milozauckerman
Jul 22, 11:58 AM
Every pc laptop being sold at a lower price than the MacBook is also competing with the Macbook. Some people look at price before features.
By this logic Yugos and Ferraris are also in competition. Hey, they both drive!
A $499 Dell laptop is not Apple's direct competition - to find that you look at price, features and size. Which is where every manufacturer will start to move their $1299 and $1499 laptops over to Core 2 Duo. The $1099 is a little more problematic (the low-end Core 2 being more expensive than Core Duo's low-end), but maybe Apple will take a small hit in order to push the MacBook market even harder.
"You can buy that $1000 Windows laptop with old technology - or you can get this new Apple laptop with the latest and greatest for the same money, Mr. Switcher."
By this logic Yugos and Ferraris are also in competition. Hey, they both drive!
A $499 Dell laptop is not Apple's direct competition - to find that you look at price, features and size. Which is where every manufacturer will start to move their $1299 and $1499 laptops over to Core 2 Duo. The $1099 is a little more problematic (the low-end Core 2 being more expensive than Core Duo's low-end), but maybe Apple will take a small hit in order to push the MacBook market even harder.
"You can buy that $1000 Windows laptop with old technology - or you can get this new Apple laptop with the latest and greatest for the same money, Mr. Switcher."
Tilpots
Apr 9, 09:17 PM
Given your argument I would have thought you'd represent "less filling". :p
B
Touch?. :D
B
Touch?. :D
Tmelon
Mar 30, 07:03 PM
So developers...
Any changes noticed yet?
Any changes noticed yet?
Unspeaked
Aug 11, 04:24 PM
The MacBook is a "consumer" model. The Pro is for the "Professional", although I'm some sort of a "professional", and my MacBook suits me just fine. (I liked the form factor and the keyboard.) Stuffed with 2G of RAM and a 100G 7.2K drive it runs OS X, Windows & CentOS (via Parallels desktop) just fine. It's like a digital Swiss Army knife - I haven't found much it can't do reasonably well. :o
I second this opinion.
There's nothing I've hit that a MacBook can't handle as well as I was hoping for, and most things it does even quicker than I thought it would.
And I'm in that "sort of pro" catagory, as well.
I second this opinion.
There's nothing I've hit that a MacBook can't handle as well as I was hoping for, and most things it does even quicker than I thought it would.
And I'm in that "sort of pro" catagory, as well.
adbe
Apr 5, 02:50 PM
Every time something like this goes down I'm reminded of the original 1984 Apple ad campaign.
Oh how things have changed.
Apple is now BIG BROTHER with a vengeance.
Bloody lame :mad:
With all our dumb laws there really should be a law that precludes bullies like Apple from using these strong arm tactics.
Apple really have got way too big for their boots.
Please read the damn article *before* posting.
Oh how things have changed.
Apple is now BIG BROTHER with a vengeance.
Bloody lame :mad:
With all our dumb laws there really should be a law that precludes bullies like Apple from using these strong arm tactics.
Apple really have got way too big for their boots.
Please read the damn article *before* posting.
itcheroni
Apr 21, 12:50 AM
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
Okay, but just for you, dude (when you disagree with me, we both can at least understand what we're disagreeing on. Other people here, well, it's just a waste of time. They start responding before even understanding my point). I guess I didn't make it clear earlier but my perspective on capital gains is in relation to inflation. If there were 100 widgets and 100 dollars, let's say the value of one widget was 1 dollar. If the central bank in charge of dollars decides to do some quantitative easing and increases the money supply to 200 dollars. This will lead to inflation with one widget valued at approximately 2 dollars. Now, why should one pay capital gains on this when, most likely, everything else costs more too. You didn't really receive any gain; the measurement of value (dollars) decreased.
For example, let's say there was a tax for getting taller. If the measurement of an inch or foot keeps decreasing, you will have to keep paying even though you're not getting taller.
Earlier I gave an example of the time between buying an apple and biting into it, likening it to cost basis and realized gain. We would find it ridiculous to pay a tax for any capital gain in the apple, but if I choose to save my money in gold until I use it, most people think I'm actually gaining something. If I were holding stock in a company that paid dividends, that might be different.
So from my perspective, the inflation (capital gain) itself is a tax, and we have to pay a tax for that tax. Right now, I don't believe the economy is really improving; the Fed is just creating enough inflation to improve the numbers. Stocks may be going up, but I think food prices are going up even faster. So what is the point of a capital gains on stocks if the proceeds from the sale nets you even less groceries than at the time of your cost basis? If a 1 ounce gold coin a hundred years ago buys you roughly the same today, what is the point of charging a capital gains? In this case, the coin would have gone from $20 to $1500, adding up to a capital gain of $1480. Sure, you could have save the $20 in cash instead of gold, but then you're "taxed" by inflation. Instead of paying your rent for several months, $20 will now buy you a haircut. Forget the "tax the rich" aspect of this; this makes it really difficult for poor people to save money because they are the ones most likely to save cash.
