or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by mcarling

If that's true, I suspect that Intel may have plans to end-of-life PCI -- at least PCI as we know it.I agree that 32GB is decent (more than decent). However, there are dynamic modeling applications which need more than 32GB of RAM. There are probably other applications which need more than 32GB of RAM.
I expect all Mac laptops introduced in 2012 to come standard with 4GB of RAM directly on the motherboard using 2Gbit chips and most of them to offer an 8GB BTO option using 4Gbit chips. I think we'll probably have to wait until 2013 for 8Gb DRAM chips and the option of 16MB on the motherboard -- though it's possible that Apple might offer 8GB standard and a 16GB BTO option on the 17" model by using 32 rather than 16 memory chips.I don't see anyone complaining anymore...
This is one of the reasons why I believe few Mac Pro customers are buying them to get flexible storage. I believe the overwhelming majority of Mac Pro customers are buying them for CPU/GPU performance and the ability to address more RAM than an iMac or Mac Mini can address. A believe a Mac with the expansion of the Mac Mini (plus one more Thunderbolt port) and the performance of an updated Mac Pro could be priced attractively and sell well. Anyone serious about storage...
Going forward, all Apple laptop RAM will be fixed on the motherboard, just like with the MacBook Air. Apple have been leaving too much money on the table with people buying the minimum RAM configuration and then loading up with third party RAM.
I expect that the next MacBook Pro will have most or all of these features which the MacBook Air does not have: - 25 to 35W CPUs - discreet graphics - two (rather than one) SSD slots - Ethernet port - Full-speed Thunderbolt port - HiDPI display - HD webcam - 10 hour battery - 8GB RAM BTO option
You're entitled to your opinion, but the sales data show the contrary. As a shareholder, I trust that Apple are putting more faith in the sales data than in your opinions about what customers want. I hope Apple continue to shift product design away from the "expandability" model of the PeeCee toward the integration model of consumer electronics.
Incorrect.
Then we would have an even worse global overpopulation problem, faster deforestation, and an even worse environmental disaster. No thank you. People who cannot feed themselves should not be breeding.
3% of earnings (profits). I think paying a dividend is a bad idea. If Apple want to return cash to shareholders, a buyback program would be better. I'd rather see Apple buy Microsoft, keep the Mac Business Unit and all the intellectual property, continue selling the software already on the market, and shut down MS Windows development, Windows Mobile, Xbox, etc. as they stop generating revenue.
Google's position comes close to evil. I'm not sure there is a fair and reasonable way to standardize licensing fees for FRAND patents, but opposition to the other two parts of the proposal, transparency and the bar on injunctions, is very evil.
New Posts  All Forums: