Eidorian
Jan 11, 04:53 PM
What does this mean for the regular MacBook then? Is it going to be another model or a replacement?
sim667
Feb 8, 10:06 AM
Oh dear chaps, mine looks almost feeble compared to your big American monster cars!
Thats why I havent put a pic of my car up either...
On the brightside at least we can go round corners :cool:
Thats why I havent put a pic of my car up either...
On the brightside at least we can go round corners :cool:
Castiel
Sep 14, 12:26 PM
I just have a hard time picturing Toyota mailing me a new accelerator pedal and linkage and expecting me to install it. Wake up!
But why should Apple provide a permanent fix when the problem hasn't affected sales too much, and they can come out with a fixed phone next year and get you to stand in line to buy it.
Consumer Reports are doing exactly what their subscribers are paying them to do. I'm sorry if everyone isn't Apple Fanboys, but they get paid NOT to be anyone's Fanboy.
Oh no! You used the word Fanboy! Everything in your post is now dubbed as completely accurate and truthful because if anyone speaks on Apple's defense they are speaking totally biasly. Congrats!
And if you think after the 3rd time that's it still not just a way to get publicity, you're being a tad naive.
But why should Apple provide a permanent fix when the problem hasn't affected sales too much, and they can come out with a fixed phone next year and get you to stand in line to buy it.
Consumer Reports are doing exactly what their subscribers are paying them to do. I'm sorry if everyone isn't Apple Fanboys, but they get paid NOT to be anyone's Fanboy.
Oh no! You used the word Fanboy! Everything in your post is now dubbed as completely accurate and truthful because if anyone speaks on Apple's defense they are speaking totally biasly. Congrats!
And if you think after the 3rd time that's it still not just a way to get publicity, you're being a tad naive.
Lord Blackadder
Feb 22, 07:06 PM
I'm not a big fan of GM on the whole, but credit where credit is due, as the company considers selling a diesel-engined version (http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2011/02/general_motors_considers_at_di.html) of the Chevy Cruze in the US.
In Europe, Australia and Asia, where GM already sells diesel versions of the Cruze, the diesel is the most fuel-efficient offering. Based on European versions of the car, an American diesel Cruze would probably get about 37 miles per gallon city/48 highway. That would give the Cruze similar mileage numbers to Toyota's Prius hybrid.
"That number probably would be achievable," said Mike Omotoso, an analyst in Detroit with survey and research group J.D. Power & Associates.
Omotoso said bringing a diesel Cruze to North America in a year makes some sense. The Cruze will be facing tough competition at that time from Ford's upcoming electric Focus and potential hybrid versions of the Honda Civic and Hyundai Elantra. So a diesel with great fuel economy could get a lot of attention.
"Volkswagen has been very successful with their diesel engine in the Jetta," Omotoso said. "It's about time that someone provided them with some competition."
EDIT: Another news article (http://rumors.automobilemag.com/diesel-rumor-2013-chevrolet-cruze-turbo-diesel-4-20279.html) about the Cruze diesel from Automobile Magazine.
The only real argument against doing it is the cost of federalizing the engine plus the lingering (and ridiculous) diesel-hate that automakers are convinced most Americans harbor. But considering that a) the diesel version of the Cruze already exists in other markets, and b) the car equals the Prius' fuel economy numbers, the case for selling it here is pretty strong IMO.
Perhaps a successful diesel Cruze will convince GM to put a diesel engine in the Volt, further improving that car's fuel economy? I think the US is ripe for a more wholehearted embrace of the diesel engine in passenger cars and light trucks.
In Europe, Australia and Asia, where GM already sells diesel versions of the Cruze, the diesel is the most fuel-efficient offering. Based on European versions of the car, an American diesel Cruze would probably get about 37 miles per gallon city/48 highway. That would give the Cruze similar mileage numbers to Toyota's Prius hybrid.
"That number probably would be achievable," said Mike Omotoso, an analyst in Detroit with survey and research group J.D. Power & Associates.