My concern is, how will we save our purchasing power? The government is actively decreasing the value of our money and anything we do to try and save our purchasing power is stripped away by taxes.
Hammer God
Mar 28, 09:49 AM
Glad to read about Mac.
No so happy to read about the lack of iPhone hardware till possibly Sept :rolleyes:. I think if their going to wait until September, then we really need to consider the possibility of an LTE iPhone.
My thinking too. If, by waiting another three months, Apple could release an LTE version of the iPhone, this might make more sense for them.
Imagine what the holiday season would look like if more of their competitors were out with LTE phones and Apple was just standing pat with what amounted to a refresh of the iPhone 4. Instead, with an LTE iPhone out, they would avoid having tons of customers going over to Android.
No so happy to read about the lack of iPhone hardware till possibly Sept :rolleyes:. I think if their going to wait until September, then we really need to consider the possibility of an LTE iPhone.
My thinking too. If, by waiting another three months, Apple could release an LTE version of the iPhone, this might make more sense for them.
Imagine what the holiday season would look like if more of their competitors were out with LTE phones and Apple was just standing pat with what amounted to a refresh of the iPhone 4. Instead, with an LTE iPhone out, they would avoid having tons of customers going over to Android.
CKtoph
Nov 13, 11:05 AM
I'm going to use it for a few days and a couple trips around town first before I give a review. But my intial impressions of the kit is that it works just as advertised. Doesn't feel cheap, BT syncing is very easy and syncs every time I plug the phone in. Speaker volume is clear but may need to be louder. I still have to give it some time and adjust to my liking first (my car is pretty loud). And yes, I am using Navigon, but I have not yet downloaded their Live Traffice update.
Per the manual, calls will not come in through your car's speaker but instead the TomTom car kit's speaker.
I currently have the kit mounted on my windshield but I also tried mounting it on my dash. If you do not want to put that adhesive on your dash, buy a Sticky Pad (http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/Hand-Stands-Jelly-Sticky-Pad-Dash-Holder/2603163/product.html) and lay it on your dash. Now mount the TomTom kit as you normally would on the sticky pad as if it were glass. It sticks and works very well. Alternatively, you can put the adhesive disk on the sticky pad if you want the suction cup of the TomTom kit to cling to a hard plastic surface. When you leave your car, just peel the Sticky Pad off of your dash and it will not leave any residue. Essentially it is a GPS friction mount. Or you can buy this (http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/HandStands-GPS-Sticky-Pad-Dash-Mount/4341949/product.html), but its just too big for my tastes.
Thanks for the tip. How do you feel about the speaker volume on the unit for calls so far? Also, do the navigation instructions come through the car's speakers at all?
I'd still be curious to see how it looks when stuck to the windshield. I've heard some say that it's too hard to see on the windshield.
Per the manual, calls will not come in through your car's speaker but instead the TomTom car kit's speaker.
I currently have the kit mounted on my windshield but I also tried mounting it on my dash. If you do not want to put that adhesive on your dash, buy a Sticky Pad (http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/Hand-Stands-Jelly-Sticky-Pad-Dash-Holder/2603163/product.html) and lay it on your dash. Now mount the TomTom kit as you normally would on the sticky pad as if it were glass. It sticks and works very well. Alternatively, you can put the adhesive disk on the sticky pad if you want the suction cup of the TomTom kit to cling to a hard plastic surface. When you leave your car, just peel the Sticky Pad off of your dash and it will not leave any residue. Essentially it is a GPS friction mount. Or you can buy this (http://www.overstock.com/Electronics/HandStands-GPS-Sticky-Pad-Dash-Mount/4341949/product.html), but its just too big for my tastes.
Thanks for the tip. How do you feel about the speaker volume on the unit for calls so far? Also, do the navigation instructions come through the car's speakers at all?
I'd still be curious to see how it looks when stuck to the windshield. I've heard some say that it's too hard to see on the windshield.
beebler
Apr 23, 10:13 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
As I said a while ago, the next gen of MBP's will have a really good screen as a main selling point.
No one listens!
hildey
Apr 23, 05:15 PM
a retina display on the 13" MBP would be the one thing that would get me to upgrade almost immediately.
jkozlow3
Mar 28, 10:24 AM
Yes, precisely. Android and other handsets are moving to Tegra 2/Orion based platforms with maybe quad core SoCs coming in Fall '11 from nVidia. An A5 equipped iPhone shipping around September would be outdated the minute it hits the shelves as far as hardware is concerned.
With Pocket Legends already reporting that gaming on Android is making them more money than on iOS and this delay in Apple's usual release schedule, it could mean that iOS gaming could lose out to Android and set the pace for future developments, just like what happened to Apple in the 80s with the rise of the PC.
While I doubt we have anything to worry about short term as iOS device owners, if they keep this up in the long term and keep losing ground to Android, it might become a problem.
The Verizon iPhone was the nail in Android's coffin. Not saying Android will go away completely, but I do believe iPhones will be as popular as iPods within a couple more years. How many people do you know without an iPod of some sort? (at least prior to the iPhone which has replaced the iPod for many)
With Pocket Legends already reporting that gaming on Android is making them more money than on iOS and this delay in Apple's usual release schedule, it could mean that iOS gaming could lose out to Android and set the pace for future developments, just like what happened to Apple in the 80s with the rise of the PC.
