or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by hmm

I think the rmbp looks better in most ways, at least judging from the ones I have seen. I don't like the higher reflectivity so much, but overall it's a bit smoother in gradation, which is to be expected with an IPS display over the older TN. Resolution is a bit higher, although the 17" is still quite good in that regard. Prior to recent 4k options, 1920x1200 was the standard resolution for 24" displays. Having that at 17" makes for some very crisp text, albeit not with...
I actually liked the 17" and didn't mind carrying it. 15" is still the undisputed most popular size with every other brand, which is why I wasn't so sure Apple would hike their starting price there relative to the older one. Their sales may be more skewed toward the 13" models due to relative pricing. 17" models gained popularity due to a time when they were being purchased by people who might have otherwise used desktop crts of 17-19". 21" wasn't that common outside of...
 I don't have the exact figures, but I recall Beats being a reasonably profitable company, especially in terms of headphone sales. What gives the impression that they would not be able to pay up? As I said before, it seems like dealing with Apple's legal department would be a much bigger obstacle and possibly much more expensive.
 I think you guys put exactly zero thought into this, because it's ridiculous. Either company can afford the payout, but which do you think retains a better legal team? It's more likely that they want to enact this against Beats rather than face litigation with Apple. There is no such thing if they are absorbing this company. I don't think they will retain Beats as a wholly owned subsidiary. In buying the company they gain both its assets and liabilities. Now if this...
I find it extremely amusing that this conversation spun off from a thread on flash. It seems no one cares about Adobe anymore. Anyway no man should ever carry a handbag, and the glasses are machined screwless ones that snap together, not exactly the type you described. There's that and I got rid of the beard a few years ago. You weren't that far off, which is extremely funny.
I could see any of those options as options. My estimates are fairly conservative. I look at options tangential to what they have done within 2 major refresh cycles. I can say that even if you stuck completely with the mobile cpus, Apple has options at the same "recommended customer pricing" levels as those from the ivy bridge generation. The skus are there, but they aren't the same as the ones Apple uses in the retina macbook pros. The cpus in the Airs would be a...
I don't doubt that. Apple likes to share parts between machines presumably for both engineering cost and volume discount reasons. I suspect a third reason would be to control the number of leftover components in the supply chain at any given point. Their choice for the lower priced imac was a cpu that is also used in the macbook air. If it wasn't for a desire to share components or invoke volume discounts, they would have probably gone with another option. The basic unit...
I'm not sure what they intend to do. It looked as though they hesitated due to a change in chip cost, making the chips used in the 13 and 15" macbook pros poor candidates for the mini due to their cost. The low end one by far the furthest out of alignment.
It has been pretty far in the distance for some time, but the tech sites occasionally like to claim that Apple and others will somehow defy intel's rollout schedule. It's also the same thing over again. They say that the generation after is still on target, but they aren't going to ship something for 3 months and then immediately switch over.
 I think they just do that to avoid political thread trolling through alternate accounts.
New Posts  All Forums: