Re: Intel Macs....

On 11 Jan 2006, at 2:16 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A long cord would be nicer tho. My housemate keeps ripping hers out because she can't quite get to the wall. Ah, yes. I had that problem. I solved it with a piece of old technology called an extension cord.

Re: Intel Macs....

Zoltan wrote, "..3x is NOT enough for me to throw everything away and buy a whole new computer." Is it enough for you to be able to run OS X.94.x Pussycat? rb -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives |

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 12, 2006, at 9:17 AM, Zoltan Batiz wrote: People who whinge about *only* 3x faster should be shot... -- Bruce Johnson Go ahead and shoot me then Bruce 'cause 3x is NOT enough for me to throw everything away and buy a whole new computer. Or you could stop whinging about it. Thus

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 11, 2006, at 11:18 AM, Bruce Johnson wrote: On Jan 11, 2006, at 10:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:05 AM -0500 01/11/2006, bobgir2004 wrote: > If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's > one helluva impressive laptop. Before we wet our collective pan

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 11, 2006, at 10:19 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 10:05 AM -0500 01/11/2006, bobgir2004 wrote: > If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's > one helluva impressive laptop. Before we wet our collective pants on this one, best first check out: http://weblog.i

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 11, 2006, at 10:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 3:06 PM -0500 01/10/2006, Brian McEwen wrote: On Jan 10, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-) If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's one helluva i

Re: Intel Macs....

s silly and does a disservice to this list and the potential transfer of knowledge through discussion. Michael J. Cangelosi -Original Message- From: G-Books [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Howard Katz Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:31 AM To: G-Books Subject: Re: Intel Macs Ok,

Re: Intel Macs....

At 4:52 PM -0700 01/10/2006, Bruce Johnson wrote: More random thoughts: I LOVE the mag-safe power connector, given that my intrepid doofo-canine at home nearly dragged my Pismo off my lap the other day by the power cord. Ya. Cool feature. A long cord would be nicer tho. My housemate keeps

Re: Intel Macs....

At 10:05 AM -0500 01/11/2006, bobgir2004 wrote: > If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's > one helluva impressive laptop. Before we wet our collective pants on this one, best first check out: http://weblog.infoworld.com/enterprisemac/archives/2006/01/the_mac_perfor

Re: Intel Macs....

At 3:06 PM -0500 01/10/2006, Brian McEwen wrote: On Jan 10, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-) If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's one helluva impressive laptop. no problem with laggy google Earth on T

Re: Intel Macs....

On 1/11/06, Michael Cangelosi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > to begin to > dissolve that community for simply a means of protest against a bit of > silicon seems silly and does a disservice to this list and the potential > transfer of knowledge through discussion. I'm not disagreeing with you, but

Re: Intel Macs....

> If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's > one helluva impressive laptop. Before we wet our collective pants on this one, best first check out: < Inter alia, in notes: > Apple

Re: Intel Macs....

rd Katz Sent: Wednesday, January 11, 2006 9:31 AM To: G-Books Subject: Re: Intel Macs Ok, here's a question: Would the new MacBook qualify for this list? Current processors all have something in common, sort of. Or will there now be a MacBook list? (Like I said, I'm stil

Re: Intel Macs....

Ok, here's a question: Would the new MacBook qualify for this list? Current processors all have something in common, sort of. Or will there now be a MacBook list? (Like I said, I'm still very happy with my almost-new G4, but still. :) ) Later.Howard -- G-Books is sponsor

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 6:52 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: I LOVE the mag-safe power connector, given that my intrepid doofo- canine at home nearly dragged my Pismo off my lap the other day by the power cord. Wow, with that I might not need a new power adapter every year (with the last few months

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 3:28 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: At 11:44 AM -0700 01/10/2006, Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. http://www.apple.com/

Re: Intel Macs....

At 11:44 AM -0700 01/10/2006, Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/ Dim gray text on a black background. Way to go

Re: Intel Macs....

Bruce Johnson wrote: On Jan 10, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Michael A. Howard wrote: Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "T41"??? It's a highly advanced version of the original T1 Terminator, mutated so it doesn't have arms to rip your head from the body and legs to run you down. However, t

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 3:01 PM, Michael A. Howard wrote: Pardon my ignorance, but what is a "T41"??? It's a highly advanced version of the original T1 Terminator, mutated so it doesn't have arms to rip your head from the body and legs to run you down. However, the system font is still

Re: Intel Macs....

Bruce Johnson wrote: On Jan 10, 2006, at 1:54 PM, Laurent Daudelin wrote: On 10/01/06 15:45, "Michael A. Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Alleg

Re: Intel Macs....

