASLR) in Windows (as shown in article) but Java has hardware based DEP and partial ASLR in Mac OS X as Java is 64 bit in OS X. Also, Mac OS X randomizes memory space into 4 byte chunks making it more difficult to defeat ASLR while Windows uses 64 byte chunks. Like you said, some is better than none.
Security mitigations, such as DEP and ASLR, can be optionally set in Windows OSes for various reasons such as support for legacy software. A lot of software for Windows comes with weak security by default and will break if the user tries to modify its settings. In Mac OS X, apps have a standard level of security mitigations dependent on the type of process (32 or 64 bit) that are set at that standard level when the app is compiled and not modifiable as in Windows (Opt-in, Opt-out, etc).
Which is different from Windows how?
Because Windows has a history of malware that achieves privilege escalation and Mac OS X does not? Check out these from late November 2010:
Security hole in Windows kernel allows UAC bypass (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/security-hole-in-windows-kernel-allows-uac-bypass/7752)
Nightmare kernel bug lets attackers evade Windows UAC security (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9198158/_Nightmare_kernel_bug_lets_attackers_evade_Windows_UAC_security)
UAC bypass exploit for Metasploit (http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/)
Agitation mamata wallpapers to
CM Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
BuddhadebBuddhadeb
Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee meets
Inspite of all odds, Buddhadeb
by vikaram thakor mamata
ibns the helped mamata
Chief Minister Buddhadeb
New Delhi, June 19: Union home minister P. Chidambaram today charged the Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee government with
mamata jan at railway oct
Mamata+banerjee+railway
Buddhadeb amp; Climate Change
BY BUDDHADEB BHATTACHARJEE
CM Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
Mr. Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee at
Buddhadeb owns up
Buddhadeb Bhattacharjee
The default account created in Mac OS X has password authentication. Your password is the unique identifier. Most people use the default account created by the OS for day to day computing.
Commercial software shouldn't be installing malware...I mean tons of it now has all kinds of DRM that is arguably malware, but...
While I'd rather run something without giving it full access to the system, ultimately you're trusting the publisher either way.
When the software is running with superuser privilege and connects to servers that can be controlled by anybody such as in many online games for Windows, the content downloaded from the server can be written anywhere in your system. This allows keyloggers, backdoors, and malware rootkits to be installed.
Why?
Why! (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11720477&postcount=182).
I really doubt they double count things like that, given they're counted separately. I suppose there might be some validity to it if they did.
They count the number of items in each vendors security releases. Mac OS X includes Flash, Java, & etc by default so vulnerabilities in those are counted for Mac OS X because included in Apple security releases. Often these items constitute the majority of vulnerabilities in the security release. It is only valid if Windows users don't install Flash, Java, various ActiveX components, codecs, etc, etc, etc...
I'm not seeing why you're saying there's any difference. I don't use IE or Safari as my primary browser, though there may be some validity to including one or the other in the list of OS issues, but at any rate neither yet sandboxes plug-ins to my knowledge.
There's a flag that can be set for that, but I'm not sure where you're getting it from that article. Regardless 'some' is better than 'none'.
Except for Chrome which is sandboxed, all browser are susceptible to the security problems of the underlying OS but these issues arise in more than just the browser. An example of how they are different is Java has no security mitigations (DER or ASLR) in Windows (as shown in article) but Java has hardware based DEP and partial ASLR in Mac OS X as Java is 64 bit in OS X. Also, Mac OS X randomizes memory space into 4 byte chunks making it more difficult to defeat ASLR while Windows uses 64 byte chunks. Like you said, some is better than none.
Security mitigations, such as DEP and ASLR, can be optionally set in Windows OSes for various reasons such as support for legacy software. A lot of software for Windows comes with weak security by default and will break if the user tries to modify its settings. In Mac OS X, apps have a standard level of security mitigations dependent on the type of process (32 or 64 bit) that are set at that standard level when the app is compiled and not modifiable as in Windows (Opt-in, Opt-out, etc).
Which is different from Windows how?
