godrifle
Nov 29, 12:27 PM
... Is Ford going to start asking for a share of the groceries I haul in the trunk?
milo
Jul 27, 10:57 AM
All of the reviews of the Core 2 Duo say that it crushes AMD in the desktop arena. This is good news, now we just need new iMacs, MacBook Pros, and Mac Pros.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
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.
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.
And minis.
I'm guessing we get the towers at WWDC and probably meroms in the macbook. Most if not all the other models will get updates, but they can't do them all at once, I'd bet they'll follow up with separate announcements in a few weeks.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Well, duh. That's already pretty much been announced. Vista will be next year, and quad core intel chips are supposed to be out before the end of the year.
wasn't this announced last friday? (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060721145043.shtml)
Yeah. But today, it happened.
Does anyone know if the chips that are actually shipping are the same as the prototype chips?
YES! That's the whole point of a prototype.
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.
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.
Val-kyrie
Jul 30, 01:27 PM
Gee, talk about getting ahead of yourself.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
Core 3 will be out before Vista is. I'm going to call it now.
Everybody, be my witness, Core 3 (any processor that goes beyond Core 2 because I don't know if they'll call it "Core 3") will be out before a consumer version of Vista is shipped.
You don't think Vista will be out before the revision to the Core 2 Duo due in Q1 2007 with the Santa Rosa chipset??? I bet Vista will ship by the time the Santa Rosa chipset is ready, especially because MS is suggesting Vista systems use harddrives or Mobos with flash RAM to speed up the boot process.
PhantomPumpkin
Apr 27, 10:50 AM
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
Potentially yes. However as people stated, it was way out of proportion. Media is one end, Apple is the other like you said. I'm sure like 99.1% of things, it lies somewhere in between them.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
Potentially yes. However as people stated, it was way out of proportion. Media is one end, Apple is the other like you said. I'm sure like 99.1% of things, it lies somewhere in between them.
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.
generik
Sep 18, 11:09 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
All new diamond dust coated titanium MBP chasis! Strong enough to ground PCs into dust...
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
All new diamond dust coated titanium MBP chasis! Strong enough to ground PCs into dust...
Megadooomer
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Except the biggest spec is missing from it: compatible with the Apple App Store. Sorry, specs are not the end all and be all of device popularity. What good are specs if few developers write the device?
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
DStaal
Jul 20, 09:10 AM
Where you are going to see the difference is when you multi-task.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
Bingo. Check how many processes are running on your computer right now, and you'll see why more cores can help. Writing a program to use multiple CPUs is complicated, yes, but OS X is already written to spread programs across multiple CPUs automatically.
It will take a while for people to come up with effective uses for that, but given the power we will find it.
For Example: Burn a Blueray disk, render a FinalCut Pro movie, download your digital camera RAW files into Adobe Lightroom and run a batch, and watch your favorite movie from the iTunes Movie Store all without a single hiccup.
Bingo. Check how many processes are running on your computer right now, and you'll see why more cores can help. Writing a program to use multiple CPUs is complicated, yes, but OS X is already written to spread programs across multiple CPUs automatically.
It will take a while for people to come up with effective uses for that, but given the power we will find it.
freeny
Jul 20, 08:10 AM
WOW! Octo cores:eek:
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
Im due a new computer and every time I hear about whats in the pipeline I bump my purchase date ahead another 4 months:o
gnasher729
Jul 27, 05:59 PM
but is still more productive because it handles more calculations per clock cycle
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
I'm no processor geek. I have a basic understanding of the terminology and how things work so correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't this one of the advantages that the PPC had over Intel chips? Does this mean Intel is moving toward shorter pipes? Are we talking more instructions per clock cycle or what? What does "calculations" mean in this context?
With most processors, especially the Intel/AMD processors, "instructions per cycle" is not a useful number. These processors have both simple instructions (add register number 3 to register number 6) and complex instructions (add register number 3 to the number whose address is in register number 6). A PowerPC has the simple instructions, but not the complex ones. Instead it would need three instructions "load the number whose address is in register number 6, and move it to register 7", "add register 3 to register 7", "store register 7 to the location whose address is in register 6". But the Intel processor doesn't magically do three times as much work. Instead, it splits the complex instruction into three so-called "macro-ops", and does exactly the same work. So in this case, the PowerPC would execute three times as many instructions per cycle (3 instead of 1), but because it doesn't do more actual work, that is pointless. Instead you would count the number of operations, and they are more or less the same.