Umm, Google Earth is badly coded, it's not really the machine. That's why they didn't release it. It's still a hell of a PowerBook though! On 11/01/2006, at 6:36 AM, Brian McEwen wrote: On Jan 10, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-)

Re: Intel Macs....

On 1/10/06 2:37 PM, "Bruce Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jan 10, 2006, at 11:50 AM, Van Snyder wrote: > >> http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/ >> >> A buddy of mine just took a lucky guess at the URL. > > In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-) > > If those published

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 12:54 PM, Laurent Daudelin wrote: On 10/01/06 15:45, "Michael A. Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Avai

Re: Intel Macs....

Michael A. Howard wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. -- Bruce Johnson This is the sig who says 'Ni!' SCHWT but... Here in OZ http

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 1:54 PM, Laurent Daudelin wrote: On 10/01/06 15:45, "Michael A. Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Avail

Re: Intel Macs....

On 10/01/06 15:45, "Michael A. Howard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Bruce Johnson wrote: > >> The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. >> >> Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. >> >> Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. >> >> -- >> Bruce Johnson

Re: Intel Macs....

Bruce Johnson wrote: The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. -- Bruce Johnson This is the sig who says 'Ni!' SCHWT but... Here in OZ http://www.apple.com.au/macbook

Re: Intel Macs....

On 1/10/06, Richard Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > my new imac is arriving tomorrow... undecided if i should > keep it or send it back for the intel. > I think I will be getting an imac now. :D -- Larry "there are three things to cry for in life - things that are lost, things that

Re: Intel Macs....

my new imac is arriving tomorrow... undecided if i should keep it or send it back for the intel. Richard On Jan 10, 2006, at 9:18 PM, Howard Katz wrote: Gee, almost makes me mad that I got my AL 15" PB last June. Almost. :) LaterHoward -- G-Books is sponso

Re: Intel Macs....

Gee, almost makes me mad that I got my AL 15" PB last June. Almost. :) LaterHoward -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronicshttp://www.smalldog.com | Refurbished Drives | -- Check our web site for refurbished PowerBooks | & CDRWs o

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 2:37 PM, Bruce Johnson wrote: In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-) If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's one helluva impressive laptop. no problem with laggy google Earth on THOSE laptops! B -- G-Books is sponsored by

Re: Intel Macs....

On Jan 10, 2006, at 11:50 AM, Van Snyder wrote: http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/ A buddy of mine just took a lucky guess at the URL. In Wayne and Garth's immortal words "SCHHHWINGGG!" :-) If those published stats hold up to real world comparisons, that's one helluva impressive laptop. -

Re: Intel Macs....

http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/ A buddy of mine just took a lucky guess at the URL. On 1/10/06, Bruce Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. > > Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. > > Allegedly 4-5x faster. Availabl

Intel Macs....

The New MacBook, just announced at Macworld. Dual core 1.67 and 1.83 Ghz, 15.4" displays, $2k and $2.5K respectively. Allegedly 4-5x faster. Available February. -- Bruce Johnson This is the sig who says 'Ni!' -- G-Books is sponsored by and... Small Dog Electronics

Re: Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

On Dec 16, 2005, at 7:35 PM, Caleb Cupples wrote: Well, to be honest, I'm looking forward to the new Intel PowerBooks, just because I think Apple is making a good move. I love the PowerPC, but the x86 hardware runs cooler than the G4 or G5. Actually it doesn't. Powerbooks use their cases

Re: Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

For Apples sake I'm glad that there is so much exitement about the new Macintels, and, intellectually I think it was a good move. That said, and for reasons I won't delve into on this forum, I'll be looking forward to the opportunity to get my first Mac desktop in a while, probably a dual G5 after

Re: Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

I didn't know about the air-cooled G5. However, I do remember the G3 Lombard and Pismo managing extraordinary battery life on one or two batteries. Then again, I'll be using my Lombard through the end of High School, so there. I'll have to check real-world life on mine, but I'm sure it'll keep

Re: Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

Not all G5 PowerMacs are water cooled - though that may have changed with the dual core machines. Actually my G5 dualie runs cooler than my Pentium machine (judged both by reported processor temps and the heat from the fans and the fans on my dualie almost run more than the lowest speed.) M

Re: Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

I should clarify that my G3 runs cooler than any of my PC notebooks have, but the G4 is just plain hot, and not only in the styling department. Ask anyone who has used a TiBook or an AlBook for any length of time. Plus, the G5 has to have water cooling to run at a decent temperature. I honestly

Intel Macs (Was USB2 for Pismo - Use a PCMCIA Card?)

Well, to be honest, I'm looking forward to the new Intel PowerBooks, just because I think Apple is making a good move. I love the PowerPC, but the x86 hardware runs cooler than the G4 or G5. The only reason I don't have one is because I prefer the Mac experience. Caleb On Friday, Dec 16, 2005