BlizzardBomb
Jul 23, 12:47 PM
Why not? Conroe will have availability by WWDC, IIRC, and Merom won't be far behind- they could announce a MBP with Merom, shipping in two weeks after WWDC.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pros with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBooks with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
Just because something is available doesn't mean it will be updated.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pros with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBooks with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
Just because something is available doesn't mean it will be updated.
CalBoy
Mar 26, 11:08 PM
I think this rumor can be readily discredited.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
Apple has been trying for a few years now to streamline product updates so that they happen like clockwork once per year.
The past few macbook pro updates have been in the spring/late winter, macbooks are seemingly being updated prior to the Back to School deal, iPods are updated in September towards the end of the student sale, iPhones have launched in June every year, iPad and iPad 2 both began selling in the spring, and while iMacs haven't had a clear pattern emerge yet, it appears to be coalescing around 1 year and I think it's safe to say that as time goes on, a yearly cycle will become dominant.
Despite the news of Lion being almost ready (or ready) for Golden Master, I think it's more probable that Lion is put on hold until iOS 5 is ready to launch as happened with Leopard and to a much lesser extent, Snow Leopard. Apple makes far more money and gets far more worldwide press from the iOS family than it does the OS X lineup. At this point, not launching an iPhone and a new OS for it in June would go against 4 years of pattern and practice, and would cause too much negative publicity, especially in the face of a constantly evolving market where a few months of lag time can cost a company vital market share and mindshare.
iliketyla
Mar 29, 01:36 PM
Are you willing to pay more for your Mac gadgets so they can be made here?
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
I'd pay a premium for products manufactured in the US.
Products might be more expensive, but there would be more Americans employed. As much are there is a downside to producing here, there is also an upside.
lilo777
Apr 18, 03:07 PM
That took awhile.
Samsung, that's what you get from trying to kill the golden egg goose. Hopefully apple follows through by moving to TSMC.
I did not know that TSMC produces LCD panels, RAM, SSD drives or flash memory. If Samsung stops supplying those to Apple, Apple is dead.
Samsung, that's what you get from trying to kill the golden egg goose. Hopefully apple follows through by moving to TSMC.
I did not know that TSMC produces LCD panels, RAM, SSD drives or flash memory. If Samsung stops supplying those to Apple, Apple is dead.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
xraydoc
May 6, 12:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_8 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E401 Safari/6533.18.5)
And go through the whole ARM-native app vs. Rosetta mk. II emulation thing again, with transitional machines that never live up to their full potential? Unless ARM can compete with the resources of Intel and their 3D 22nm chip fab technologies, I think it'll be a rough transition giving us several years worth of under-performing Mac hardware.
Can't see using an ARM processor for Final Cut Pro by 2014.
And go through the whole ARM-native app vs. Rosetta mk. II emulation thing again, with transitional machines that never live up to their full potential? Unless ARM can compete with the resources of Intel and their 3D 22nm chip fab technologies, I think it'll be a rough transition giving us several years worth of under-performing Mac hardware.
Can't see using an ARM processor for Final Cut Pro by 2014.
theappleguy
Jul 31, 04:27 AM
couldn't they just release it as an UNLOCKED phone, sell it on their site and allow us to use it with who ever?I'm sure they would. If they did choose to only make it available to Verizon/T-Mobile etc then they would either have to sell unlocked versions in other countries where those networks don't operate or loose a large amount of sales.
ravenvii
May 4, 05:13 PM
OP updated with re-written rules by Don't panic (with minor modifications).
zorinlynx
May 6, 08:03 AM
Why would they do this? Intel processors give among the best performance per watt on the market, and have power saving modes so advanced that you can get 8-9 hours of regular usage out of a Macbook Pro that is also one of the fastest laptops on the market when pushed hard.
I hate these unfounded rumors; they make people hesitant to invest in a platform. If Apple changes processors in the Mac it will likely be to AMD CPUs, which would be just fine as it would barely require software changes at all.
Even a low end Intel x86 CPU... hell, even an Atom trounces the ARM processors. They're different architectures meant for different purposes.
I hate these unfounded rumors; they make people hesitant to invest in a platform. If Apple changes processors in the Mac it will likely be to AMD CPUs, which would be just fine as it would barely require software changes at all.
Even a low end Intel x86 CPU... hell, even an Atom trounces the ARM processors. They're different architectures meant for different purposes.
Manderby
Mar 31, 04:30 AM
The lack of color in the system icons is god awful. Color graphics are much more easily identified than a scaled down grey icon.
Stroop effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect)
You are mixing up badly. That example shows that humans who can read, are trained to rely on what they read almost blindly rather than identifying a color. This means, Apples choice of making the icons grey makes it indeed easier to recognize as there is one less distraction. An even stronger conclusion would be: Leave the icons away completely, because reading is much faster.
Icons were useful in the 1990s, when the number of pixels on the screen was small. Nowadays, just use text, it is way better. Look at websites, icons are used very sparsely. Text is the way to go.
Stroop effect (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stroop_effect)
You are mixing up badly. That example shows that humans who can read, are trained to rely on what they read almost blindly rather than identifying a color. This means, Apples choice of making the icons grey makes it indeed easier to recognize as there is one less distraction. An even stronger conclusion would be: Leave the icons away completely, because reading is much faster.
Icons were useful in the 1990s, when the number of pixels on the screen was small. Nowadays, just use text, it is way better. Look at websites, icons are used very sparsely. Text is the way to go.
seek3r
Apr 22, 01:22 AM
It is trivial, in say my case, to SSH into a "workstation" type Mac Pro, say "Noble Mac Pro, run this really computational intensive code, I'll check back in a bit" and then SSH the output back to another machine when it's done. No muss, no fuss.
Now imagine you have bunches of workstations...
In my end of things we usually call that a cluster :-p
Now imagine you have bunches of workstations...
In my end of things we usually call that a cluster :-p
Jelite
Mar 29, 01:37 PM
I don't trust corporate clouds, especially with a service that Sony is clearly gunning for legally.
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
This is exactly what im talking about, why pay for cloud storage when you already have all you need to make your own?
I suggest Subsonic. It streams music from your Mac or PC to your iPhone, Android phone, or Win7 phone. It also allows you to stream from another computer via a web browser. And it's free! Own your data, create your own cloud.
http://www.subsonic.org/pages/index.jsp
This is exactly what im talking about, why pay for cloud storage when you already have all you need to make your own?
Multimedia
Aug 3, 12:38 AM
http://www.gizmodo.com/gadgets/intel/intel-core-2-duo-laptops-last-5-hours-in-cross-country-flight-191002.php
Flying West to East means leaving SF and arriving in NYC. :rolleyes:
Please tell me I'm wrong again.So I'm Geographically dyslexic. Are you seriously gonna give me a hard time because I got the direction backwards?
3 hours Yonah
5+ hours Merom
Much better frame rates in games. Why are you beating me up over symantics? Why do you not want to be happy this is true? :confused: :eek:
Flying West to East means leaving SF and arriving in NYC. :rolleyes:
Please tell me I'm wrong again.So I'm Geographically dyslexic. Are you seriously gonna give me a hard time because I got the direction backwards?
3 hours Yonah
5+ hours Merom
Much better frame rates in games. Why are you beating me up over symantics? Why do you not want to be happy this is true? :confused: :eek:
Jazwire
Apr 24, 07:47 PM
Please give us retina displays or at least an option for the next Imac refresh.
JesterJJZ
Apr 21, 07:33 PM
I need:
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
What he said...
8 Internal Bays.
More PCIe Slots.
Thunderbolt.
Keep Dual Optical Bays.
More Ram Slots.
Built in Fibre Channel (This is a stretch)
That should be a MacPro. What you guys want is that magic headless iMac. I want more, not less.
Working in Video I need the most horsepower possible. 32 Cores would be nice.
At home I can live with my iMac, but editing on it is a pain. A MiniMacPro might work there, but it will still cost 2k and people will bitch.
For work I can justify spending $8,000 on a high powered PRO machine.
What he said...
mds
Apr 26, 03:45 PM
Just a sample size of one, but I'm a good example of a customer that Apple might not get:
Sprint user for years. Good discounts, etc. and the service has worked fine for me over the years. For me to switch carriers for an iPhone I'd spend $40-$50 a month more. As much as I want an iphone (I own a 3gs I use internationally and really like it), unless Apple and Sprint make a deal I'm probably gonna end up with an Android phone to replace my barely functional Palm Pre. I'm heading out of the country for a couple months, hopefully Sprint has the iPhone when I return, haha...
Sprint user for years. Good discounts, etc. and the service has worked fine for me over the years. For me to switch carriers for an iPhone I'd spend $40-$50 a month more. As much as I want an iphone (I own a 3gs I use internationally and really like it), unless Apple and Sprint make a deal I'm probably gonna end up with an Android phone to replace my barely functional Palm Pre. I'm heading out of the country for a couple months, hopefully Sprint has the iPhone when I return, haha...
dernhelm
Nov 26, 05:51 PM
Do they have more or less credibility if they spell Mac like MAC?
jholzner
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
Both the iMac and the MBP have been out longer than the Mini. The MBP has received slight CPU updates but the iMac has been out going on 8 months with no update at all.
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
Both the iMac and the MBP have been out longer than the Mini. The MBP has received slight CPU updates but the iMac has been out going on 8 months with no update at all.
Pontavignon
Apr 25, 11:12 AM
Go to any Apple website and check the published specs for iPhone 4/3Gs or iPad with 3Gs. Here's a link to help with that:
http://www.apple.com/ca/channel/iphone/iphone-4/tour/specs.html
You will see that Apple does not just offer GPS, it offers "Assisted" GPS. Here we once again see Apple's zeal to optimize. The location cache that's causing all the fuss is what provides the "Assist". Some secret.
When you are moving about, your device notes and identifies cell towers that come in range. It gathers their identification, which initially does not include location. It then further queries a database to get the location info. The location is associated with that tower ID, and the two together are stored in the "notorious" cache.