Because Windows has a history of malware that achieves privilege escalation and Mac OS X does not? Check out these from late November 2010:
Security hole in Windows kernel allows UAC bypass (http://www.zdnet.com/blog/security/security-hole-in-windows-kernel-allows-uac-bypass/7752)
Nightmare kernel bug lets attackers evade Windows UAC security (http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9198158/_Nightmare_kernel_bug_lets_attackers_evade_Windows_UAC_security)
UAC bypass exploit for Metasploit (http://www.exploit-db.com/bypassing-uac-with-user-privilege-under-windows-vista7-mirror/)
Equitek
Apr 22, 12:23 PM
Are there any Thuderbolt devices yet?
sigh... I haven't even seen cable adapters, I kinda expected a ThunderBolt to eSATA adapter quickly...
sigh... I haven't even seen cable adapters, I kinda expected a ThunderBolt to eSATA adapter quickly...
Ampidire
Apr 22, 01:43 PM
I've decided the SB refresh on this machine will be my next purchase, it's perfect for me in school and I no longer need the powerhouse MBP I have now.
I just didn't wanna buy a C2D, the nVidia IGP is nice yes, but I don't game on my MBP as it is, so what do I have to lose other than weight..
I just didn't wanna buy a C2D, the nVidia IGP is nice yes, but I don't game on my MBP as it is, so what do I have to lose other than weight..
Chupa Chupa
Sep 4, 07:55 PM
Insiders can only presume the device will take up the form of a video-enabled version of Apple's existing AirPort Express wireless base station, which lets users stream their iTunes music tracks from their computers to their home stereo receivers. It also acts as a wireless 802.11 router and printing hub.
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Look Apple has been keeping secrets it wants to be secret very secret for over a year now. The rumor sites have been so off this year, except for the obvious, that they'd need a power plant to get them back to being on. I'm not buying any of it. I'll be sorely disapponted if all we get is a Disney movie store, a 80GB iPod, a 23" iMac, and an array of colorful nanos. Zzzzz. Put me to sleep.
The nano was the last buzzworthy product Apple has put out in a year (I'll spare you the MPB jokes). Apple is due with something cool; something to compete with PS3 dollars this Xmas.
Hmm...I think Belkin calls this 802.11n. This isn't new. Gimme a break. People are really scrounging around deep now.
Look Apple has been keeping secrets it wants to be secret very secret for over a year now. The rumor sites have been so off this year, except for the obvious, that they'd need a power plant to get them back to being on. I'm not buying any of it. I'll be sorely disapponted if all we get is a Disney movie store, a 80GB iPod, a 23" iMac, and an array of colorful nanos. Zzzzz. Put me to sleep.
The nano was the last buzzworthy product Apple has put out in a year (I'll spare you the MPB jokes). Apple is due with something cool; something to compete with PS3 dollars this Xmas.
iMikeT
Aug 28, 04:37 PM
I think the whining (about notebooks being crap) is the fact that there is so much demand for it that Apple has no time to actually test the product.
It's a good thing that they offer free replacements for those that find defects actual defects in the machines. Usually the first batch is not so perfect, and that goes for all computer manufacturers.
It's a good thing that they offer free replacements for those that find defects actual defects in the machines. Usually the first batch is not so perfect, and that goes for all computer manufacturers.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 12:08 PM
What is to be skeptical about? Seriously Intel continuously improves its hardware, they have to or end up getting trounced on by the competition. In fact recent history with respect to AMD demonstrates what happens when they don't take a serious look at their hardware.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.I'm skeptical that Napa64 is a different chipset then the standard Intel 945 mobile series. Core 2 Duo works in the same socket as Yonah but somehow you need a Napa64 chipset to get full 64-bit addressing? They haven't changed a thing with the 945. Napa64 is just the 945 chipset with a Merom instead of a Yonah. We won't see any real change until we hit Santa Rosa.
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet.
DaveKentsfield is two Conroes on a single die. They don't share cache like the previous Pentium D chips. So they'll each have 4 MB of cache and then communicate over the front side bus.
The issue with Merom and this iterations backward computability is that it gets INTEL 64 bit hardware to market fast as frankly they weren't even competing in that realm. For Intel 64 bit is serious issue as they are behind the eight ball or this one. It is an example of Intel being asleep at the wheel as they focused on who needs 64 bit instructions when a good part of the market demand was for addressable ram.I'm skeptical that Napa64 is a different chipset then the standard Intel 945 mobile series. Core 2 Duo works in the same socket as Yonah but somehow you need a Napa64 chipset to get full 64-bit addressing? They haven't changed a thing with the 945. Napa64 is just the 945 chipset with a Merom instead of a Yonah. We won't see any real change until we hit Santa Rosa.
