jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
boonme
Apr 5, 06:42 PM
Philip Bloom and Larry Jordan are both heavy weights and their words go far in the film making community. Great to hear... I look forward to finding out more.
JGowan
Jul 15, 02:09 PM
Man if they put the power supply on the top that would just be insanely stupid.-markThat's just some guy's rendition who knows a little about Adobe software. Certainly not Jonathan Ive's work, nor will remotely look like that.
BoyBach
Nov 29, 12:52 PM
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:...
That's a nice back catalogue, but how many new albums has The Carpenters, Jimi Hendrix, Carole King, John Lennon, etc released recently that weren't 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best of's? The challenge for the "Big Boy's" of the record industry is to find the next group of artists that will still be selling in 20-30 years time. I don't think my children and grandchildren will be buying Pussycat Dolls and Britney Spears albums in thirty years time. This is reason that their music sales have been falling, it's not exclusively piracy.
...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:...
That's a nice back catalogue, but how many new albums has The Carpenters, Jimi Hendrix, Carole King, John Lennon, etc released recently that weren't 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best of's? The challenge for the "Big Boy's" of the record industry is to find the next group of artists that will still be selling in 20-30 years time. I don't think my children and grandchildren will be buying Pussycat Dolls and Britney Spears albums in thirty years time. This is reason that their music sales have been falling, it's not exclusively piracy.
runninmac
Aug 17, 01:01 AM
This is a very dumb question but is Photoshop running under rosetta in this test?
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
If Photoshop is that is nuts.
Oh, please believe it is.
:eek:
whatever
Aug 25, 03:53 PM
I've called Apple twice in the past week (on Saturday morning and this morning) and I received excellent support both times!
They answered my questions in a very timely manner.
I'm very hard on Support people because I did Technical Support for years and expect the highest level of support, which I've always received from Apple.
I've also been a .Mac subscriber since it was released and I've never had a problem with it. Yes, I'm currently getting those stupid stock SPAMS, but so is everyone else. I always check to see the address of where the e-mail is coming from, waiting for that day that my addresss is there and I've never see a .mac.com address in the "From" column. It's a great service and much better than the other e-mail services that I use.
They answered my questions in a very timely manner.
I'm very hard on Support people because I did Technical Support for years and expect the highest level of support, which I've always received from Apple.
I've also been a .Mac subscriber since it was released and I've never had a problem with it. Yes, I'm currently getting those stupid stock SPAMS, but so is everyone else. I always check to see the address of where the e-mail is coming from, waiting for that day that my addresss is there and I've never see a .mac.com address in the "From" column. It's a great service and much better than the other e-mail services that I use.
Leoff
Sep 19, 10:39 AM
While you make some valid points, you overlook others:
1. As soon as the new model comes out, the older models will drop in price. So even if you aren't getting the fastest and greatest, even if you're buying the lowest end MBP, you'll benefit from the price break.
2. MBPs are expensive computers. You're investing in something that you'll keep around for 3-4 years. I want to future-proof my computer as much as possible. Features like easily-swappable HD and fast graphics card will affect "the average user" 2+ years from now (pro'ly sooner) when everyone's downloading and streaming HD videos and OS X has all this new eye-candy that will require a fast graphics card.
3. There are other features than just a 10% increase in CPU power that we are hoping in the next MBP, including a magnetic latch, easily-access to HD and RAM, and better heat management. Certainly the average Joe will be able to benefit from these features, even if all you do is word process and surf the web.
Again, this string of responses has been talking about the MacBook, not the MacBookPro. Anyone buying a MacBook to do heavy graphics or processor-intensive stuff doesn't know what they're doing.
As soon as the new models of any Mac come out, the old models drop in price because they become refurbs.
The MacBookPro is still too new a release to have the major type of changes you and others are hoping for. All you're going to get for the next year or two is speed bumps and maybe an upgrade in HD capacity, Graphics card, or Optical Drive (Blue-Ray or HD-DVD)
Basically I see two types of users in here pleading for the newer chips: the average users who just "like the idea of fast" when it really does them no good, and the professionals who are consistantly holding out for something better. The professionals are few and far between.
1. As soon as the new model comes out, the older models will drop in price. So even if you aren't getting the fastest and greatest, even if you're buying the lowest end MBP, you'll benefit from the price break.