Intel is indeed moving towards shorter pipelines. They have done that already with the Core Duo chips. Longer pipelines have the advantage that each pipeline step is a bit faster, so you can get higher clockspeed. Shorter pipelines have the advantage that they take much less energy (very important; at some point your chips just melt), they are much faster handling branches, and they are just much much easier to design. Pentium 4 needed absolutely heroic efforts to produce it, and would have needed twice the heroics to improve it. Instead, the Core Duo has a much simpler design, that is just as powerful, and because it was so simple, Core 2 Duo could improve it.
And Core 2 Duo can now execute up to four "micro-ops" per cycle, same as the G5, compared to three for Core Duo, Pentium 4 and G4. It also has some clever features that reduce the number of micro-ops needed up to 10 percent, and some other improvements.
%252525252B(1%252525252Bof%252525252B69).jpg "real estate ads that sell.")
kevin.rivers
Jul 14, 04:26 PM
<snipped...>I don't think you realize what you're asking for. A system that is capable of performing all possible tasks at once is just unrealistic. Nobody will ever equip a system like that, because no user will have those kinds of requirements.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Amen. It makes me sick to see people crying foul.
"I want 4 of every port/slot there is, in a case that is no more than a foot tall, plus 2 3Ghz processors, blu-ray, dual gpus, all for $1500! And if Apple doesn't give it to me, I will never buy anything from them ever!"
Even though they will never even use them(all the ports/slots). Most people will fill the x16 and maybe an old school PCI slot. Thats about it.
Even in the PC world, where more slots are common, you almost never find a system that has actually filled all those slots with devices.
Amen. It makes me sick to see people crying foul.
"I want 4 of every port/slot there is, in a case that is no more than a foot tall, plus 2 3Ghz processors, blu-ray, dual gpus, all for $1500! And if Apple doesn't give it to me, I will never buy anything from them ever!"
Even though they will never even use them(all the ports/slots). Most people will fill the x16 and maybe an old school PCI slot. Thats about it.
gnasher729
Jul 28, 06:27 AM
Ensoniq, thanks so much for the useful corrections. How significant do you think that 64-bit capability will be in the future compared to not having it(say, 2-3 years time)?
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
64 bit is required for applications that need more than four GB of memory. For other things, it is nice to have, but not required. If you buy a MacBook today, you wouldn't be able to put more than 4 GB of memory in it for the next few years anyway, so in that respect it doesn't matter much whether you have a Yonah or Merom chip. For everything else, 64 bit software might run a bit faster than 32 bit software on a 64 bit chip, but it is not essential. So I think applications will ship as 32 bit or as combined 32/64 bit applications for quite some time.
The question for the developers would be: If I switch to 64 bit exclusively, so my code runs ten percent faster on Core 2 Duo, but 1-2 million Macintosh users cannot use it at all, how many sales will I gain because it is faster, and how many sales will I lose because 2 million people cannot use it? Three years from now, the answer will still be that you lose more sales running 64 bit only.
Willis
Jul 28, 04:27 PM
Okay, I did some tinkering myself, just for kicks, and here's what I came up with. I thought that we were talking about a computer that was somewhere between a Mac Mini and a Mac Pro (Power Mac), so I thought, maybe the style should be a combination of the two. Let me know what you think.
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
It's not a Mac Plus... It's a Mac++!
http://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++1.PNGhttp://www.ghwphoto.com/Mac++2.PNG
can you say "G4 Cube"?
cmaier
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
Samsung, circa 2006:
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
http://www.gsmarena.com/samsung_at_cebit_2006-news-177.php
ryanx
Apr 10, 06:37 PM
a >>dramatic<< change - the truth is that it really needs to be dramatic :))
AidenShaw
Jul 14, 11:22 PM
top heavy is just idiotic.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
Has anyone noticed that three or four disk drives actually weigh a lot more than a power supply?
Especially a modern power supply! (Those Apple IIfx supplies had a lot of iron - but today a 600watt supply is pretty light.)