Frankly I haven't followed Kentsfield that much, more of an AMD man, but what is interesting to me with respect to this thread, is that MEROM the platform has a long way to go yet.
DaveKentsfield is two Conroes on a single die. They don't share cache like the previous Pentium D chips. So they'll each have 4 MB of cache and then communicate over the front side bus.
howard
Sep 19, 02:30 PM
jeez, thats about 10x what i would have expected.
a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.
couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?
a lot of people I have talked to thought that it was "crazy" to expect people to wait 30+mins to download a movie.
couldn't apple develop something into itunes that lets you watch while it is downloading? is this possible?
lOUDsCREAMEr
Sep 26, 09:56 AM
I hear you. :eek: But, there are no Intel Inside stickers on the Intel Macs. Perhaps there is hope...
http://images.apple.com/imac/images/indexintelchip20060906.jpg
whatz that?! ;) :D :p
http://images.apple.com/imac/images/indexintelchip20060906.jpg
whatz that?! ;) :D :p
Joshuarocks
Apr 19, 10:16 AM
Bottom line: The USA is already becoming like a 3rd world nation and I predict its going to get worse from here on through.. until the American People wake up and do something about it. One thing I have noticed about Americans when I came to this country many years ago - they are NOT revolutionaries like those in Eastern Europe or Europe for that fact.. they will allow their government to please them in any way shape or form, even when their freedoms are taken away by the Patriot acts I and II, and very soon III.
Americans don't have it in their blood any more to fight for what they truly believe in, all they care about is letting themselves be sent like sheep to the government's slaughter house.
WAKE UP!
Americans don't have it in their blood any more to fight for what they truly believe in, all they care about is letting themselves be sent like sheep to the government's slaughter house.
WAKE UP!
Apple OC
Jan 2, 03:32 PM
The McAfee free trial versions for Mac should be out any day now. :cool:
aiqw9182
Apr 16, 01:53 AM
No different? What planet on you living on because it's not Earth.... The link quoted tested a slow 2.5" drive and still showed a 3.5x speed improvement. USB3 can only go as fast as the drive it's connected to. You're going to find that out with TB as well. You can't make gold out of dirt.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
These people on here suggesting Intel should can USB3 are not real computer users. They're non-computer types that don't know WTF they're talking about. Period. There is NO reason to NOT use USB3 on new computers. Their cost is next to nothing. They're 100% backwards compatible with USB2.0,1.1 and 1.0 and you'll need those ports regardless whether your computer has TB or not. Not having USB3 simply means less flexibility. Even if you hate it, your friend comes over with his 7200RPM USB3 drive and connects it to your Mac using USB 2.0 and instead of going 110MB/sec as it would under USB3, it goes 30-35MB/sec under USB 2.0. He then asks you why your Mac SUCKS SO HARD and your reply will be that he should have paid $400 for that drive with a TB connector instead of $150 with a USB3 connector (even though TB will not go faster because that's the limit of the drive itself). Your friend will then suggest you give him some money since you're stinking loaded to WASTE $250 more on the TB drive when USB3 would have done just as well. But then you remind him that Apple don't support no stinking USB3 and he then tells you that his PC just 'PWNED' your 'Crapple'. :eek:
Apple isn't doing themselves ANY favors to ignore mainstream tech. They want TB? Fine, but don't leave out USB3 to spite yourself. Oh wait. They already did that with Blu-Ray.... :rolleyes:
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Lol
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also.
zango
Apr 25, 02:01 PM
Didn't Apple recently hire someone that deals with carbon-fibre? Guessing might have something to do with that...
scottgroovez
Apr 25, 02:50 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
2012 is a long way off. Buy now, enjoy it now and sell and upgrade when the time comes. I'm terrible for getting caught in the waiting game. You just wait for eternity.
I'm not sure the pros will lose the DVD drive. It'll encroch into MBA territory and pros are meant more for industry use where the drives are useful.
MBA for casual use. MBP where nothing is compromised.
13 needs a better screen though. I've just bought my first 13 MBP and the soft resolution is a bit disappointing.
Would you disagree that, just perhaps, in these industries where the DVD drive is so crucial that they might just have external drives? Apple is trying to sell these MacBooks to everyone, not just pros. It's the internet and App store are capable of doing the exact same thing as DVDs (for most computer purposes). For everything else, buy the external superdrive. 15% of MBP customers might need a DVD drive, but we know Apple isn't going to ignore the 85% who don't.
Those who don't want the superdrive have the option of an air. People in the music industry will always have a use for CD's. I just think no superdrive makes it an air varient not a pro.
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
2012 is a long way off. Buy now, enjoy it now and sell and upgrade when the time comes. I'm terrible for getting caught in the waiting game. You just wait for eternity.
I'm not sure the pros will lose the DVD drive. It'll encroch into MBA territory and pros are meant more for industry use where the drives are useful.
MBA for casual use. MBP where nothing is compromised.
13 needs a better screen though. I've just bought my first 13 MBP and the soft resolution is a bit disappointing.
Would you disagree that, just perhaps, in these industries where the DVD drive is so crucial that they might just have external drives? Apple is trying to sell these MacBooks to everyone, not just pros. It's the internet and App store are capable of doing the exact same thing as DVDs (for most computer purposes). For everything else, buy the external superdrive. 15% of MBP customers might need a DVD drive, but we know Apple isn't going to ignore the 85% who don't.
Those who don't want the superdrive have the option of an air. People in the music industry will always have a use for CD's. I just think no superdrive makes it an air varient not a pro.
Tom Sawyer
Apr 30, 07:54 PM
Then I wouldn't plan on ever going back to an iMac.
Definitely no plan to. Apple (SJ) is far to enamored with glossy screens to give anyone options on the large displays/iMacs. I'm still surprised they actually brought the matte option back to MBP's.
Definitely no plan to. Apple (SJ) is far to enamored with glossy screens to give anyone options on the large displays/iMacs. I'm still surprised they actually brought the matte option back to MBP's.
JAT
Apr 11, 12:05 PM
Try proofing before posting articles.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.
"especially when there it is possible to be an officially licensed AirPlay partner."
They do appreciate notice of such things, but you could try using a friendly tone.
True, but if you've just spent �450 on the receiver and another �100 or so on speakers you'd maybe resent having to shell out more for AirPlay.
I've never quite understood the mindset that '$600 is ok for a PS3, $300 is ok for an iPod Touch, $2000 is ok for a pieced gaming rig, $200+$30/month forever is ok for a smartphone....but spend another $30 to get a necessary accessory??? You bastards are ripping me off!!' :rolleyes:
Also, people should really plan ahead and not expect others (say, Apple) to accomplish setting up their home for them. Expecting and whining about getting any speaker and any song on any device to communicate without YOU having a bit of forethought is silly. If you have 10 rooms with speakers, then set them up right with potential 'friends' iPods' hookup somewhere. Put your iTunes server on the most intelligent computer for whole house audio and set it up appropriately. You should be happy it no longer costs $10000+ to do such a thing. Whether it's a few AEXs or other means, you can get what you want, go do it.
squeeks
Apr 10, 08:48 PM
you guys do realize gas is like 9 dollars a gallon in europe right?
miyamoto
Nov 9, 02:37 PM
Some time back there was a post of someone swapping out a cpu in an Imac. Does anyone know if someone has managed to swap out the core 2 duo cpu yet? I assume they still arent soldered?
*LTD*
Apr 29, 06:08 AM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
Wrong.
The exact OPPOSITE is true.
Apple takes some serious risks. How else do they move the entire industry in new directions?
iPhone. iPad. Both massive risks. Both were dismissed by major industry players. The iPad especially was dismissed by a lot of folks on MR. Vertical business model in an industry where everyone in in a race to the bottom and where some version of Windows dominates on computers. Big risk. Completely ditching OS 9 overnight and moving to OS X. Big risk as well. Apple is really the only one on the block that bothers to try new things.
Here's some claim chowder. Mmmm, deeeelish!
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=9197388&postcount=166
Am I the only one who thinks Acer is right and they are not worried nor expect the iPad to do little to no damage to their netbook market.
The iPad is basicly nothing more then a iPod touch with a bigger screen. Yes the bigger screen offers some extras stuff but still you suffer the same limitition of the iPhone/iPod Touch OS and are trapped in apple's sand box.
