17" is lot more cheaper than 15"

If you simply upgrade the 15" macbook pro to standard 17" spec, aka 2.16Ghz CPU and 7200RPM or 120G harddrive, it is already more expensive than the 17" .
If you then buy an external 8X SuperDrive(DVD-RW) and a CardBus34 FW800 card, you will realize that the 17" is indeed a good buy.
Oh forget to mention you get a 1680x1050 screen from the 17", and that means it can bring up as much content as your cinema 20".
er... wat you say? profit margin of 15"mbp? i cant hear you say again pls... =__=

my theory is that the people who can afford these
machines have no problem what they pay. me
personally, i dont use this machine for "pro" apps.
i just dont want the next"iBook"
ust say i did work on pro apps. if i wanted 2.15 but
didnt want to carry a 17 then i would upgrade the
15inch. obviously i can afford it ya know.
the people who purchase this who need to get the most
for their penny will probably buy the 17. but the
people who can afford it will just buy whichever size
they want regardless.
that's how Apple survived all these years. to make money from people who don't care about money. However it seems like now Apple wants to push its machine out of the market niche and share some of the big fat PC territories ( there'r also loads of people don't care about their money using PCs, including mr. gates ), so i doubt if their trick still works.
only hope is the the next gen of macbook (pro) come out with fancier designs and apple manage to make some more Apple Only ProApps like FinalCutStudio and Aperture

Similar Messages

I haven't been on itunes in a very long time. I had a lot more songs than are there now. What can I do about it, or is there a way to access the missing songs?

I haven't been on itunes in a very long time. I had a lot more songs than there are listed there now. What can I do about it, or is there something I can do to get the missing songs back?

forget about it, I actually figured it out.

I use itunes on a Dell XPS502 with W7/64. In some cases have have problems to import CD's. The sound is very disturbed and the import need a lot more time than in normal cases. Is there a problem between itunes W7/64 or a known hardware issue?

I use itunes on a Dell XPS502 with W7/64. In some cases have have problems to import CD's. The sound is very disturbed and the import need a lot more time than in normal cases. Is there a problem between itunes and W7/64 or a known hardware issue?
Example-CD : "Tracy Chapman , Telling stories" is not able to import . I have more such negative cases. But in other cases it works fine and the sound is great.
The firmware at the inbuild CD/DVD DS-6E2SH is the latest version.
What can I do??