While I doubt we have anything to worry about short term as iOS device owners, if they keep this up in the long term and keep losing ground to Android, it might become a problem.
The Verizon iPhone was the nail in Android's coffin. Not saying Android will go away completely, but I do believe iPhones will be as popular as iPods within a couple more years. How many people do you know without an iPod of some sort? (at least prior to the iPhone which has replaced the iPod for many)
radesousa
May 6, 01:18 AM
Hell, Apple has so much cash they should buy AMD. :D
Apple can then sell CPUs to the PC manufacturers such as HP, Dell, etc. :D
Apple can then sell CPUs to the PC manufacturers such as HP, Dell, etc. :D
iZac
Mar 28, 11:14 AM
Capacity bump now, full update September(ish)?
milbournosphere
Mar 29, 12:06 PM
I don't trust corporate clouds, especially with a service that Sony is clearly gunning for legally.
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
Gasu E.
Mar 29, 02:53 PM
Yes, didnt you know?
Every country outside the US lives in poverty, where families must raise 17 children to send them out to work, and must fight to the death over food.
Oh, I had forgotten about all that. Thanks!
Every country outside the US lives in poverty, where families must raise 17 children to send them out to work, and must fight to the death over food.
Oh, I had forgotten about all that. Thanks!
kevink2
May 6, 06:23 AM
Wouldn't a new CPU have to be much faster than the equivalent Intel chip to make it worthwhile? Not just equivalent. Wouldn't it have to be able to run previous generation software in emulation for a period of years.
Unorthodox
Aug 2, 02:08 PM
How about this for WWDC:
--Talk about how great the switch to Intel is going
--Praise developers work on Universal apps
--Talk about pro software
--Sit down and preview Leopard
--Talk about new Core 2 Duo
--Oh, by the way the iMac I have been using has the new Core 2 Duo
play money, printable fake
fake million dollar bill
--Talk about how great the switch to Intel is going
--Praise developers work on Universal apps
--Talk about pro software
--Sit down and preview Leopard
--Talk about new Core 2 Duo
--Oh, by the way the iMac I have been using has the new Core 2 Duo
itcheroni
Apr 18, 06:51 PM
Yet you haven't convinced many here. Doesn't that indicate that perhaps you need to address it again, and perhaps find other ways to illustrate your point? It's not like I'm unwilling to be convinced. I just haven't heard a good reason to accept your argument.
Well, if you guys agreed with me then I would have to rethink my position. :D
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
Well, if you guys agreed with me then I would have to rethink my position. :D
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
KnightWRX
May 4, 06:33 PM
This is great, with Snow Leopard I couldn't buy it for weeks as they were constantly "out of stock" in the shops.
Really ? Apple Store in Montreal had plenty of copies on Day 1 and for weeks afterwards. Piles and piles of the stuff.
Really ? Apple Store in Montreal had plenty of copies on Day 1 and for weeks afterwards. Piles and piles of the stuff.
peskaa
Apr 21, 02:31 PM
Redesign to a rackmountable? Yes please, even if it isn't as convenient as 1U.
Smaller for desktop use too? Bonus!
Smaller for desktop use too? Bonus!
GregA
Nov 28, 05:17 PM
A thing the size of a notebook, with an open screen for handwriting...not just like a PDA or vPod.
So for you a tablet pretty well means a Laptop, without a keyboard?
So for you a tablet pretty well means a Laptop, without a keyboard?
rtharper
Sep 11, 09:19 AM
It won't be updated tomorrow. But it will probably be updated as soon as later this week. Boo freaking hoo already, is it really that big a deal to wait a few days. And here's the big question: IS DELL EVEN SHIPPING MEROM LAPTOPS YET?
No, but they're not playing games with my rather fragile heart =(
No, but they're not playing games with my rather fragile heart =(
bedifferent
Apr 24, 10:24 AM
Ah... But notice they sell one type of these displays and not the other ;)
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
dernhelm
Aug 4, 11:41 AM
Like someone else said, That is exactly my case! I am carefully awaiting a Core 2 Duo version of the iMac. It's the only thing holding me down right now.
I'm waiting for the Core 2 processors to come out as well. I'm finally replacing my 664MHz P-III (you read that right) that I surf the web with at home. Got my better half to agree to an upgrade, and almost pulled the trigger about 3 weeks ago, but thought I'd wait for the Core 2 Duo iMac to be introduced. That should mean cheaper Core Duo iMacs for me...
I'm waiting for the Core 2 processors to come out as well. I'm finally replacing my 664MHz P-III (you read that right) that I surf the web with at home. Got my better half to agree to an upgrade, and almost pulled the trigger about 3 weeks ago, but thought I'd wait for the Core 2 Duo iMac to be introduced. That should mean cheaper Core Duo iMacs for me...
No comments:
Post a Comment