Stridder44
Oct 10, 09:37 AM
You know, today is tuesday.... :D
AppleScruff1
May 2, 12:57 PM
This is truly breaking news.
kd5jos
Jun 19, 09:06 AM
Does nobody realise that you have to support the exFAT format (from Microsoft, currently NOT supported on OS X, and has to be licensed by Microsoft) to be able to use more than 32 GB? (or the up to 2 TB). Otherwise if you format it with the old formats you are stuck on the same limits as you would with ad SDHC card..
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
Sort of.
Lets separate reading and writing exFAT. If I can read it, I can pull stuff off of it. So OS X will require the ability to read exFAT in order to make it compatible with non apple devices that will be using this format. HOWEVER, it is not required that Apple choose to read exFAT. You could format with HFS+. Then any device that can read HFS+ could read and write to it.
If I can write to exFAT, then I can place data (even 4GB+ media files) on the card. Apple may create a driver that allows you to read exFAT but not write to it.
This matters if you are going to use the card to store media files (4 GB+), or are planning on using the card with non Apple devices. I could get a 128 GB SDXC card, format 100 GB in FAT32 for a user directory, and format 3 8GB swap spaces (one for OS X, one for Windows, and one for Unix). Then I'd have my user files and swap space with me wherever I go, and it would be cross platform compatible (everyone reads and writes FAT32). Yes, FAT32 does have a maximum partition size, this is why I used a 128 GB SDXC card as the example. And yes, I wouldn't have my media files (movies) on the card (I'd need one of the 2 TB cards to do this).
Since Pretec is selling an ExpressCard SDXC reader, this is what I plan to do with my triple boot MBP (see sig). I'll point my OS X user directory to the directory that will be on this card, I'll do the same for Win7, and BackTrack. Each OS will also have swap space on the card. This increases security too. If I have my SDXC card with me, someone using the laptop can't see my files at all. It also increases speed (maybe and a little) because I'm using a different storage device and bus to put my user files/swap space on.
gdew
Sep 25, 10:55 AM
http://www.apple.com/aperture/newfeatures/index.html
more...
MacSimoPark
Jan 7, 04:58 AM
Has anyone else found that after installing this their iPhone battery can not get enough charge to turn on? I'm popping into Regent Street this afternoon, but it would be useful to know if anyone else has had the same problem.
Tried a hard reset, and it's not Jailbroken or Pwned or anything.
UPDATE: iPhone is working again. Multiple hard resets, removing sim, unplugging seemed to do the trick.
Tried a hard reset, and it's not Jailbroken or Pwned or anything.
UPDATE: iPhone is working again. Multiple hard resets, removing sim, unplugging seemed to do the trick.
yg17
Mar 27, 09:35 AM
Do you not have Road Tax on your cars?
To use a car in the UK, (unless it's a classic car made before 1972 I think), you have to keep it taxed. It's �105/6 months for my car, which has a 2litre engine.
Depends on the state. I pay $25 a year to renew my license plates, and then around $400 a year in personal property tax (that number depends on the value of the car, my car is 2 years old so it's pretty high). Some states have a higher license plate fee and no personal property tax.
To use a car in the UK, (unless it's a classic car made before 1972 I think), you have to keep it taxed. It's �105/6 months for my car, which has a 2litre engine.
Depends on the state. I pay $25 a year to renew my license plates, and then around $400 a year in personal property tax (that number depends on the value of the car, my car is 2 years old so it's pretty high). Some states have a higher license plate fee and no personal property tax.
more...
neonart
Nov 21, 05:28 PM
Does this mean we might actually see a 3GHz G5 Powerbook? :rolleyes:
I know really. I could see the tagline now:
The new PowerBook G5. Power cords are a thing of the past.
Yea, kinda cheesy, but you get the idea. :)
ARRGGGH! You guys beat me to it.
I was certain we were getting G5 Powerbooks on Tuesday based on this news.:D
I know really. I could see the tagline now:
The new PowerBook G5. Power cords are a thing of the past.
Yea, kinda cheesy, but you get the idea. :)
ARRGGGH! You guys beat me to it.
I was certain we were getting G5 Powerbooks on Tuesday based on this news.:D
fcortese
Mar 4, 05:54 AM
http://jddavis.zenfolio.com/img/s9/v0/p1055447075-5.jpg
JD, nicely done. I love the vibrant reds and yellows with the softer-out-of-focus greens in the background. My eyes are drawn immediately to the almost star-like center of the red flower-of course, placed a the rule of thirds juncture.