hi b noir,
I don't no about virtuel drives like you mententioned. In the mean time I have rebooted the XPS and run again the iTunes diagnostics. I think the back - chance in the registry was not ready to use. Now there are another results. They are the same in case of a running CD or a not running CD. The difference in total is like before. It takes more time that iTunes reads the (bad) CD and at the there is no good sound. In both cases ( running or not running CD) iTunes diagnostics gives as a result :
(the copie from ITunes shows the result of the not running CD from Tracy Chapman)
Microsoft Windows 7 x64 Ultimate Edition Service Pack 1 (Build 7601)
Dell Inc. Dell System XPS L502X
iTunes 10.3.1.55
QuickTime 7.6.9
FairPlay 1.11.17
Apple Application Support 1.5.2
iPod Updater-Bibliothek 10.0d2
CD Driver 2.2.0.1
CD Driver DLL 2.1.1.1
Apple Mobile Device 3.4.0.25
Apple Mobile Device Treiber 1.55.0.0
Bonjour 2.0.5.0 (214.3)
Gracenote SDK 1.8.2.457
Gracenote MusicID 1.8.2.89
Gracenote Submit 1.8.2.123
Gracenote DSP 1.8.2.34
iTunes-Seriennummer 00D7B2B00CD25750
Aktueller Benutzer ist kein Administrator.
Aktuelles Datum und Uhrzeit sind 2011-06-11 19:33:22.
iTunes befindet sich nicht im abgesicherten Modus.
WebKit Accelerated Compositing ist aktiviert.
HDCP wird unterstützt.
Core Media wird unterstützt.
Info zu Video-Anzeige
NVIDIA, NVIDIA GeForce GT 540M
Intel Corporation, Intel(R) HD Graphics Family
**** Info für externe Plug-Ins ****
Keine externen Plug-Ins installiert.
iPodService 10.3.1.55 (x64) arbeitet zurzeit.
iTunesHelper 10.3.1.55 arbeitet zurzeit.
Apple Mobile Device service 3.3.0.0 arbeitet zurzeit.
**** CD/DVD-Laufwerkstests****
LowerFilters: PxHlpa64 (2.0.0.0),
UpperFilters: GEARAspiWDM (2.2.0.1),
D: PLDS DVDRWBD DS-6E2SH, Rev CD11
Audio-CD im Laufwerk
11 Titel auf der CD gefunden, Spieldauer: 42:07 auf Audio-CD
Titel 1, Startzeit: 00:02:00
Titel 2, Startzeit: 03:59:47
Titel 3, Startzeit: 07:19:27
Titel 4, Startzeit: 11:31:30
Titel 5, Startzeit: 15:31:50
Titel 6, Startzeit: 20:07:50
Titel 7, Startzeit: 24:27:15
Titel 8, Startzeit: 27:49:10
Titel 9, Startzeit: 32:41:25
Titel 10, Startzeit: 35:29:65
Titel 11, Startzeit: 38:38:00
Audio-CD erfolgreich gelesen (Suche nach alter Firmware).
Laufwerksgeschwindigkeit erfolgreich erkannt
Die CDR-Geschwindigkeiten des Laufwerks sind: 4 10 16 24
Die CDRW-Geschwindigkeiten des Laufwerks sind: 4
Die DVDR-Geschwindigkeiten des Laufwerks sind: 4
Die DVDRW-Geschwindigkeiten des Laufwerks sind: 4
After starting the import it is going slower and slower. If it is helpful I can send you a soundfile with these distortions.
best regards
tcgerd

"Last Month" in RECENT shows a lot more photos than just last month's photo

For some reason when I select "Last Month" in RECENT (on the left) I get a lot more photos than just last month, it seems like just about all the photos from the current year!
Any one else running into this problem?
By the way, my library was originally created using iPhoto '07 and I upgraded when iLife '08 came out.

Indeed that is the case but it sounds to me like a bug and not a feature.
I agree - but since this is just a user forum that is all I can do
report to Apple -- iphoto menu ==> Provide iPhoto feedback - they can change it
Larry Nebel

I have noticed lately that Firefox crashes a lot more frequently than before. Why? I am careful to install all Firefox updates.

Firefox has been crashing on many sites, not just Facebook. I started using Firefox years ago because of spamming issues with email. Now I get more spam than ever before and many websites crash while on them. I update the Firefox whenever there is an update. If you can't stabilize Firefox, I will be forced to go back to Internet Explorer which I do NOT like.

See:
*http://kb.mozillazine.org/Preferences_not_saved
*https://support.mozilla.com/kb/Preferences+are+not+saved
It is possible that there is a problem with the file(s) that store the extensions registry.
Delete the files extensions.* (e.g. extensions.sqlite, extensions.ini, extensions.cache) and compatibility.ini in the Firefox profile folder to reset the extensions registry.
*https://support.mozilla.com/kb/Profiles
New files will be created when required.
See "Corrupt extension files":
*http://kb.mozillazine.org/Unable_to_install_themes_or_extensions
*https://support.mozilla.com/kb/Unable+to+install+add-ons
If you see disabled, not compatible, extensions in "Tools > Add-ons > Extensions" then click the Tools button at the left side of the Search Bar (or click the "Find Updates" button in older Firefox versions) to do a compatibility check or see if there is a compatibility update available.

BT billings are taking a lot more money than my ac...