When a device owner seeks to use GPS the program assists by instantly getting a preliminary location fix by accessing cell ID and location info in the cache. Without the cache, it would have to seek the cell tower location info first, so the existence of the cache speeds the finding of preliminary location info. That info is used to speed up the tracking and locking-on of the device to the GPS satellite.
So, the cache exists to enable a faster GPS lock.
Sinister?
No, but maybe a bit sloppy, I don't know enough to be able to say for sure. Maybe Apple should only log and locate a tower once, which would limit the adding of current data. Maybe the file should always be encrypted.
I suspect we will find out, because legislators in the US and Europe have become involved and this trivial-seeming issue won't go away.
But, with regard to the Steve Jobs email, it does seem clear that Apple is collecting no information. Apple may once again be the victim of it's zeal to optimize features.
http://www.apple.com/ca/channel/iphone/iphone-4/tour/specs.html
You will see that Apple does not just offer GPS, it offers "Assisted" GPS. Here we once again see Apple's zeal to optimize. The location cache that's causing all the fuss is what provides the "Assist". Some secret.
When you are moving about, your device notes and identifies cell towers that come in range. It gathers their identification, which initially does not include location. It then further queries a database to get the location info. The location is associated with that tower ID, and the two together are stored in the "notorious" cache.
When a device owner seeks to use GPS the program assists by instantly getting a preliminary location fix by accessing cell ID and location info in the cache. Without the cache, it would have to seek the cell tower location info first, so the existence of the cache speeds the finding of preliminary location info. That info is used to speed up the tracking and locking-on of the device to the GPS satellite.
So, the cache exists to enable a faster GPS lock.
Sinister?
No, but maybe a bit sloppy, I don't know enough to be able to say for sure. Maybe Apple should only log and locate a tower once, which would limit the adding of current data. Maybe the file should always be encrypted.
I suspect we will find out, because legislators in the US and Europe have become involved and this trivial-seeming issue won't go away.
But, with regard to the Steve Jobs email, it does seem clear that Apple is collecting no information. Apple may once again be the victim of it's zeal to optimize features.
PygmySurfer
Apr 7, 09:34 AM
So, what is Apple doing with a bunch of 7" touch screens, since Jobs said "7 inch tablets are dead on arrival"?
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
I also don't recall RIM ever giving a date before April 19th.
-aggie-
Apr 10, 06:29 PM
What is my assumption?
They are assuming that all the engineers know the right answer, and that math is a language that is the same all over the world.
Cry then if it makes you sad.
It has nothing to do with being an engineer. And yes, math is a language that is the same all over the world.
They are assuming that all the engineers know the right answer, and that math is a language that is the same all over the world.
Cry then if it makes you sad.
It has nothing to do with being an engineer. And yes, math is a language that is the same all over the world.
farmboy
Apr 18, 05:17 PM
So, are we talking about these patents?
What kind of BS is that? Perhaps it might qualify for a school project but a patent?
That is part of the disclosure, not part of the claims. The claims are what one enforces against infringers.
What kind of BS is that? Perhaps it might qualify for a school project but a patent?
That is part of the disclosure, not part of the claims. The claims are what one enforces against infringers.
kalsta
May 6, 10:41 AM
I don't know what a centimeter is when I'm eyeballing something.. and I don't want to. I run in miles, I measure in inches, I weigh in pounds. I'm not doing conversions to kilos or megas all the time in real life, so um..
Well.
I do more conversions metric to imperial than imperial to imperial. The imperial system isn't that hard to use, and I don't think it's mattered before what the rest of the world does anyway.
Neko Girl, it looks like my first reply to your comment got censored for its reference to a song from Team America, so I'll try again without said reference� :)
You run in miles? That's impressive. I run in metres. After that, I'm stuffed. BTW, no one really talks about 'megas', unless it's megabytes. Increasing computer storage is teaching us a lot of fun new prefixes � giga, and now tera have finally entered popular usage too. You have those too right? So you see people, you're already learning the metric system and you didn't even know it! The rest we could probably teach you in about 10 minutes if you have the time?
Well.
I do more conversions metric to imperial than imperial to imperial. The imperial system isn't that hard to use, and I don't think it's mattered before what the rest of the world does anyway.
Neko Girl, it looks like my first reply to your comment got censored for its reference to a song from Team America, so I'll try again without said reference� :)
You run in miles? That's impressive. I run in metres. After that, I'm stuffed. BTW, no one really talks about 'megas', unless it's megabytes. Increasing computer storage is teaching us a lot of fun new prefixes � giga, and now tera have finally entered popular usage too. You have those too right? So you see people, you're already learning the metric system and you didn't even know it! The rest we could probably teach you in about 10 minutes if you have the time?
old-school
Mar 28, 10:27 AM
They would also avoid pissing off 11 million Verizon iPhone customers.
Exactly. That's the main reason in my mind this rumour holds any weight.
Exactly. That's the main reason in my mind this rumour holds any weight.