Omotoso said bringing a diesel Cruze to North America in a year makes some sense. The Cruze will be facing tough competition at that time from Ford's upcoming electric Focus and potential hybrid versions of the Honda Civic and Hyundai Elantra. So a diesel with great fuel economy could get a lot of attention.
"Volkswagen has been very successful with their diesel engine in the Jetta," Omotoso said. "It's about time that someone provided them with some competition."
EDIT: Another news article (http://rumors.automobilemag.com/diesel-rumor-2013-chevrolet-cruze-turbo-diesel-4-20279.html) about the Cruze diesel from Automobile Magazine.
The only real argument against doing it is the cost of federalizing the engine plus the lingering (and ridiculous) diesel-hate that automakers are convinced most Americans harbor. But considering that a) the diesel version of the Cruze already exists in other markets, and b) the car equals the Prius' fuel economy numbers, the case for selling it here is pretty strong IMO.
Perhaps a successful diesel Cruze will convince GM to put a diesel engine in the Volt, further improving that car's fuel economy? I think the US is ripe for a more wholehearted embrace of the diesel engine in passenger cars and light trucks.
gmcalpin
Jun 22, 06:02 PM
Ah yes. A porn free, tightly censored, code controlled desktop machine. That's what everyone wants right? :rolleyes:
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
Did you miss the part where it says OSX and iOS?
Sydde
Mar 19, 04:32 PM
In an environment of Fart apps and birds exploding in clouds of feathers, enter an app called "Exodus International". Obviously, it is Christian in nature (well, Exodus was in the Torah, so I suppose it could in theory be Jewish), its main focus being as a tool to help homosexuals recover from the f'upedness with the healing hand of jesus (lord, save us from your followers). So, yeah, whilst the concept is lame or offensive, there is a fair abundance of that on the app store already.
So, now some are calling for its removal. Is that the right thing to do? I mean, clearly a person whose sexual orientation is corrected by the church inevitably becomes just miserable and insufferable, the hallmarks of someone trying to be something they are not. A small minority are advocating a view that has soundly been debunked because the idea that a few of the wrong kind of people might exist and offend their sensibilities (quid pro quo).
Does this app represent nothing more than plain foolishness, some misguided folks expressing their opinion and showing that they care for others? Or is it an attempt to perpetuate a vile and dangerous mth that has cause inestimable pain and misery for as long as recorded history? And can I use it to... Oh, wait... :eek:
So, now some are calling for its removal. Is that the right thing to do? I mean, clearly a person whose sexual orientation is corrected by the church inevitably becomes just miserable and insufferable, the hallmarks of someone trying to be something they are not. A small minority are advocating a view that has soundly been debunked because the idea that a few of the wrong kind of people might exist and offend their sensibilities (quid pro quo).
Does this app represent nothing more than plain foolishness, some misguided folks expressing their opinion and showing that they care for others? Or is it an attempt to perpetuate a vile and dangerous mth that has cause inestimable pain and misery for as long as recorded history? And can I use it to... Oh, wait... :eek:
Lord Blackadder
Mar 7, 06:20 PM
Because there is not enough of it, and it will increase our need of foreign oil not lessen it.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
There is twice as much gasoline refined from a barrel of sweet crude than diesel.
Can you quote a source on that? As far as I'm aware, that is not necessarily true (http://www.theoildrum.com/node/2174). It all depends on what is in highest demand. Diesel can be refined into gasoline, and gasoline is what people in the US want at the moment. I will try to find some more citeable links than this (http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/26624/Maximum-gallons-of-diesel-from-a-barrel-of-crude-oil), but my impression is that a single barrel of crude always potentially contains more diesel fuel than gasoline. This is a very market-driven process. Refineries make what people want to buy.
It's also worth pointing out that a lot of gasoline has ethanol and other compounds in it that diesel does not have, and that stuff had to be refined before being added - increasing the engery cost of refining gasoline. Regular unleaded gasoline also has more sulphur in it than the now mandatory-for-passenger-cars ULSD fuel.