The iPad is not going to replace a traveling computer because it is just way to limited. It has piss poor way of connecting to USB/SD card. You are still required to carry a dedicated keyboard if you want to get much work done that way and so on.
The Netbook on the other had is a great for business travelers. It is a full flege computer. Yeah it has a small screen but it is the same size a the iPad and a full size keyboard and more powerful OS.
iPad is a consumer level devices. Netbook is a bussiness/Enterprise level device. That is 2 very different markets. The Netbook is not designed to replace a deticated desktop/Main laptop neither is the iPad. Netbooks are designed to make traveling with a computer a hell of a lot nicer.
Lets compare the 2.
Checking Email-- I give that to the iPad.
Responding to Email - Netbook due to keyboard.
Over all email - Netbook
Surfing the internet - Netbook due to flash support
Reading the news - iPad.
Reading books - iPad.
Getting real work done (word documents excel sheets ect.) -- Netbook.
iPad - Consumer device something apple has proven it is damn good at.
Netbook --Enterprise/ Bussiness device -- Something apple has shown time and time again it has craptactor support and does not really even bother making stuff to into that market.
So what happened? This "oversized iPod Touch" did this:
http://www.geekwire.com/2011/microsoft-profits-top-expectations-xbox-office-trump-pc-slump
In its quarterly filing, Microsoft indicated that the consumer PC market was the primary culprit for the decline � pointing in particular to a 40 percent decline in netbook sales in the consumer market. That�s more evidence of the iPad�s impact on the market. Many consumers are opting for the Apple slate rather than Windows-based netbooks to fill the gap between the PC and the phone.
40% decline in netbooks, huh?
Remember seeing articles like these a while back?
David Carnoy, February 2009: "Why Apple Must Do a Netbook Now"
Preston Gralla, March 2009: "Why Apple Will Have to Release a Netbook"
Charles Moore, March 2010: "Apple Still Needs a Sub-$700 Conventional Notebook"
Apple TOOK A RISK and did the iPad instead. And look what happened.
Cheap netbook junk is circling the drain and major players are suddenly in the tablet game full-tilt. AFTER Apple laid the groundwork. Apple's big risks pay off. Whether Apple thinks they're a "sure thing" is a different story. They're likely pretty confident in what they produce because they know better than everyone else, whether it's the other major industry players, pundits, etc.
MS' backbone is their universal licensing racket. Winblows on PCs. No need to innovate. Blame netbook decline. Blame a "market reset." Blame your mom. But never blame your aging cash cow whose udders are now almost completely dry. MS is NOT a risk-taker. Especially in the enterprise. Especially in operating systems. Especially by copying Apple 3 years late ALMOST EVERY TIME. Let Apple take the risks, and then Zune it! Or release a smartphone no one really gives a damn about.
Please, don't go talking about risks. Because the only one to have any friggin' shred of creativity in the industry and the power to mass produce the fruits of it is Apple. Their moves for the past decade have been nothing less than complete and total daring. They often come out of left field with products that no one initially understands, that are laughingly dismissed by other major players (Ballmer on the iPhone, nearly everyone on the iPod), but that we end up using and everyone else ends up copying shortly after. Part of the reason an industry player that does the exact opposite of the other major players is about to surpass Exxon Mobil as the most valuable company on the planet.
oliversl
Mar 29, 12:48 PM
Regarding that news about Nokia not shipping Symbian in 2012, that means feature phones (80US$) will also be loaded with WP?
Either way, Nokia is now the enemy. I used to love Nokia, so sad
Either way, Nokia is now the enemy. I used to love Nokia, so sad
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:28 PM
Sounds like you'd be interested in a nice Windows7 machine. Enjoy. :rolleyes:
Why would he? Just because he wants a 24"?
Physically, compared to the 27, it's not much smaller due to the aspect ratio. The resolution on the 27 is the only real improvement.
I recall when the 21.5 and 27's came out and people were up in arms for Apple going to 16:9 displays when they had traditionally stayed with 'regular' PC resolutions.
Why would he? Just because he wants a 24"?
Physically, compared to the 27, it's not much smaller due to the aspect ratio. The resolution on the 27 is the only real improvement.