JD, nicely done. I love the vibrant reds and yellows with the softer-out-of-focus greens in the background. My eyes are drawn immediately to the almost star-like center of the red flower-of course, placed a the rule of thirds juncture.
more...
jellomizer
Nov 2, 11:30 AM
Apple retail store statistics imply that around 50% of folks purchasing a Mac are new to Mac. ...so new blood appears to be joining the platform.
I would think that a large portion would be new Mac Users. If it was people upgrading you will see a noticeable drop in market share right after apple announced the switch to intel. (With everyone waiting for the intel chips) but any drop from that anouncement didn't seem to effect much. So I would assume that it is from new people. Because now the PC vs. Mac arguments are getting really picky.
Old Arguments.
Intel Chips vs. Power PC chips in speed: Argument resolved Apple is now all Intel.
One Mouse button: Argument resolved with OS X supporting 2 button mice, Mighty Mouse alling right and left mouse clicks, Macbook Pros two finger click to emulate right mouse click.
Price: Mostly resolved. Now with the ability to judge the systems spec to spec it is easier to show that Macs are competive in price with their PC Counterparts.
New Arguments.
Video: Slow /underclocked video cards. And not the greatest resolution for laptop displays.
Keyboard size: The keyboards are slightly smaller then PC keyboards.
Choices: Most apples are not as configurable as PC. You cant have a barebone el Cheapo system. Or something that is slightly better then a MacMini but not quite a iMac.
But these new arguments are much more minor. So it should increase new sales for people waiting for the arguments to be resolved. Also by the fact that boot camp allows windows to run. It allows them to have a comfort catch if they really hate OS X they can always run windows like they did before.
I would think that a large portion would be new Mac Users. If it was people upgrading you will see a noticeable drop in market share right after apple announced the switch to intel. (With everyone waiting for the intel chips) but any drop from that anouncement didn't seem to effect much. So I would assume that it is from new people. Because now the PC vs. Mac arguments are getting really picky.
Old Arguments.
Intel Chips vs. Power PC chips in speed: Argument resolved Apple is now all Intel.
One Mouse button: Argument resolved with OS X supporting 2 button mice, Mighty Mouse alling right and left mouse clicks, Macbook Pros two finger click to emulate right mouse click.
Price: Mostly resolved. Now with the ability to judge the systems spec to spec it is easier to show that Macs are competive in price with their PC Counterparts.
New Arguments.
Video: Slow /underclocked video cards. And not the greatest resolution for laptop displays.
Keyboard size: The keyboards are slightly smaller then PC keyboards.
Choices: Most apples are not as configurable as PC. You cant have a barebone el Cheapo system. Or something that is slightly better then a MacMini but not quite a iMac.
But these new arguments are much more minor. So it should increase new sales for people waiting for the arguments to be resolved. Also by the fact that boot camp allows windows to run. It allows them to have a comfort catch if they really hate OS X they can always run windows like they did before.
Sydde
Apr 3, 09:01 PM
If they expected to cut taxes, not cut spending, and have a balanced budget then stupidity, not the tax cuts, are to blame.
30? Then you are not old enough to remember Laffer and Friedman and their bill-of-goods. But surely you have read how they told us with straight faces that cutting taxes would increase revenue. Whether they actually believed it, honestly expected big loop holes to be eliminated, or were just messing with us is not entirely clear. In the end, it all added up to oceans of red ink where before we had ponds, and the economy just keeps getting more unstable. The optimal balance has yet to be discovered, but right now it looks like we are not getting any closer to it.
30? Then you are not old enough to remember Laffer and Friedman and their bill-of-goods. But surely you have read how they told us with straight faces that cutting taxes would increase revenue. Whether they actually believed it, honestly expected big loop holes to be eliminated, or were just messing with us is not entirely clear. In the end, it all added up to oceans of red ink where before we had ponds, and the economy just keeps getting more unstable. The optimal balance has yet to be discovered, but right now it looks like we are not getting any closer to it.
more...
JackAxe
Apr 5, 02:56 PM
Somehow I was expecting to see a lot more praise and excitement for the 3DS after it launched....
The 3D effect seems to trigger mixed reactions. Other than that...there really doesn't seem to be anything truly exciting about it? I don't see any "wow, those graphics!!" or "holy cow, this thing is fast/powerful" type comments.