For a long time, and in many places people that drove diesel vehicles did so because of the tax advantages. The taxes were kept lower in order to make commercial usage cheaper.
Diesel may be cheaper in Europe due to tax structures, but the same could be said about gasoline here. It doesn't have to be that way in either case. On a purely technical level, gasoline should actually cost more because it takes more energy to refine.
It is not greener to go diesel. It takes that resource from other parts of the economy and puts it into cars. Cars do just fine with gasoline. They are relatively clean and there is twice as much of the stuff in a gallon of oil. They don't get better mileage except in volume of stuff. Which is not the correct measurement. If cars became more diesel, then diesel would become dramatically more expensive, affecting the overall livelihood of everyone, dramatically increase the cost of oil and bring about energy devastation much faster than anyone could imagine.
Diesel takes less energy to refine, contains more energy per unit of volume, emits less CO2, you get potentially more of it out of a barrel of crude and diesel engines are always more fuel efficient than equivalent gasoline engines. Where's the problem?
I can't see how you are going to argue that it is necessary for us to drive gasoline-engined cars in order to prevent "energy devastation". Most other countries already use a much larger proportion of diesel and they seem just fine. We could make a lot more diesel with the crude we are currently extracting, and the market for gasoline will never go away.
By moving to hybrids and electrics, we actually decrease our dependence on foreign oil, and make our cars greener per mile driven. This is why it is the answer and diesel isn't.
I am not advocating that we all switch to diesel. Nor do I want to get rid of the gasoline engine (especially in performance cars!). But the USA has an unecessary obsession with the gasoline-engined car. We need diesel serial hybrids for starters, and more hybrids and diesel-engined cars of all types. There is no one solution. If tens of thousands of people in the US started buying diesel Cruzes, it would not destroy the world's energy infrastructure.
But come on - "energy devastation"?
the argument for that silent agreement ? they don't want "a horsepower arms race"... look how well that has turned out
Indeed. Same with the Japanese and their 280hp/180 km/h limit. Some of the cars made under this "agreement" were considerably faster/more powerful than was officially admitted, and anyway they did away with that a number of years ago.
ipedro
Apr 12, 09:34 PM
Please don't become one of those photographers who thinks they can "just add video" to their list of services because their DSLR shoots video. It's a lot more complicated than that.
I'm kinda glad FCP and other tools cost as much as they do. It keeps the professionals serious about their craft. Having been on both sides of the fence, being a photographer doesn't make you a videographer and vice versa.
On the contrary, I don't add it to my services at all. My clients do however sometimes request some video with my shoots. If it appears that they want full fledged video, I'll outsource a videographer to accompany me on the shoot. However, if all a client wants is a short video attached to the main service of photography, it's not justifiable to hire a videographer.
I'm kinda glad FCP and other tools cost as much as they do. It keeps the professionals serious about their craft. Having been on both sides of the fence, being a photographer doesn't make you a videographer and vice versa.
On the contrary, I don't add it to my services at all. My clients do however sometimes request some video with my shoots. If it appears that they want full fledged video, I'll outsource a videographer to accompany me on the shoot. However, if all a client wants is a short video attached to the main service of photography, it's not justifiable to hire a videographer.
mkaake
Jan 12, 08:55 AM
I had, or rather still have in a closet, a powerbook 100. It had an external floppy drive and I did carry it around with me, kind of defeating the purpose of the smaller form factor in the first place, so I bought my wife the powerbook 145 which had the floppy onboard. I guess we're now beyond wondering how to get things on the computer without the drive, but it would make sense for a driveless mac to have some super wireless connectivity options? Perhaps connectivity with the home mac in a "go to my pc" kind of way. Apple does own the "go to my mac" domain name. Just a thought.
Having not read through 5 pages, I don't know if this has been addressed yet, but there's a lot of people talking like this (that I've heard) - but there's a big difference between now and then (I remember those days too :) ) - Back then, the floppy was your main method for moving data from one place to another. Today, your options for moving data from one machine to another are pretty huge - you can use a USB thumb drive (which is the biggest reason, IMHO, that it's finally okay to think about external disc drives again on laptops - I've used the disc drive on my lappy about 2 times since I got it 2 years ago), you can email yourself data, etc.
