22july2013

About

Username
22july2013
Joined
Visits
146
Last Active
Roles
member
Points
7,538
Badges
2
Posts
3,848

Reactions

4.5KLike126Dislike423Informative

  • Tim Cook reveals 'a few more exciting things' coming from Apple soon

    22july201322july2013
    mjtomlin said:
    22july2013 said:
    entropys said:
    • ASi macbook, there could be a Mac mini but I believe Cook’s long term goal has no interest in desktops, he really wants iPad to be the future in an appliance vision of computing. The ASi MacBook will just be another step in that direction. If this theory is right, the first model will not outclass an iPad Pro  in raw performance. This might mean a new iPad Pro as well then.
    Interesting, so you think macOS is on the way out since you think "Cook... has no interest in desktops" and "MacBooks... will not outclass an iPad Pro in raw performance." That's a fascinating idea, if it turns out to be right. On the other hand, since desktops have no design limitations on fans/cooling or batteries/power, Apple could give them more power than any iOS device (or laptop.). My money is on this latter theory. The only thing that could stop me from buying an Apple Silicon computer is if your theory is right and Apple intends to cripple desktops.

    It’s ridiculous to think Apple is losing interest in the Mac... Craig and Joz both said so and Craig even want so far to call those that continue to think along those lines as “tools”. It’s obvious they are not interesting in phasing out the Mac. First of all, there’s no reason the Mac needs to be dropped in order for the iPad to continue on as an appliance computer. This is the single biggest reason why they have continued to resist morphing  them into one platform. Second, the Mac is a huge business for Apple and continues to grow. Do these people think Apple is going to just drop a product that generates tens of billions a year? I suspect after Intel is finally completely dropped, the prices of Macs will come down as well... especially on the high end, where the CPU alone can cost a couple thousand dollars.
    Generally when I disagree with someone I try to start my response with a non-combative word like "Interesting" (rather than words like "ridiculous") in order to keep them reading and to keep things civil. It's my style. I rarely get hostile or insulting, because I tend to feel that such approaches don't win over anyone. In fact, if the first words of my post are "I agree with you..." then you should be prepared for a particularly argumentative post. :wink: 
    muthuk_vanalingamCheeseFreezewilliamlondon

  • Tim Cook reveals 'a few more exciting things' coming from Apple soon

    22july201322july2013
    "A couple" usually means two. "A few" usually means three.
    williamlondontrackerozAlex1Nwatto_cobra

  • Early 2021 Apple Silicon iMac said to have 'A14T' processor

    22july201322july2013
    I, for one, am not happy about this.  Moving away from x86 to something (anything) else will break sooooo much.  All of a sudden the ability to run Windows (at CPU speed) goes away, all the programs which rely on Wine stop working (or at least working well).  I liked the 6502 (and variants).  I liked the 68K series.  I liked the PPC series.  I (eventually) liked the x86 series.  But this change...  I just don't feel good about it.  That said, perhaps the Apple CPUs will be fast enough to make emulation tolerable (unlike the x86 emulators for the PPC!)...  Perhaps.
    Apple actually demonstrated its Rosetta 2 emulation for a Windows x86 3D game (Shadow of the Tomb Raider) in its July WWDC conference. Did you see it? Wasn't it fast enough for you? https://www.reddit.com/r/macgaming/comments/hdzdo8/shadow_of_the_tomb_raider_running_on_rosetta_2/ <--

    I'm also wondering if you are assuming that Microsoft has no intention to introduce a native Apple Silicon version of Windows. Would that mitigate your concern, since Windows apps would be able to recompile their apps to Apple Silicon version of Windows, thereby providing "native" support. Microsoft's official line on future OSs for Apple is "we have nothing more to say at this time." To me, that's exciting, as they are still considering it.
    ronnrazorpitwatto_cobra

  • Epic argues Apple has 'no rights to the fruits' of its labor in 'Fortnite' filing

    22july201322july2013

    Rayz2016 said:
    seanismorris said:
    I think Apple’s fees are high, but it’s difficult to sympathize with Epic.
    Before Apple entered the mobile market, fees averaged between 50 and 7 per cent.  They bought the fees down across the board. 
    I presume you meant to say "between 50 and 70 per cent." It took me 5 minutes to realize you made a typo.
    SamsonikkwilliamlondonaderutterBittySon

  • Epic argues Apple has 'no rights to the fruits' of its labor in 'Fortnite' filing

    22july201322july2013
    I think Apple’s fees are high, but it’s difficult to sympathize with Epic.
    Right now Apple's fee structure favours the small developer, because all developers pay almost NOTHING (only that $99 annual developer fee) until they start selling products, through that 15% to 30% fee. Would you prefer that there be an upfront fee of $1000 per developer for the Xcode tools and developer accounts and services, even before a single product is sold? That would be great for big companies like Epic but bad for the million developers who would have to pay $1000 each just to join the table.

    Basically Epic doesn't want to be subsidizing the small developer (who include their competitors) any more. Understandable. But every one of the 200 million socialists in the US should be outraged at Epic.
    williamlondonradarthekataderuttermark fearingtenthousandthingslollivermdriftmeyerskippingrockhlee1169watto_cobra