I recall when the 21.5 and 27's came out and people were up in arms for Apple going to 16:9 displays when they had traditionally stayed with 'regular' PC resolutions.
Nomadski
Apr 13, 07:07 AM
MagnusVonMagnum -
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
- Sonos is not "way better quality" (AppleTV2 output is DIGITAL and so the "quality" depends entirely on the stereo you connect it to. So sorry but you have no point there.
Unless you've purchased / converted music in Apple lossless format it IS way better quality. Im making the comparison of my situation listening to FLAC vs the masses who purchase mp3s on iTunes. You could rip your music in Apple Lossless for sure, but then your hooked into iTunes, cant play on WMP or most other mp3s other than iPods. Like with a lot of stuff iTunes related, if you go that route, your stuck. Even the all inclusive Sonos S5 sounds better than the best iPod dock on the market (Bose 10 / Zeppelin whichever grabs your boat the most).
- It may not be better quality, but it IS "way more expensive". AppleTV2 costs $99 (same price as an Airport Express which is "audio only" like Sonos). Sonos OTOH costs $349 for a basic receiver which then still requires to either be connected directly to a router (wired) OR you have to pay ANOTHER $99 for a "bridge" to send a separate wireless signal off your router just for Sonos devices (waste of bandwidth and clutters the band with more wireless signals instead of just using your existing wireless router, which most people already have (how many used a wired only router and if you did you cannot use the Sonos wireless for anything else). So already you are at LEAST $450 in the hole for a single room with Sonos and you have ONLY AUDIO capability.
Sonos isnt cheap for sure, but that is why I said people who have no shortage of money at the start of my thread. Some people have massive Mac systems, those people shouldn't skimp when it comes to music, if they like music, or video for that matter.
One of the big features of Sonos which you obviously arent aware of is that Sonos DOESNT hog your bandwidth. It uses its own Mesh network which works independantly of your home wireless network, hence no bandwidth constraints, which is why you can have up to 32 Sonos units all working AT THE SAME TIME on the same or different sources whilst not affecting the bandwidth capability of your home network. Try using even 2 AppleTV2s at the same time and see how much of your bandwidth is left.
Also, if you live in a large house, or one with thick walls, or you want to listen outside, because Sonos recreates its own Mesh network each time it hits a Sonos unit strength signal on the opposite side of the house to the router is still very high, each Zone Player acts like a new Sonos signal source.
Yup its expensive but I bought my first Sonos bit of kit in 2006. Since then ive added 3 more units, 2 of which were new redesigned units released a couple of years ago. Ive also added a second controller when they moved to touchscreen 2 years ago. And you know what? It all works seamlessly with each other. Old hardware, new hardware, built up over time. New features added over time (for free) seamlessly updated into even the oldest bit of hardware with a firmware update, they even added full Touch, iPhone and iPad control options so I could use any of them to control the audio around the house. Can you integrate AppleTV2 with 1? Can you honestly say in 5 years time your money spent will still work with the rest of your AppleTV system as they upgrade and add new features? When 3 year old sounddocks wont even charge new ipods I would hazard a guess...no.
-But then I would be forgetting you need a SOURCE of music. You tout the use of an NAS, but most NAS devices aren't exactly cheap or anything. For all intensive purposes they are a just a headless computer and most run Linux. AppleTV2 is out of the box a PITA if you don't want to leave a computer on, but you can put XBMC on it which will use any NAS or networked source. You then have the same functionality as Sonos BUT you also have full video capability. You could instead get a cheap Netbook for $250 (cheaper than most NAS devices) and connect a hard drive to that and run iTunes and the full Apple interface if you'd like and still have XBMC available as well. Personally, I just use an old PPC G4 PowerMac as a server and 24/7 Internet terminal. Intel machines can also be set to Wake On Lan, so you can have your machine sleep while AppleTV is not in use. In short, NAS isn't as great as you make it sound (most are also dog slow compared to a real computer) and there are alternative options even with Apple software like a cheap Netbook as a server.
NAS or WHS arent cheap but youve just contradicted yourself.
Sonos will also play from any networked PC, MAC, External hard drive on Airport, netbook. To use a NAS you dont have to install XBMC on it, it works out of the box from any source you want. That PPC G4 would also work with Sonos, or you could play Last.FM, or Pandora, or Spotify, or Napster, or unlimited internet radio (you can even add your own internet radio addresses).