The times you would like to have it around would most likely be for software (either expensive software still distributed on physical media), or watching movies (or ripping new music). And while it would certainly be a pain to walk in to a store (or coffee shop, or whatever), buy a new CD, and not be able to rip it until you get near your optical drive again, I think Apple is okay with that, as they want your primary means of obtaining music / movies / media in general to be the iTMS.
So I see this as plausible. What's more, I expect other manufacturers will follow suit, and within 2-3 years, most laptops (costing more than $600, and not the desktop replacement bricks) will have external drives.
Having not read through 5 pages, I don't know if this has been addressed yet, but there's a lot of people talking like this (that I've heard) - but there's a big difference between now and then (I remember those days too :) ) - Back then, the floppy was your main method for moving data from one place to another. Today, your options for moving data from one machine to another are pretty huge - you can use a USB thumb drive (which is the biggest reason, IMHO, that it's finally okay to think about external disc drives again on laptops - I've used the disc drive on my lappy about 2 times since I got it 2 years ago), you can email yourself data, etc.
The times you would like to have it around would most likely be for software (either expensive software still distributed on physical media), or watching movies (or ripping new music). And while it would certainly be a pain to walk in to a store (or coffee shop, or whatever), buy a new CD, and not be able to rip it until you get near your optical drive again, I think Apple is okay with that, as they want your primary means of obtaining music / movies / media in general to be the iTMS.
So I see this as plausible. What's more, I expect other manufacturers will follow suit, and within 2-3 years, most laptops (costing more than $600, and not the desktop replacement bricks) will have external drives.
netdog
Jan 11, 06:16 PM
I don't think we are even close in either of these threads. I suspect that 10.5.2 and/or the iPhone SDK are going to contain some huge surprises. Perhaps included in that are some of the Leopard "secret features" that were promised a year ago but took more time than expected.
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:52 PM
Here is what makes me think it's not generic and apple would/should win.
There have been other online stores that sell computer programs/applications before apple created the "app store" None of them used the word App in their store name.
Examples:
GetJar
MobileRated
Cellmania
Apple launches a store just like these but better and called the store "App Store"
July 10, 2009 Apple's "App Store launches". Pre this no online stores used the term "app"
Post apples launch other phone makers/OS systems start to scramble.
App Catalog = Palm
App World = RIM
Amazon AppStore = Amazon
Stores that didn't ride apples coattails
Android Market = Android
Ovi Store = Nokia
Windows Phone Marketplace = Microsoft.
If "app store" was so obvioius and generic why did no one call their store "App store" until apple did? This is like everyone that argues that the iphone is so generic with it's icons and screen. I mean so obvious. No it's not obvioius.
If it was obvious Netjar, Mobilerated, Steam etc.. would just say "App Store" instead of some other random word.
Even the unauthorized iphone Store Cydia doesn't use the word app in their store name. "Unauthorized App Store" "Rogue App Store"
App Store is apple.
Even Wikipedia's serach term "app store" goes to the apple "app store" page. if want other onlilne phone stores you need to go to the disambiguation section.
There have been other online stores that sell computer programs/applications before apple created the "app store" None of them used the word App in their store name.
Examples:
GetJar
MobileRated
Cellmania
Apple launches a store just like these but better and called the store "App Store"
July 10, 2009 Apple's "App Store launches". Pre this no online stores used the term "app"
Post apples launch other phone makers/OS systems start to scramble.
App Catalog = Palm
App World = RIM
Amazon AppStore = Amazon
Stores that didn't ride apples coattails
Android Market = Android
Ovi Store = Nokia
Windows Phone Marketplace = Microsoft.
If "app store" was so obvioius and generic why did no one call their store "App store" until apple did? This is like everyone that argues that the iphone is so generic with it's icons and screen. I mean so obvious. No it's not obvioius.