The general vibe I am getting from here and other places is more like "pretty neat", rather than "wow, so awesome". :confused:
I bought my 3DS for Zelda, so as it's not out yet. It's just what it is.
The original DS wasn't exactly a WOW factor at launch and for many -- especially the press -- it was considered a complete joke as they praised the PSP. Its launch line up was worse than the 3DS, but years later its games and sales speak for itself.
Anyways, the 3DS just needs titles. It's a solid portable gaming system with no shortage of GREAT DS games to play on it until 3DS titles start to role in.
The 3D effect seems to trigger mixed reactions. Other than that...there really doesn't seem to be anything truly exciting about it? I don't see any "wow, those graphics!!" or "holy cow, this thing is fast/powerful" type comments.
The general vibe I am getting from here and other places is more like "pretty neat", rather than "wow, so awesome". :confused:
I bought my 3DS for Zelda, so as it's not out yet. It's just what it is.
The original DS wasn't exactly a WOW factor at launch and for many -- especially the press -- it was considered a complete joke as they praised the PSP. Its launch line up was worse than the 3DS, but years later its games and sales speak for itself.
Anyways, the 3DS just needs titles. It's a solid portable gaming system with no shortage of GREAT DS games to play on it until 3DS titles start to role in.
xPismo
Nov 14, 12:43 PM
United is the ONLY airline that does this.
I wish they all did. Its a great way to enjoy the flight.
As for the ipod plugins, its great the only downside I see is it forces Apple into a single connector / body shape for future ipods. It would suck to release a new ipod that isn't useable on your next flight.
I wish they all did. Its a great way to enjoy the flight.
As for the ipod plugins, its great the only downside I see is it forces Apple into a single connector / body shape for future ipods. It would suck to release a new ipod that isn't useable on your next flight.
more...
al-c
Mar 24, 02:58 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
For some maybe, I have my finger on the trigger to order an iPad 2 3G tonight to compliment my MBA 11 and iPhone....bought the MBA about a month ago, it's great, but I miss the iPad...
For some maybe, I have my finger on the trigger to order an iPad 2 3G tonight to compliment my MBA 11 and iPhone....bought the MBA about a month ago, it's great, but I miss the iPad...
weldon
Apr 2, 07:56 PM
It's a great Word alternative for those who don't need Excel and don't want to shell out several hundred bucks (MS Office) just to get something better than TextEdit.
At $80 for iWork and $150 for the student/teacher edition of Office, it's a bit harder to justify. Of course, if you get an academic discount, $50 for iWork is low enough that you might just pick up both. I'm waiting for Pages to become a more capable page layout app. I'm still a little worried that Apple won't stick with it.
At $80 for iWork and $150 for the student/teacher edition of Office, it's a bit harder to justify. Of course, if you get an academic discount, $50 for iWork is low enough that you might just pick up both. I'm waiting for Pages to become a more capable page layout app. I'm still a little worried that Apple won't stick with it.
more...
eXan
Oct 27, 12:32 AM
The first time I read the title, I thought that Apple has made Soundbooth app. After re-reading it, I realized it was Adobe who made it :eek:
Photobooth, Soundbooth, dont they look familiar? ;)
How did they make a x86-only app for OS X? I though the only way app can be compiled for Intel OS X is use of UB format! Guess I was wrong...
Anyway, I dont need this SoundPooth, I'm happy with my Soundtrack Pro :D
Photobooth, Soundbooth, dont they look familiar? ;)
How did they make a x86-only app for OS X? I though the only way app can be compiled for Intel OS X is use of UB format! Guess I was wrong...
Anyway, I dont need this SoundPooth, I'm happy with my Soundtrack Pro :D
dethmaShine
May 2, 12:43 PM
But what does Consumer Reports say about the network connection of this phone?
:)
:)
more...
Sharky II
Sep 25, 10:39 AM
Can't believe aperture doesn't support more RAW types yet.
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
Until it supports more/all of the raw types, it will never be a real 'pro' application imho
ImAlwaysRight
Sep 25, 11:21 AM
It says "MacBook" updates at this event. I hope that wasn't a typo! :eek: :D
It is not a typo, but look at the full statement: There have been rumors of Aperture updates and possibly MacBook updates at this event.
You have neglected two key words, "rumors" and "possibly." Those two words in combination like that shouldn't get your hopes up that much for a MacBook update. :(
It is not a typo, but look at the full statement: There have been rumors of Aperture updates and possibly MacBook updates at this event.