Best of all, you DONT have to use iTunes. You can if you want, but you dont have to.
Sonos also gives you multi room grouping. Group 2 or more zones together and enjoy synced music wherever you want it. Not miliseconds out syncing like Sony or Logitech but 100% synced. Dropping zones can be done at the flick of the controller.
Read a review of a new album in the newspaper? Listen to it 5 seconds later on Sonos.
So the kids can listen to their own music streamed in their rooms upstairs, my wife can be listening to the TV, or some music in the living room, and I can be in my little den listening to my music whilst enjoying near full speed wireless capability on my pc or mac, or maybe my wife likes a song shes hearing upstairs and links zones so she can hear it downstairs.
You can buy a standalone unit which sounds better than the B&W Zeppelin, or get the amped unit for attaching to any speaker system you want, or get the small unit for use (as you do) with your existing stereo system. You can add these anytime you want, building up your Sonos system over time, without the fear it will be redundant over time.
Its a high end multi room music system vs a limited single streaming unit.
-Now I come to the heart of the matter...VIDEO. You suggest a Popcorn Hour in ADDITION to the already out of this world priced Sonos system. They start at $179 and go up to $299. That brings your total minimum price for a wireless system for a single room to $629 AND you have to switch between two separate devices to listen to audio and/or watch videos. With AppleTV you have all your movies, tv shows, photos, music, music videos, YouTube and Internet Radio (plus the options of XBMC with a quick hack including non-Apple formats) and your TOTAL COST for **one** room wireless using an existing wireless router is $99. $629 versus $99...Hmmmmmm. And then there's the matter of Popcorn Hour's crappy interface versus Apple's polished one. XBMC makes Popcorn Hour look bad as well. Bugs or popcorn? :confused:
Cost seems to be the big issue with you, so I wonder if you own a mac mini as opposed to 3 macbook pros, an imac, apple tv2 etc etc as many posters here have? If so, Sonos etc wont be for you. If you do own multiple Apple systems why are you so concerned with price? If you want the best you got to pay for it.
With Apple TV you DONT have all your movies or music or internet radio. you have limited experiences with all 3. No 1080p, no DVD images (Popcorn will load your dvd image in exactly the same way your dvd player would), wont play .mp4 .m4v .mkv .wmv .avi .aac .divx, doesnt have full support for all subtitle formats, wont play FLAC or anything else outside of your iTunes library audio wise and its internet radio function is gimped.
Its sure nice to have it in one box, but *it* is very very limited. Dedicated systems will always trump jack of all trade systems.
The interface is nice on AppleTV2 for sure, my popcorn looks better though with my skin on it. The default layout looks boring ill agree.
So for the price of your ONE room audio and video, I could have SIX rooms using AppleTV2 with both video and audio and still have $29 to spare
Except you couldnt do that could you? Your wireless network would be crippled with half that many running at the same time. I can assure you I can play a 1080P movie AND have 3 other Sonos units streaming at the same time. Try that sometime with 4 AppleTVs...
With XBMC installed, it can play any format (just like Popcorn Hour).
No, no it cant. DVD isos? All subtitle formats? 1080P? Also your slightly expanded feature set (not out of the box) is achieved by essentially hacking your AppleTV 2, so good luck on the next firmware update.
Hell, I can even buy a cheap 3.5" internal hard drive and slot that into my popcorn hour if I want to store the films locally, what sized hard drive does Apple TV2 have? Oh wait.
Your not seeing the advantages with zero configuration audio system, and a play all with no hassles video system? The only mucking about in my system is if you want a nice shinier interface with Popcorn Hour. You have to convert audio, replace (essentially) the OS to XBMC, have a linux system and a Crystal card to play 1080p on an OLDER Apple TV (your not factoring in this stuff with your price or integrated system arguments are you?) and you STILL have a far more limited setup.
Reading thru your post I guarantee you your costs are higher than $99 and in about 2 years time your system will be redundant.
Im not saying the AppleTV 2 is useless for everyone, for many of the dumb masses who are locked into iTunes already its probably the best thing since sliced bread, and really its only advantage is a cheap price and movie rentals, in glorious 720P, but if I want to feed my 42" 1080p plasma with subpar 720P video I could use the xbox or PS3 sitting under the TV, which I also dont bother with. For audiophiles or moviephiles it doesn't cut it.