Get a life (and an IEC 90° cord) and forget whining about power supply top or bottom.
Worrying about "Top heavy" is simply nonsense - I have top PS systems and bottom PS systems, and "top heaviness" has never been an issue - the centre of gravity of my systems is usually determined by the number, capacity, and location of the disks.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 04:50 PM
So We May Be Seeing A Very Short Life For What Steve Introduces August 7. If true, this looks like Steve may be able to claim an all Quad Core plus Oct Core on top Mac Pro line PLUS Quad Core iMacs at his annual SF MacWorld SteveNote January 9,2007 perhaps with Leopard on board as well. Wouldn't that be a Merry belated Christmas and a Happiest of New Years? :eek: :D :p :cool: ;) :)
shamino
Jul 14, 03:55 PM
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
Shagrat
Jul 15, 02:00 AM
Here (http://www.ntius.com/default.asp?p=dragonburn/dburn4_main) you go.
(re Dragon burn...)
looks like a good app, and the price is good, but it seems as if it is for PPC mac only if their downloadable manual is to be believed. Anybody know if there is a Universal binary in the offing? Need a burn program for my (Non-Mooing!) Macbook!
(re Dragon burn...)
looks like a good app, and the price is good, but it seems as if it is for PPC mac only if their downloadable manual is to be believed. Anybody know if there is a Universal binary in the offing? Need a burn program for my (Non-Mooing!) Macbook!
grmatt
Apr 8, 08:29 AM
I had a strange experience at Best Buy. About two days before the iPad 2 came out I went to my local Best Buy to ask about availability on release day. The employee I spoke to told me essentially that I should wait. He told me the iPad 3 was coming this fall and I should either skip the iPad 2 or purchase something like the Zoom. I pressed him how could he possible know that, I said I read all the rumor mills and such and time and time again no one actually ever knows that information. He said "they all did" (best Buy employees) it was posted on there "E-Learnings" site which is basically an internal Best Buy training/notification/product information system.
So here is an employee telling me not to purchase an iPad 2 because he thought the Zoom was better AND I should just wait because iPad 3 was coming out this fall.
WTF?
Fandroid.
So here is an employee telling me not to purchase an iPad 2 because he thought the Zoom was better AND I should just wait because iPad 3 was coming out this fall.
WTF?
Fandroid.
boncellis
Jul 20, 12:05 PM
double post, my apologies.
mobilehavoc
Apr 6, 02:14 PM
It's funny because appletards tend to speak about numbers in different ways.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market which avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
When it's related to Macs, they say they sell less than PCs but they're still much better.
When it's related to tablets, they say the iPad sells more because it's better.
So, I'm under the impression that the iPad is just like a "PC-like" market, which everyone buys because someone told it's cheaper and better.
That's what appletards say about PCs, isn't that? Something like an underground market which avoids people from knowing the "real quality" of Macs.
Ps: lol.
I'm not joking when I say this - I held off buying a Macbook for years purely because I didn't want to be associated with these hardcore Apple fanboys who live under Steve Job's bed. It's quite sickening.
I love Apple products, but doesn't mean you have to be blind to the alternatives. It's absolutely amazing how easily people can be brainwashed.
kentkomine
Apr 11, 03:42 PM
Aww, I was really hoping/expecting for a summer release :( But with all the other rumors suggesting that WWDC 2011 will be software-oriented, it makes sense. The iPhone 5 better be AWESOME, or else!!
0815
Apr 6, 02:34 PM
This can't be right. MR posters have assured me that the Xoom is better than the iPad. I mean, if you can't trust MR posters, whom can you trust?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
Ballmer?
As someone who likes his Apple products, part of me laughs seeing numbers like this for the Xoom, but the other part thinks the same thing you post above--that Apple needs to have a successful competitor in the space to keep Apple's progress from stagnating. More competition will make them take bigger steps more quickly.
As long as SJ has some say he (and Apple) will follow his vision, not the competition (and this is a good thing) - the competition will follow Apple [Remember how Android Phone Prototypes looked like before the iPhone was out - just a copy of BlackBerry phones]
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Maybe it should be put in these words: iOS was designed for the iPhone with a tablet in mind ....
I didn't know the "proposing Linux" part, very interesting - do you have any links on this so that I can read up on it?