You have neglected two key words, "rumors" and "possibly." Those two words in combination like that shouldn't get your hopes up that much for a MacBook update. :(
Krevnik
Jan 15, 12:26 PM
I would say the app has some potential but needs a lot of work. No need to name all the issues since they are obviously already mentioned in the thread.
I encountered a lot of "WTF?"-style behavior quirks with Garmin myself. It does the job, but the deal-breaker for me is that the volume slider in settings sets both your device volume, and the speech volume. So you either deal with quiet music, or very loud instruction if you are using your phone to also play music.
It handles drop-outs of network fine, but requires you to be on the network to get a route planned, and you can't pre-plan a route. So if you are say, planning a camping trip, you will only get GPS direction one way if the camp site is out of cell service (like mine usually are).
I encountered a lot of "WTF?"-style behavior quirks with Garmin myself. It does the job, but the deal-breaker for me is that the volume slider in settings sets both your device volume, and the speech volume. So you either deal with quiet music, or very loud instruction if you are using your phone to also play music.
It handles drop-outs of network fine, but requires you to be on the network to get a route planned, and you can't pre-plan a route. So if you are say, planning a camping trip, you will only get GPS direction one way if the camp site is out of cell service (like mine usually are).
iMeowbot
Sep 25, 11:40 PM
Those bots are too dang quick!
I'm a bot with more bots at my beck and call� the grey goo is only a matter of time, meh meh meh.
For fun, here (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=78459101) is a list of the parties who expect to file opposition to the Pod trademark application. They are Secure-It (http://www.secure-it.com/), Varsity Group (http://www.varsitygroup.com/), VNU Media Measurement (Nielsen/Soundscan (http://www.vnu.com/about/companyProfile/mediaMeasurement.html)), TastyBytes (http://www.tastybytessoftware.com), Podfitness (https://www.podfitness.com), and Line 6 (http://www.line6.com/).
I'm a bot with more bots at my beck and call� the grey goo is only a matter of time, meh meh meh.
For fun, here (http://ttabvue.uspto.gov/ttabvue/v?qs=78459101) is a list of the parties who expect to file opposition to the Pod trademark application. They are Secure-It (http://www.secure-it.com/), Varsity Group (http://www.varsitygroup.com/), VNU Media Measurement (Nielsen/Soundscan (http://www.vnu.com/about/companyProfile/mediaMeasurement.html)), TastyBytes (http://www.tastybytessoftware.com), Podfitness (https://www.podfitness.com), and Line 6 (http://www.line6.com/).
KnightWRX
May 6, 08:59 PM
Except of course, the Unix backend that powers OS X also powers ATM machines, practically every cellphone, a lot of cars, and many other servers/embedded devices as well.
No, it doesn't. The Unix backend that powers OS X is pretty much Apple built by now (Darwin/XNU don't at all ressemble their ancestors) and I don't think Apple is a SysV licensee, so they don't share any code from most commercial Unix systems.
The only thing they share with those other Unix systems is having passed the certification suite from The Open Group.
However I do agree with you that the other guy doesn't really have a clue. Windows is about as flexible as a concrete slab and as versatile as a blade of grass in the networking arena. The only reason it's so widespread in the server arena is because you need to multiply the number of installations just to get a working LDAP directory that resists logon requests from 5 client boxes. Meanwhile, any commercial Unix worth its salt can serve up many times more requests from a single box, while consolidating other services as well.
ATMs might run Windows, but the backend they connect to is a Unix system (and actually, my bank here still uses some version of OS/2 Warp for their ATMs, something I found out after finding a DoS bug in the card reader that crashed their software and forced a reboot).
No, it doesn't. The Unix backend that powers OS X is pretty much Apple built by now (Darwin/XNU don't at all ressemble their ancestors) and I don't think Apple is a SysV licensee, so they don't share any code from most commercial Unix systems.
The only thing they share with those other Unix systems is having passed the certification suite from The Open Group.
However I do agree with you that the other guy doesn't really have a clue. Windows is about as flexible as a concrete slab and as versatile as a blade of grass in the networking arena. The only reason it's so widespread in the server arena is because you need to multiply the number of installations just to get a working LDAP directory that resists logon requests from 5 client boxes. Meanwhile, any commercial Unix worth its salt can serve up many times more requests from a single box, while consolidating other services as well.