2. MBPs are expensive computers. You're investing in something that you'll keep around for 3-4 years. I want to future-proof my computer as much as possible. Features like easily-swappable HD and fast graphics card will affect "the average user" 2+ years from now (pro'ly sooner) when everyone's downloading and streaming HD videos and OS X has all this new eye-candy that will require a fast graphics card.
3. There are other features than just a 10% increase in CPU power that we are hoping in the next MBP, including a magnetic latch, easily-access to HD and RAM, and better heat management. Certainly the average Joe will be able to benefit from these features, even if all you do is word process and surf the web.
Again, this string of responses has been talking about the MacBook, not the MacBookPro. Anyone buying a MacBook to do heavy graphics or processor-intensive stuff doesn't know what they're doing.
As soon as the new models of any Mac come out, the old models drop in price because they become refurbs.
The MacBookPro is still too new a release to have the major type of changes you and others are hoping for. All you're going to get for the next year or two is speed bumps and maybe an upgrade in HD capacity, Graphics card, or Optical Drive (Blue-Ray or HD-DVD)
Basically I see two types of users in here pleading for the newer chips: the average users who just "like the idea of fast" when it really does them no good, and the professionals who are consistantly holding out for something better. The professionals are few and far between.
striker33
Apr 6, 06:39 PM
I have something better than a MacBook Air. It's called an iPad 2.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
So when your away from your iMac, how does one use CS5 on-the-go?
These "I dont use anything other than facebook and itunes so therefore my iPad wins" idiots need to sit the **** down and realise that people actually buy Mac's based on the OS and apps that they NEED, and dont buy Apple products just to sit there and look shiny like most people do.
That with my iMac and I have no need anymore for my 13" aluminum MacBook. While the Air is a nice looking and light machine, I still like having things like Firewire, an optical drive (without having to pay extra for it or plug it in), and above all, screen real estate.
My 24" iMac gives me that. While my iPad 2 gives my instant on, mobile, and light. When the iMacs get a refresh and ship with Lion, it will be time for a 27".
So when your away from your iMac, how does one use CS5 on-the-go?
These "I dont use anything other than facebook and itunes so therefore my iPad wins" idiots need to sit the **** down and realise that people actually buy Mac's based on the OS and apps that they NEED, and dont buy Apple products just to sit there and look shiny like most people do.
rwilliams
Jun 8, 09:30 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7D11 Safari/528.16)
On launch day at the Apple store, are there usually separate lines for pre-orders and walk-up customers, or is it one enormous line?
On launch day at the Apple store, are there usually separate lines for pre-orders and walk-up customers, or is it one enormous line?
Astro7x
Apr 6, 11:29 AM
FCP supporting Bluray is irrelevant if Apple does not start putting Bluray drives into its Macs. The nice thing about the Superdrive is that I know if I have a Mac, I can do anything related to DVDs. I can play them, I can burn them, I can do Dual Layer. It's just as simple as "You have a Mac? You can play this disc!". Does anybody remember the days before DVD Drives became standard in computers? I remember giving DVDs to people that wouldn't play, and then having to have them crouch down next to their PC and read off the faintly printed logos on the drive and tell me if it said CD-ROM.
All the haters that are against Bluray, you have to admit that if it was a Bluray drive in every single Mac made that the requests for Bluray would be much higher.
I've dealt with clients that when our Client's Client needs to sign off on a final video, we have to mail them a DVD. Because they are so stupid that they either don't know how to download a file, can't play a file because their computers are so locked down they can't install quicktime (think bigger corporate environments where you need permission to install anything), or are just idiots to the point where all they can understand is "Put this disc in this slot". I remember having a end client one time where the DVD Video Logo on the disc wasn't enough, and I had to spell out on the disc label. "This disc will only play on a DVD Player". And then apparently that wording was too confusing and I had to reword it to "This disc will only play IN a DVD Player". Then they put the DVD in the computer and it wouldn't play. Sent their IT department to the owners office and find out that they downloaded DVD Playing software earlier that was on a trial, the trial ran out, then since it became their default DVD player they were incapable of playing DVDs.
I've also had stupid clients request DVDs (because files is too difficult...), fire it up on their 27 inch Cinema Display, then complain that the video is blurry because they don't understand the concepts of resolutions and that if a Standard Definition DVD plays full screen you're blowing it up 3 times it's normal size probably.