I am absolutely tired of this and will be sending a complaint soon.
I've been with BT for 8-9 months now and it's been nothing but a hassle, ever since January when I moved homes, BT have been taking £65 every month because of 'average calls I made back in 2012', even though they've already taken the money to cover those bills, they're still taking £65 because it's the average use, bare in mind we no longer use the landline anymore.
Since February, BT have been taking more than what I need to pay for, so I said okay and let them take out the money because they said that any extra money will be deducted from the next quarterly bill, starting from may, they deducted the extra money from previous bills and my quarterly bill was £108.75, may first they took again £65 leaving about £43 left for the next TWO months.
I then called BT and they said that for now on there will be a set amount of money that will be due every month but for now I have to finish my current quarterly bill in order for them to proceed, I said it doesn't make sense that I have to pay off the £43 now and start paying the set amount starting from next month. I was put on hold for a few minutes and told that I won't have to clear the current bill and was CONFIRMED that the next payment will be next month.
Guess what, they took out the £43 without my permission even though we agreed that the set payment will start from June.
It's just an absolute mess, to keep this short .. my current quarterly bill from 11th April till 12th of July is 'PAID'. Why am I still being charged, going to be charged £45 next month and the month after even though my quarterly bill is cleared?
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Hi
I am sorry to see you are having problems
I suggest you contact the forum mods they should be able to get this problem sorted for you this is a link to them http://bt.custhelp.com/app/contact_email/c/4951
They normally reply by email or phone directly to you within 3 working days they will take personal ownership of your problem until resolved and will keep you informed of progress
They are a UK based BT specialist team who have a good record at getting problems solved
This is a customer to customer self help forum the only BT presence here are the forum moderators
If you want to say thanks for a helpful answer,please click on the Ratings star on the left-hand side If the reply answers your question then please mark as ’Mark as Accepted Solution’

Return value from database function taking a lot more time than the query

Hi guys,
I have a Query that does a call to a database function. The function takes in a few parameters and returns a Date. Now, the query within the function takes barely .05 seconds. However, doing a select get_join_dates from dual is taking almost 6 seconds for each call.
Here is the Query:
select s.student_id, s.student_name, s.organization_code
from   student s
where s.student_id = :p_student_id
and    s.student_enrollment_date = get_join_dates( :p_year,
                                                   :p_month,
                                                   :p_student_id,
                                                   s.organization_code );And here is the database function. The select inside this function barely takes 0.05 seconds per call. This function gets called 3 times in my case as there are 3 records in the org_body table for this student.
create or replace function
get_join_dates( p_yyyy in org_body.fiscal_yyyy%type,
                       p_month in org_body.fiscal_mm%type,
                       p_student_id in student.student_id%type,
                       p_organization_code in org_body.organization_code%type) return date as
    t_enrollment_date date;
    cursor cur_latest_enrollment_date is
      select max(enrollment_date)
      from   org_body
      where fiscal_yyyy = p_yyyy
      and    fiscal_mm = p_month
      and    student_id = p_student_id
      and    organization_code = p_organization_code;
BEGIN
    open cur_latest_enrollment_date ;
    fetch cur_latest_enrollment_date into t_enrollment_date;
    close cur_latest_enrollment_date ;
    return t_enrollment_date;
exception
    when others then
      null;
end;owever, when I run the following statement below, it takes close to 6 seconds to retrieve a record. In turn, my Query is becoming really slow and taking almost 35 seconds. Imagine that with more records.
select get_join_dates( 2010, '01', '2167543', 'PSYCH01' ) from dual;If I run my query with this condition below, it takes 0.5 seconds.
select s.student_id, s.student_name, s.organization_code
from   student s
where s.student_id = :p_student_id
and      s.student_enrollment_date = '01-JAN-10'Any ideas would be greatly appreciated.

Any reason why you are doing this with the stored function?
You could just do this with SQL. Embed the query in the function as a subquery in your initial query from STUDENT.
select s.student_id, s.student_name, s.organization_code
from   student s
where s.student_id = :p_student_id
and    s.student_enrollment_date =
(select max(enrollment_date)
      from   org_body
      where fiscal_yyyy = :p_year
      and    fiscal_mm = :p_month
      and    student_id = s.student_id
      and    organization_code = s.organization_code);Why your function is not performing: I cannot say that with the information you have provided.
Maybe sqltrace a call and see what the reason is.

--Ext3 using a lot more space than XFS?