ATMs might run Windows, but the backend they connect to is a Unix system (and actually, my bank here still uses some version of OS/2 Warp for their ATMs, something I found out after finding a DoS bug in the card reader that crashed their software and forced a reboot).
kalisphoenix
Oct 26, 03:46 PM
What utter crap.
Screw Adobe.
Screw Adobe.
-hh
Mar 21, 09:24 PM
Its funny that film and film cameras were so difficult to get right, but there was almost no post-processing. Now we shoot computers with lenses attached, get great technical results, yet post-process our photos to death.
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
Actually, for many people there was quite a bit of post-processing, but it was hidden from them: it was the hand-inspected print from ye olde local camera store, which would dial in what they believed were the appropriate corrections.
I do still suck.
My problem is leaving my camera on Auto. I just don't know which setting to use. The more I read and the more opinions I see, the more confused I get. Plus when I see a good subject I don't want to mess it up with my ill informed selections...
I did just buy the Bryan Peterson Understanding Exposure book, so hopefully that will help set me off in the right direction!
I agree with most of what you say, except.... I don't get the "Shoot only Full Manual" advice that is heard here and in other places.
If I have spent some $$ on a camera with a computer and a light meter, I figure I'm going to make it do at some of the work. The way I see it, I have a management job, and that is to decide what DoF and/or apparent motion I want to capture (composition) - and to ensure good exposure (quality control). The camera gets to do the grunt work of doing the calculations. It's the back-office.
Thanks for saying this.
I think that there's really two different aspects to this that both require appreciation.
The first is that having the personal knowledge of the variables that go into a proper exposure is a good thing...as well as more factors such as the trade-off of DOF versus Shutter, etc...this is most easily learned by inflicting the "pain" of full manual upon the student.
(like that contradiction? "Pain is Easy" :-)
However, once one knows the ropes ... and what is important - - including when it is/isn't important - - why not let the machine do the settings for a 'nominal' exposure? Afterall, that's what it is good at, and you can concentrate on more important stuff - - such as composition.
At the same time, knowing when to be ... unafraid ... of using the various camera settings is still a very good thing. For example, I revisited this just the other night while outside to shoot some 'big moon' photos:
I did a quick setup and did some shots to find that the auto exposure was totally blown out. Did the "quick cheat" to spin the one dial to override to -2 stops ... still too bright. Figured out that this was probably because I had forgotten to set the camera over to spot metering before going out in the dark...and in the dark, couldn't find that control. So instead of stumbling in the dark blind, I just spun it over to Manual and readjusted, recalling reading somewhere that the old "Sunny 16" rule (I had forgotten the "Moony 11" derivative) also applies to bright exposures of the full Moon to get an idea of just how many stops I was still over-exposing things. I didn't remember the correct rule of thumb, but with digital that doesn't matter as much: it got me quite close in just a few shots; the shot I liked best ended up at 1/320sec for a 280mm shot at f/4.9 / ISO 100...a bit more light-gathering than the correct rule, but more importantly, it was a full 7 stops lower than where the camera default settings were, and I got the whole shebang done in <2 minutes.
...which meant that I was able to get quickly back inside, before my wife was able to yell at me for being outside in the cold without any jacket.
-hh
bluebomberman
Mar 2, 02:36 PM
Google literally Velcro's their server farms? Dang, I should try that.
I'm serious. See here (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/technology/14search.html?pagewanted=all). And here (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10209580-92.html).
The slow shift to el cheapo green servers and cloud computing makes Xserve an even tougher sell, most of all to Apple internally.
More so than other tech companies, Apple is famous for making stuff that they want to use themselves. (I remember Steve Jobs once mentioned how Apple employees' hatred for their own cell phones helped drive the creation of the iPhone.) So I'm willing to bet that Apple looked at their server farms and thought, "Dang, we'd be stupid to put Xserves in here. Um, why are we building these things again?"
I'm serious. See here (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/14/technology/14search.html?pagewanted=all). And here (http://news.cnet.com/8301-1001_3-10209580-92.html).
The slow shift to el cheapo green servers and cloud computing makes Xserve an even tougher sell, most of all to Apple internally.
More so than other tech companies, Apple is famous for making stuff that they want to use themselves. (I remember Steve Jobs once mentioned how Apple employees' hatred for their own cell phones helped drive the creation of the iPhone.) So I'm willing to bet that Apple looked at their server farms and thought, "Dang, we'd be stupid to put Xserves in here. Um, why are we building these things again?"
No comments:
Post a Comment