It's pretty ignorant to say Apple shouldn't support Bluray because you personally don't use it. I haven't put a spot to tape in forever, should the next Final Cut Pro not include export to tape options because it's a dying format?
All the haters that are against Bluray, you have to admit that if it was a Bluray drive in every single Mac made that the requests for Bluray would be much higher.
I've dealt with clients that when our Client's Client needs to sign off on a final video, we have to mail them a DVD. Because they are so stupid that they either don't know how to download a file, can't play a file because their computers are so locked down they can't install quicktime (think bigger corporate environments where you need permission to install anything), or are just idiots to the point where all they can understand is "Put this disc in this slot". I remember having a end client one time where the DVD Video Logo on the disc wasn't enough, and I had to spell out on the disc label. "This disc will only play on a DVD Player". And then apparently that wording was too confusing and I had to reword it to "This disc will only play IN a DVD Player". Then they put the DVD in the computer and it wouldn't play. Sent their IT department to the owners office and find out that they downloaded DVD Playing software earlier that was on a trial, the trial ran out, then since it became their default DVD player they were incapable of playing DVDs.
I've also had stupid clients request DVDs (because files is too difficult...), fire it up on their 27 inch Cinema Display, then complain that the video is blurry because they don't understand the concepts of resolutions and that if a Standard Definition DVD plays full screen you're blowing it up 3 times it's normal size probably.
It's pretty ignorant to say Apple shouldn't support Bluray because you personally don't use it. I haven't put a spot to tape in forever, should the next Final Cut Pro not include export to tape options because it's a dying format?
studiomusic
Apr 10, 10:31 AM
It's that they never have announced pro-level products at/alongside professional trade shows prior to this. CES is one thing, but I don't ever recall Apple ever placing any presence at/during NAB or AES (the latter of which they would present something related to the Logic Pro) before.
They did it in 2007... I was there.
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
They did it in 2007... I was there.
Back when Myspace was cool. (http://www.myspace.com/studiomusic1/blog/253736149)
jwp1964
Sep 18, 11:10 PM
Please Apple put out a new 12" or smaller notebook and I'm in! My iBook is about to be 3 years old and it's time to upgrade.:D
RMBootneck
Mar 22, 07:59 PM
1st point: It's factually inaccurate to make your first statement, as evidenced by your last statement. Kind of funny, don't you think?
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
VERY well said!
In your second statement, you are comparing all Android software-running phones to a single model/product line, the iPhone. The iPhone (each generation) has out sold any single phone model (generation) over it's life than that of any offered by any other hardware manufacturer.
Your comparison is like saying Toyota has sold more cars than Ford has sold F-150s. That may be true, but the F-150 is still the number one selling truck in the US, even though it does not outsell the sum total of all other trucks by all other manufacturers.
You should compare a single phone model, say Motorola Droid or HTC Incredible. You are simply talking software. Apple is primarily a hardware company that happens to make the software for its hardware. (yes, I know about FCP and other software) They do not license the iOS software to other manufacturers, so comparison to Google's OS and number of DIFFERENT phones it runs on is really irrelevant to whether any hardware manufacturer has had a more successful phone than the iPhone.
VERY well said!
aaronb
Jul 27, 03:21 PM
I always thought it was "Time" but I could be wrong!
FoxHoundADAM
Apr 11, 11:56 AM
Ugh. The iPhone 4, while beautiful, still needs a larger screen for my liking. Maybe I just bite the bullet and switch to the Inspire. Save some cash in the process.
ethana
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Samsung.... good move. I think you are on the right track.
RIM. You're dead on arrival and loosing market share fast. Watch for an acquisition of these guys in the next 5 years.
RIM. You're dead on arrival and loosing market share fast. Watch for an acquisition of these guys in the next 5 years.
alpacojohn
Aug 25, 05:42 PM
Funny how I just came across this thread, as I'm in the middle of an Apple support nightmare as well (I have one of those MacBooks that just turns itself off for no reason - completely unacceptable). I have been routed through 12 people over 3 calls, with several promises of "expedited resolution"s but no tangible result.