Hi,
although this question is related to my fileserver I put it in this forum as it's not related to networking in any way, I hope it fits.
So, I have a fileserver mostly acting as NAS. The main volume consits of 250GB+500GB as one LVM group. I have a second group of the same size for backup. I use rsync for backups, and both volumes contain exactly the same data, only difference is: main volume is formatted with XFS, backup volume is using Ext3 with journal=data.
df -h:
Dateisystem Größe Benut Verf Ben% Eingehängt auf
/dev/mapper/data-fileserver
699G 605G 94G 87% /mnt/fileserver
/dev/mapper/data--backup-fileserver
679G 606G 39G 95% /mnt/backup
I double checked both filesystems contain the same data, still there is a difference of 55 gigabytes in free space. How come?

Well mostly. I set it to 1% the numbers looked good and I thought it'd be okay, however after setting the reserved space to 0% I still missed 19GB. On a closer look we can see that the Ext3 filesystem is around 20GB smaller than the XFS one, and I can't really understand that:
[root@dude ~]# tune2fs -m 0 /dev/data-backup/fileserver
tune2fs 1.40.3 (05-Dec-2007)
Setze Verhältnis der reservierten Blöcke auf 0% (0 blocks)
[root@dude ~]# df -h
Dateisystem Größe Benut Verf Ben% Eingehängt auf
/dev/mapper/data-fileserver
699G 607G 93G 87% /mnt/fileserver
/dev/mapper/data--backup-fileserver
679G 606G 74G 90% /mnt/backup
Both LVM groups have the same size:
[root@dude ~]# lvm lvscan
ACTIVE '/dev/data-backup/fileserver' [689,64 GB] inherit
ACTIVE '/dev/data/fileserver' [698,64 GB] inherit
And
[root@dude ~]# tune2fs -l /dev/data-backup/fileserver
tune2fs 1.40.3 (05-Dec-2007)
Block count: 180785152
Since I haven't changed the standard block size of 4K this means we have 723140608 K of data, or 706192 MB or 689,64 GB which is exactly the size of the volumes. So still I wonder what happended to 19GB of space

Content takes up a lot more space than expected.

I just got a new 32 GB iPhone 5s.
When I set it up, I used the backup from my 32 GB iPod Touch so that all my messages, apps, settings, etc would be transferred over.
32 GB iPod Touch has 14.4 GB free.
32 GB Phone 5s with the same exact content only has 4.7 GB free!
I am using the same exact sync settings. The main difference I'm seeing is that my iPhoto collection is reporting three times larger on the iPhone than it was on the iPod Touch. Obviously the iPhone iOS is a different version too but the discrepency between the amount of free space on each device is huge.
Can anybody explain this? Thanks.

Well mostly. I set it to 1% the numbers looked good and I thought it'd be okay, however after setting the reserved space to 0% I still missed 19GB. On a closer look we can see that the Ext3 filesystem is around 20GB smaller than the XFS one, and I can't really understand that:
[root@dude ~]# tune2fs -m 0 /dev/data-backup/fileserver
tune2fs 1.40.3 (05-Dec-2007)
Setze Verhältnis der reservierten Blöcke auf 0% (0 blocks)
[root@dude ~]# df -h
Dateisystem Größe Benut Verf Ben% Eingehängt auf
/dev/mapper/data-fileserver
699G 607G 93G 87% /mnt/fileserver
/dev/mapper/data--backup-fileserver
679G 606G 74G 90% /mnt/backup
Both LVM groups have the same size:
[root@dude ~]# lvm lvscan
ACTIVE '/dev/data-backup/fileserver' [689,64 GB] inherit
ACTIVE '/dev/data/fileserver' [698,64 GB] inherit
And
[root@dude ~]# tune2fs -l /dev/data-backup/fileserver
tune2fs 1.40.3 (05-Dec-2007)
Block count: 180785152
Since I haven't changed the standard block size of 4K this means we have 723140608 K of data, or 706192 MB or 689,64 GB which is exactly the size of the volumes. So still I wonder what happended to 19GB of space

PS CS4 consumes a lot more RAM than CS3

I recently updated from Photoshop CS3 to Photoshop CS4 and now I have the problem that CS4 is consuming very much RAM.
When I open the same image on both versions CS4 consumes like four times as much RAM as CS3 does.
Settings are identical on both versions, so I don't quite know how this can be.