If it was obvious Netjar, Mobilerated, Steam etc.. would just say "App Store" instead of some other random word.
Even the unauthorized iphone Store Cydia doesn't use the word app in their store name. "Unauthorized App Store" "Rogue App Store"
App Store is apple.
Even Wikipedia's serach term "app store" goes to the apple "app store" page. if want other onlilne phone stores you need to go to the disambiguation section.
MacPanda
Nov 29, 02:52 PM
i think you will be able to purchase stuff directly off itv and i am hoping you will be able to use some sort of wifi to sync it to the next generation ipod with wifi - i really want to be able to share songs between iPods and although the zune only lets you do it 3 times wifi needs to happen.
iTV has a small form factor and i hope they will keep it that way too - looks like a neat idea.
Peace - Anthony
iTV has a small form factor and i hope they will keep it that way too - looks like a neat idea.
Peace - Anthony
miloblithe
Aug 31, 03:00 PM
Let's hope that those specs aren't the final ones. That they're just to clear inventory.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?
Knowing that Apple doesn't pay listed prices, it's not unreasonable to assume that Apple could get the Yonah chips for less than Merom ones.
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.
I'm hoping for Merom based mac minis.. Merom costs the same so why not ?
Knowing that Apple doesn't pay listed prices, it's not unreasonable to assume that Apple could get the Yonah chips for less than Merom ones.
Also, Apple has historically liked to scale its product lineup to encourage buying then next item up the scale. Some have even referred to it as "crippling" the lower machines.
Bregalad
Apr 20, 01:10 PM
what's the first letter in imac?
An all-in-one computer is just another consumer device. Bring on the Mac Pros
Intel won't have new Mac Pro CPUs available until fall. It's a strange way to run a company actually. Release the consumer stuff first and wait most of the year to give the pros something that beats the consumer stuff. Then a couple months later release new consumer stuff that matches the vastly more expensive pro stuff. Seems backward to everyone except Intel.
I think that's one of the reasons why Apple has held off with the iMac upgrade. They wanted the MacBook Pro to be ahead for a few months because it's a "pro" model line.
To the person who claimed iMac was held back because of the chipset defect, they obviously haven't counted the high speed SATA channels correctly. The 27" iMac only uses two (SSD and HD). A slot loading optical drive is pretty much the slowest device you can put in a computer these days and can be run off any crap bus.
An all-in-one computer is just another consumer device. Bring on the Mac Pros
Intel won't have new Mac Pro CPUs available until fall. It's a strange way to run a company actually. Release the consumer stuff first and wait most of the year to give the pros something that beats the consumer stuff. Then a couple months later release new consumer stuff that matches the vastly more expensive pro stuff. Seems backward to everyone except Intel.
I think that's one of the reasons why Apple has held off with the iMac upgrade. They wanted the MacBook Pro to be ahead for a few months because it's a "pro" model line.
To the person who claimed iMac was held back because of the chipset defect, they obviously haven't counted the high speed SATA channels correctly. The 27" iMac only uses two (SSD and HD). A slot loading optical drive is pretty much the slowest device you can put in a computer these days and can be run off any crap bus.
tk421
Jul 14, 12:23 AM
Meh, Apple came out with that Express Card slot for the MacBook Pro kind of early as well...but I'm with most people in arguing that a blue-ray drive won't see the light of day in Apple computers until early 2007.
Good point, and this isn't just with Express Card, either. Apple was an early adopter with 802.11b (with the original iBook, I think). They were early to drop the floppy drive, too.
I for one would love a Blu-Ray drive, but I understand that others might not. They should make it a BTO option.
Good point, and this isn't just with Express Card, either. Apple was an early adopter with 802.11b (with the original iBook, I think). They were early to drop the floppy drive, too.
I for one would love a Blu-Ray drive, but I understand that others might not. They should make it a BTO option.
neoelectronaut
Jan 18, 01:41 PM
http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6843/photojan1812328pm.jpg
New 2011 Ford Fusion SE which is replacing my 2007 Ford Fusion SE which was the victim of an unfortunate accident.
Edit: I need to pick up a sunshade before Summer rolls around.
New 2011 Ford Fusion SE which is replacing my 2007 Ford Fusion SE which was the victim of an unfortunate accident.
Edit: I need to pick up a sunshade before Summer rolls around.
kelving525
Oct 6, 11:16 PM
The volume buttons are a little stiff, though the sleep/wake button is perfect. I'm hoping the volume buttons will loosen up a bit over time. I can adjust them pretty easily with my pointer finger when held in my right hand, but I can't do it very well with my thumb when holding in my left hand.
I completely agree with you on this, the sleep/wake button is fine using either left or right, BUT the volume rocker is not convenient when using left hand, but right hand is ok.
I completely agree with you on this, the sleep/wake button is fine using either left or right, BUT the volume rocker is not convenient when using left hand, but right hand is ok.
RBD2
Sep 14, 10:44 AM
http://tinyurl.com/yed7h3p
georgerussos
Sep 20, 04:13 PM
Ah, I got a nice silicon one and a nice polycarbonate one, then I will wait for Griffins. I also got a Zagg Shield :) My iPod is going to be shiny as new!!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 1, 07:41 PM
in germany though it means you are banned from the left lane if it takes you so long to hit 200 ;)
Apparently the diesel Cruze tops out at 210 km/h (130ish mph); I'm somewhat surprised it goes that fast, though it has decent power and torque. My 1999 Nissan Altima manual was governed to 120mph, and although I did hit 120 in it once (:o), it had over 1500rpms left before redline, so it could probably have hit 130mph or more.
Apparently the diesel Cruze tops out at 210 km/h (130ish mph); I'm somewhat surprised it goes that fast, though it has decent power and torque. My 1999 Nissan Altima manual was governed to 120mph, and although I did hit 120 in it once (:o), it had over 1500rpms left before redline, so it could probably have hit 130mph or more.
BillyShears
Jan 12, 08:17 AM
People here seem to want to condone ANY decision Apple may wish to make. Already people seem to be defensive on the "MacBook Air" name which is probably just a rumor and also seem to be defensive of Apple's decision to remove the optical drive - something we don't even know will happen! People are defensive of Apple's decision to ship the new Mac Pros with the 8800GT and not something of higher spec, people are defensive of Apple's decision not to release a mid-tower.
I don't see how the external optical drive falls into the category of things to be "defended." The others, sure, because you don't have the choice of the name, the graphics card, or mid-tower. But so far the rumours suggest the external optical drive is optional (as in, buy a MacBook or MacBook Pro with built-in drive - this isn't across the product line). What I see are people hoping for a feature: a lighter notebook.
I don't see how the external optical drive falls into the category of things to be "defended." The others, sure, because you don't have the choice of the name, the graphics card, or mid-tower. But so far the rumours suggest the external optical drive is optional (as in, buy a MacBook or MacBook Pro with built-in drive - this isn't across the product line). What I see are people hoping for a feature: a lighter notebook.
EricNau
Dec 27, 10:38 PM
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
Didn't Jobs say it would be priced at $299?
ecoons
Jan 11, 10:43 PM
Electromagnetic fields decrease with the cube of the distance (I think- might be square, but someone smarter than I can correct me). You would need to keep the charger within a few inches while charging. Frankly, if I'm going to carry a charger with me when I travel, I really don't care if it's plugged in directly or just has to be really close.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
What if there was a universal (yikes, what IS truly universal nowadays) way of transmitting electrical power, where your physical desk-top, kitchen counter, tray tables in airplanes, glove boxes (or cup holders for phones), nightstand in a hotel room, etc could charge your electronic gadgets just when you set them on the surface. That would mean they would be "just a few inches away" or less. There's no need to be charging devices 100% of the time, but as long as you can set them down on a "recharging surface" when they get low, then you have a cordless charging system.
vincenz
Apr 9, 11:34 PM
I can't drive stick, but I really want to learn one day. They look like fun when not in traffic.