Eraserhead
Apr 11, 03:22 AM
55 miles to the gallon isn't even abnormal, a lot of standard hatchbacks/small family cars do that and more.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
55 miles per US gallon ;). Thats 70 miles per imperial gallon as US gallons are smaller.
BRLawyer
Sep 9, 11:44 AM
Am I the only one who's starting to find this petty crusade of yours annoying? Seriously, just drop it. The iMac is a great machine. I loved my G5 and I might well buy another iMac when I upgrade from the Mini I have now. A Mac Pro would be nice too, but we'll see. Anyways, the iMac is not the "most powerful desktop" in the world and no one gives a damn: it's an awesome machine regardless. So please, honestly, just drop it. What you said was false and still is. It's ok. Everyone makes mistakes. But drop it. It's starting to annoy me very seriously and I'd be surprised if I was the only one.
And I don't see what your personal attacks on some fine folks here are adding to the discussion. Along with opinions, AidenShaw - among others - brings a lot of technical expertise and hard facts to the table. I, for one, value that greatly, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Indeed, the reason MacRumors is so awesome is that a fair share of the posters bring more than opinions to the forums: they also bring hard facts and educated guesses. I think that people can discuss respectfully, that people can argue respectfully, and that people can disagree respectfully. Most folks here do, and I'm sure you can do it too if you try even just a little. Thanks.
Sorry, if you are feeling too stressed like a few others, you should know how to draw a difference between "personal attacks" as such, and generic/stupid/playful opinions on Windows and machines.
I love to joke and to make public my fondness for Macs. I participate in this forum for a long time, and have always had my arguments with Mr. Shaw, both in technical and playful terms...his posts are almost always directed at bashing Macs or praising its failures...and I don't care, honestly...I just follow on with the jokes.
I have been receiving personal attacks, instead, because people here can't tell such a difference...they get offended when MACHINES are bashed and then offend a PERSON back...
I don't do that, I bash machines and keep on playing on ad hominem arguments that don't have to be offensive...you may tell it by probably all my posts...so considering you seem to be a slightly more mature person, try to understand it better.
And please, getting "seriously annoyed" because I said the MP was the most powerful desktop? Really, get a grip and live a life outside...if you and others are that sensitive you need a reality check...this is just a damn computer forum, and we talk about damn computers...nothing else.
I have already defined "most powerful" as something more than just the speed of a chip...and I will keep saying it as much as I want, as Apple does, even if you show me a thousand SPECmarks...just leave me with my stupid jokes and don't answer, it's easier.
And I don't see what your personal attacks on some fine folks here are adding to the discussion. Along with opinions, AidenShaw - among others - brings a lot of technical expertise and hard facts to the table. I, for one, value that greatly, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. Indeed, the reason MacRumors is so awesome is that a fair share of the posters bring more than opinions to the forums: they also bring hard facts and educated guesses. I think that people can discuss respectfully, that people can argue respectfully, and that people can disagree respectfully. Most folks here do, and I'm sure you can do it too if you try even just a little. Thanks.
Sorry, if you are feeling too stressed like a few others, you should know how to draw a difference between "personal attacks" as such, and generic/stupid/playful opinions on Windows and machines.
I love to joke and to make public my fondness for Macs. I participate in this forum for a long time, and have always had my arguments with Mr. Shaw, both in technical and playful terms...his posts are almost always directed at bashing Macs or praising its failures...and I don't care, honestly...I just follow on with the jokes.
I have been receiving personal attacks, instead, because people here can't tell such a difference...they get offended when MACHINES are bashed and then offend a PERSON back...
I don't do that, I bash machines and keep on playing on ad hominem arguments that don't have to be offensive...you may tell it by probably all my posts...so considering you seem to be a slightly more mature person, try to understand it better.
And please, getting "seriously annoyed" because I said the MP was the most powerful desktop? Really, get a grip and live a life outside...if you and others are that sensitive you need a reality check...this is just a damn computer forum, and we talk about damn computers...nothing else.
I have already defined "most powerful" as something more than just the speed of a chip...and I will keep saying it as much as I want, as Apple does, even if you show me a thousand SPECmarks...just leave me with my stupid jokes and don't answer, it's easier.