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
jaxstate
Jul 27, 11:15 AM
Once again, I read it and read it well. The big deal about the G5 being in Mac was that the entire system was redesigned for better performance. Go read about the G5 system architecture if apple still has it up.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
You really need to read about this...these chips are just a little higher clock speed. But they have a 20%+ boost at the same clock speed. They ARE making better chip designs instead of just bumping clock speed. Intel/Apple is actually doing pretty much the opposite of what you accuse them of doing.
kirk26
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
I'm voting this positive only because this is such a low number and Apple is winning.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:21 PM
Now in Europe I know it is different and that GSM is the standard.
It is more like 81% of the world market.
It is more like 81% of the world market.
ergle2
Sep 20, 06:44 PM
I should have been more thorough in my previous reply. What I really like about these frequent updates are the following:
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
1. The motherboard has socketed processors (except for the laptops).
Yeah, an upgradable processor socket is a wonderful thing :)
It's a shame the laptops are soldered, but it makes sense given the design...
2. Even though Intel is updating processors every 6 months or so, the motherboard and chipset seem to support the next processor version.
Yonah can be replaced with Merom.
Woodcrest can be replaced with Clovertown.
Your computer does not become obsolete in 6 months. Instead, it gains new life if you decide that you need the new processor.
Every 12 to 18 months or so a new chipset may become necessary. Only then does your computer lose the upgrade potential. If you buy Merom, you may not be able to upgrade to the next processor. Likewise if you buy Clovertown. New chipsets will be required beyond Merom and Clovertown.
In any event, this is based on trailing history of just 1 year. Future events may unfold differently.
Yeah -- tho' some of this might not please some due to philosophy.
Bear in mind part of the Mac philosophy from the start was "no user servicable parts inside" -- think of it as the computing equivalent of a toaster, in a sense. Jobs and Raskin were both proponents of that concept, and it lives in in some of the userbase.
I suspect that part of the userbase would prefer being able to sell an old system and buy a new one.
Now, that's not my worldview, but it's definitely out there.
Going back, often newer processors are release, at least initially, in multiple forms of package. Take the Pentium-4, which appeared for some versions as both a S478 and S775 (I think? or was there one inbetween?) chip. So even when there's a new chipset, it's not always required, it'll just give you some whizz-band new features.
With Merom, you're likely right, since that's part of the mobile line, and Intel sells the mobile line by platform (well, you can get it OEM too, but it's a lot cheaper if you just buy the platform).
ninjadex
Mar 31, 02:44 PM
What so many fail to realize is iOS was made for the iPad from the get-go. It's been mentioned many times that what became the iPad was in development longer than the original iPhone.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
This goes to show that iOS conceptualization is light years ahead of Android. It's so obvious Google is scrambling, and seems to be making this stuff as they go along, without any sense of a master design guiding the way.
Dalton63841
Apr 8, 04:18 AM
As best as I can figure, it works like this. Managers get good grades if they sell certain amounts of products.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This guy has a firm understanding of how retail chains work. This is EXACTLY the case and how MOST major chains operate.
I'll use low numbers here. Let's say BB corporate wants you to sell at least 5 iPads a day to make your "Quota". One day, 10 iPads come in. You sell all ten, yay, you made quota for the day.
But the next day, none get shipped to the store. So, boo, you didn't make quota, since you didn't have any to sell.
So, if you get 10 the day after that, & not knowing if more are coming tomorrow, you sell 5, make quota, and hold the other 5 for the next day when, low and behold, none get shipped to the store. You still have 5 left over to sell, which you do, and again you make quota for the day.
Basically the more days you make quota, the happier BB corporate is, and the better chance Mr. Manager gets a bonus down the road.
Mr. Manager (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O4DMPmoJkJQ)
This guy has a firm understanding of how retail chains work. This is EXACTLY the case and how MOST major chains operate.
Popeye206
Apr 25, 02:58 PM
This...
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.
You are explicitly asked if you want Google to collect this information.
You can say NO. It does reduce the accuracy of some programs when you opt out, but YOU have the choice.
You do have the option to enable this feature at any time if you feel you need too.
Same on the iPhone... this is not what we're talking about here. Application tracking has always been opt in or out.
This is just a database of cell tower pings. That's all. it's shared with NO ONE and goes nowhere except on your phone. It's like your web browser cache.