lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:50 PM
Well Rovio (Angry Birds) thinks otherwise:
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
http://www.insidemobileapps.com/2011/03/13/angry-birds-android-ios/
"The company said in December that it expected to make $1 million per month from Android by the end of 2010. (...) Now that the app has seen about 100 million installs across all platforms, Rovio is not getting the same initial bump in paid download revenue from Apple’s app store. On Android, the company doesn’t offer paid Angry Birds apps, but sees recurring revenue from advertising."
So they make more money with their free Android version than they do with the paid iOS version.
Apple Has Paid $2 Billion To App Developers (And Other Key Stats)
[http://www.techspot.com/news/42006-apple-has-paid-over-2-billion-to-app-developers.html
How much has Google paid?
And how many other developers feel that way as Rovio ... a few. If marker share was the end all then why is all the new top apps coming out for iOS first then Android later? Android going to have a large market share iOS will probability have around 20- 25% market share and if people continue to keep paying for apps I don't see anything changing this.
Why I prefer iOS Development over Android, from a Java guy
http://www.jeviathon.com/2011/01/why-i-prefer-ios-development-over.html
Android is a mess, say developers
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/04/04/android-is-a-mess-say-developers/
IOS Easier For Developers Compared To Android
http://www.mobile88.com/news/read.asp?file=/2011/4/5/20110405035733&phone=iOS-easier-to-develop-Android-Symbian
DeathChill
Aug 7, 10:18 PM
Running the preview now... some nice developer level stuff that I cannot ebelish on however beyond what was talked about in the keynote.
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
So it's fair to say that developers have received their copy of Leopard?
OrangeSVTguy
Apr 25, 04:23 PM
Guess we all now know what that new data center is going to be used for now.
mwswami
Jul 21, 04:48 PM
Interesting. You know links where we can learn more about Bensley?
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
TechReport: The Bensley server platform debuts (http://techreport.com/etc/2006q2/woodcrest/index.x?pg=1)
MacRumors
Aug 16, 10:33 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
Barefeats provides (http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html) benchmarks comparing the Quad 3GHz Mac Pro (Xeon) vs the Quad G5 2.5GHz Power Mac (G5). This represents the new top of the line vs the old top of the line Mac.
They provide benchmarks for both non-Universal and Universal applications between the Mac Pro 3GHz, Mac Pro 2.66GHz and PowerMac G5 Quad 2.5GHz.
The top-end Mac Pro performed well compared to the Quad G5 with both Photoshop CS2 and After Effects 7.0 despite running under Rosetta emulation on the Mac Pro. Universal upgrades to these applications should provide additional performance boosts.
Meanwhile, Universal applications iMovie HD 6, Final Cut Pro 5, FileMaker Pro 8.5 and Cinebench 9.5 generally showed substantial improvements even in the 2.66GHz Mac Pro vs the 2.5GHz PowerMac.
There's no doubt that both versions of the Mac Pro are faster than the G5 Quad-Core running Universal Binary apps like iMovie, Final Cut Pro, etc. As you can see from the four UB tests we ran in this session, the Mac Pro 2.66GHz was as much as 62% faster than the Quad-Core G5/2.5GHz. The Mac Pro 3.0GHz was as much as 85% faster.
bkj216
Apr 6, 10:10 AM
And THAT's why I didn't jump the gun on a MBA yet. Now give me the new processors, and a backlit keyboard, and Apple's got my $.
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
(Be nice if they could bump up the battery life on the 11 too)
KingYaba
Mar 1, 04:47 AM
I have no right to condemn anyone to hell.
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
If heaven were very crowded, it wouldn't be very heavenly, would it?
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
mcgillmaine
Jun 22, 10:32 AM
I just got off the phone with a radio shack in the area I live in (Raleigh-Durham, NC). The guy (Alex) seemed to be well informed on what's going to happen in the next few days. This is a sum of what was told to me.
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
Our area sent out 251 pin request (or something like that). And only got back 96. Which leaves each store at about 3-5 phones. So he went on and talked about the "pre order" list that didn't really mean you would have one on the 24h and said it's about a 1-50 chance most people will get there phone on Thursday. Not good news for me. I hope this can help!!
ezekielrage_99
Jul 27, 10:04 PM
This was one of the advantages of the G5 but IBM stalled and Intel has essentially blown past everybody. AMD will answer no doubt, but it appears that Intel has about a 6 month jump on them.
AMD has it's hands full with an ATi take over which gives Intel the chance to get a bit a head on the Processor game. Either way it's good Intel has some real competition it means faster cheaper chips.:cool:
AMD has it's hands full with an ATi take over which gives Intel the chance to get a bit a head on the Processor game. Either way it's good Intel has some real competition it means faster cheaper chips.:cool:
DPazdanISU
Aug 7, 03:49 PM
http://events.apple.com.edgesuite.net/aug_2006/event/index.html
FreeState
Mar 2, 09:54 PM
Why is most straight people assume that gay people do all those? I'm gay and I don't do a thing in that article. I know.. I'm boring but hey that's not the point.
Poison sumac plant
What Does Poison Oak Rash Look
The typical rash is arranged
oak and poison sumac.
Poison Ivy Treatment Cream
and poison sumac are plants
oak and poison sumac.
causes an itching rash in
OutThere
Apr 27, 01:29 PM
Don't jack up America for those of us who love it for what it was founded on.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
(insert here where some smart-A responds with "slavery?" or something equally inapplicable)
I don't know about you, but I love America because it was founded on stolen native land. Just makes me so proud of my forefathers, makes me all warm and fuzzy inside.
notjustjay
Nov 28, 09:20 PM
If can prove to the record companies that all the music on my iPod is legitimately sourced, I expect them to send me a refund of this fee.
Seriously, name me ONE other industry where the sales and marketing people blatantly call their customers liars, cheats and thieves, while we just sit there and take it.
Seriously, name me ONE other industry where the sales and marketing people blatantly call their customers liars, cheats and thieves, while we just sit there and take it.
portishead
Apr 12, 02:25 PM
BTW, apparently this site is doing live blogging:
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
http://www.finalcutmtl.org/2011/04/10/supermeet-live-sur-final-cut-mtl
That's about all I could find.
coolbreeze
Apr 7, 11:30 PM
You people don't know the facts and are jumping to conclusions. You need to realize that this is a RUMOR site....
Share the facts then sir.
We are reacting to a rumor on a rumor site.
:confused:
AppleBestBuy? (applebb)?
Share the facts then sir.
We are reacting to a rumor on a rumor site.
:confused:
AppleBestBuy? (applebb)?
28monkeys
Apr 11, 07:10 PM
iphone 4 out of date? Is that even possible with the mighty apps around to entertain me every second i turn it on!?
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:31 PM
And I remember that they were very concerned about the lack of ECC memory, and were extremely eager to replace them with Xserves as soon as the G5 model came out.
Yeah, the original PowerMac G5 cluster thingy was really just a proof of concept that a high-powered supercomputer could be made from Macs and using the Mac OS. It never ran anything mission critical because of the lack of ECC RAM which could cause all sorts of trouble with calculations if there was even one bit flip.
Once the XServe came out with ECC support they swapped out the PowerMacs (I think MacMall had a big sale of the PMs from the Virginia system) and replaced them with 2.3GHz XServes made specially for them by Apple - at the time I think the XServes were only 2GHz so Apple made a bunch of 2.3GHz systems for Virginia to counteract the effect of the time they lost replacing the PowerMacs.
Yeah, the original PowerMac G5 cluster thingy was really just a proof of concept that a high-powered supercomputer could be made from Macs and using the Mac OS. It never ran anything mission critical because of the lack of ECC RAM which could cause all sorts of trouble with calculations if there was even one bit flip.
Once the XServe came out with ECC support they swapped out the PowerMacs (I think MacMall had a big sale of the PMs from the Virginia system) and replaced them with 2.3GHz XServes made specially for them by Apple - at the time I think the XServes were only 2GHz so Apple made a bunch of 2.3GHz systems for Virginia to counteract the effect of the time they lost replacing the PowerMacs.
Multimedia
Jul 23, 03:14 PM
Given the change in Clovertown schedule, I expect that at WWDC Apple will release 2 "lower end" Mac Pro configurations both with dual Woodcrests. The higher end configuration with two Clovertowns will ship early Q1 (maybe around MW'07).
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
I expect it will be 2.33GHz and 2.67GHz Woodcrest models with 3.0GHz as a BTO option. Conroe in Mac Pro is looking highly unlikely.
Anyone care to speculate on Intel's pricing for a 2.67GHz Clovertown? I am thinking $999.Well Swami I am going to have to call your bluff. Makes no sense to skip Conroe Dual Cores on the Mac Pro yet. This Winter 2007 with Clovertowns, perhaps post MacWorld SF. But not yet. And maybe not ever.
There are some who may never find a need for more than two cores. But therein creeps back the need for a cheaper dual core tower line in the same price range as the iMacs. Seems inevitable doesn't it? Expand the Tower line down to $999 and let it go all the way up to $3.5k. Six models instead of only 3 expensive ones.
January - March 2007
..$999 - Dual 2.13 GHz One Conroe
$1399 - Dual 2.4 GHz One Conroe
$1699 - Dual 2.67 GHz One Conroe
$1999 - Quad 2.67 GHz One Kentsfield
$2499 - Quad 3.2 GHz One Kentsfield
$3499 or more for Mac OctoPod Fastest On EARTH - 8 x 3.2 GHz
Two Clovertown later One Yorkfield for less money.
I found that word "OctoPod" in my Tiger's Oxford Dictionary. It's a REAL word.
When they get to 8 via a Yorkfield then the whole line can be based on the less expensive desktop family motherboards and chipsets except the extreeme top where pairs of Harpertown will make 16 etc etc.
You fill in the specs. I can't remember what speeds are being offered. This is all just a wild guestimate for discussion purposes. Please don't flame me.
ender land
Apr 27, 10:05 AM
I would have waited till after I was out of office.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
But meh, this whole thing was so outrageously stupid and the total amount of press time and money spent on something relatively obvious (how the @#%$ would someone actually be allowed in the White House by the gov if they were not a citizen?) is just saddening.
doylecook
Mar 31, 06:44 PM
"But as Android's popularity has taken off and the number of manufacturers and devices utilizing it has exploded, Google has begun tightening its control over the operating system, perhaps recognizing that a purely open system might in fact not be best for consumers..."
Four legs good, two legs better.
Four legs good, two legs better.
blackcrayon
Mar 22, 09:56 PM
Christ I am so sick of them taking fantastic hardware and absolutely ruining it by using proprietary file formats and frankenstein versions of Android. I do get a kick out of their 10.1" model being both thinner and lighter than the 9.7" Ipad2 though. That will undoubtedly have the apple apologists out en masse.
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
Yes 2 tenths of a millimeter thinner and 6 - 12 grams of weight difference... I'm sure the "apple apologists" are losing a lot of sleep over that one :rolleyes:
SPUY767
Jul 27, 03:38 PM
Sorry if i missed it, but at what speeds do these run? Don't they know just because they keep bumping and bumping the chip speed don't really mean they have a faster system. Seem just like yesterday when a better design was more important than a super fast chip. Oh well, everyone is buying into the Mhz myth now. Funny that just a year or so ago, Apple was trying to shoot down the Mhz myth, now they have people cheering for it. I guess power consumption is good though.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
This is a positively thoughtless remark. No one's cheering the MHz myth on, in fact, Intel itself has abandoned the concept. Until the 3Ghz woodies get dropped in a MacPro, the 2.7 GHZ G5 will still be the fastest chip ever put in a Macintosh. I have a dual core Pentium D in a bastard Mac at the house, it runs at 3.8 GHz. I'm pretty sure that even it is slower in a lot of areas than these Core 2's. So no, you're absolutely wrong, the MHz myth is all but dead.
QCassidy352
Apr 6, 11:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
So is that also true for the difference between SV and LV? If that is the case, the Core i7-2649M you cite above (2.3 LV chip) should be faster compared to the 2.3 i5 in the low end Pro 13?
Thanks!
It would be about as fast. The IGP is 150MHz slower though so graphics wise it would be slightly slower. chrmjenkins explained some smaller details but in terms of performance, i7-2649M should be similar to i5-2520M.
Sure clock speed isn't everything. But you better go read up some more on Tue Intel HD3000 IGP. You're using facts from the STD voltage SB IGP and applying them to the ULV SB IGP. Go read about the graphics on the Samsung Series 9 laptops. The 13" model uses this very chip cited. It shows greater than a 50% drop in graphics performance from the 320m to ULV IGP used in SB.
This has been the problem all along with everyone. They're attributing facts that are actually fallacies to this Intel IGP.
Remember that those are numbers under Windows. Anand mentioned in his 2011 MBP review that Intel HD 3000 has brilliant drivers in OS X, and in general it beat the 320M in OS X too. In Windows it got badly beaten by 320M. Sure the LV and especially ULV IGP will be slower than 320M, even in OS X but it may not be as bad as 50% drop.
True. But here's the thing. Apple generally updates these about one a year. With such a slow upgrade cycle, you'd like to see significant improvement on each update. To stay the same would be pretty mediocre. To actually move backwards is just sad.
And yes, I realize options are limited here by the spat between intel and nvidea and by the size of the air (not enough room for a big dedicated card). So I don't know what the right answer is. All I know is I won't be tempted by an upgrade to CPU when it comes with a gpu downgrade.
LagunaSol
Apr 6, 04:27 PM
1. Have you seen honeycomb?
I have.
Its a work of art. "Work of art???" Kind of like Dogs Playing Poker? :confused:
5. PAUSE. Games apple does not have more games then Android. Android has Emulators which allow it to play NES, GBA, and countless others. Do to this android has tons more games.
LOL WUT? You're honestly going to count emulated games (pirated in almost all cases) as Android games?
Wow.
I have.
Its a work of art. "Work of art???" Kind of like Dogs Playing Poker? :confused:
5. PAUSE. Games apple does not have more games then Android. Android has Emulators which allow it to play NES, GBA, and countless others. Do to this android has tons more games.
LOL WUT? You're honestly going to count emulated games (pirated in almost all cases) as Android games?
Wow.