TheARchitect2009 wrote:
As an example: In idle, without any file loaded, CS3 uses around 90MB while CS4 uses 380MB.
I don't run CS4 on Windows (just CS3) so I can't say whether is this normal behavior. That sadly may be simple application bloat. I was also shocked to see Vista using 1 GB of RAM when idle and without running apps.
Make sure your RAM allocation and history state settings are consistent between the versions.

Does Tiger use a lot more memory than Panther

Hopefully this is my last question before I upgrade. I dont know if I want to do it if Tiger is not as efficient.

My sister has an older iMac with basically the same processor you have. You actually have two processors. Her iMac has 768mb of ram. She is running 10.4.5 and everything operates just fine.
One thing I noticed is with Dashboard, even though the Widgets are not actively displayed on the desktop they still will access the processors, and can slow your machine down. You can check this with Activity Monitor. If you are going to do processor intensive tasks, close all widgets, or there is now a widget which will allow you to quit the Dashboard, this will disable all widgets. Also some widgets will access the internet intermittently (news feeds, weather maps and many others) if you have dial-up internet and again if the widgets are not closed, these will impact the speed of your browser and downloads.
For myself, Tiger has been extremely stable and have not had a single crash of the operating system. I upgraded last May so almost one year.
hope this helps

Why essential server 2012 is more expensive than windows server 2012?because essential is incl. licenties and 2012 excl. licenties

hi,
I have a question about the price ,
windows 2012 is more cheaper than windows essential 2012, I don't understand why the windows 2012 is excl. licenties and essential has 25 free client licenties is that the reason.
thanks
johan
h.david

Check the Link below to find relevant information regarding Editions and Pricing of Windows Server 2012 R2:
https://www.google.gr/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&ved=0CFEQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdownload.microsoft.com%2Fdownload%2F4%2FD%2FB%2F4DB352D1-C610-466A-9AAF-EEF4F4CFFF27%2FWS2012_Licensing-Pricing_FAQ.pdf&ei=fJa8UsP_FK6V7AaywYGgDQ&usg=AFQjCNEtmNeiIPtw0boIAju2kH4iqOAxvw&bvm=bv.58187178,d.ZGU
Exempt Windows Server 2012 R2 Datacenter Edition, Pricing is the Same with Windows Server 2012 Products.
It will answer your question.

Lightroom 1.0 is producing lost more noise than RSP

In my workaround in LR 1.0:
- importing the RAW files by converting them to DNG en copy them to another location
- Edit the imported files in LR 1.0 and export the file as TIFF, 300dpi, 16bit, color mode Adobe RBG
The tiff files contain a lot more noise than after editing the RAW files in RSP or Capture One LE. (I compare them in Photoshop Elements 5.0).
Is someone experiencing the same problem?
Rgds,
Ron

Perhaps noise is not the right word. The pictures exported from RSP look a lot cleaner than from LR.
Nevertheless; I like LR a lot. It is a "total work flow programm" and offers a lot more options than RSP. I hope the qualty of the exported images will be better in the next update.

Remember Phil Robertson?? How is firing someone for different belief make you more tolerant than him? Deleted Firefox. Too bad, I liked it.

You are a bunch of hypocrites. I am amazed that you would not realize there a lot more traditionalists than there are homosexuals. In America everyone is entitled to an opinion, you could be pro Faggot and I would have continued to use your product, but since you chose to unload the CEO for having an opposing view, I am now unloading you. It is a shame because I really like your browser. Remember the Alamo... Today it is Remember Phil Robertson!! A lesson should have been learned there, Gays are less than two percent of the population, if you are willing to piss off the rest to put the gays on a pedestal, I can only hope you go down in flames, hope to see you in chapter 13

Unfortunately many are assuming he must have been fired or forced out all due to his personal choice to leave for now versus going back to CTO or another role as the board members encouraged him to do.
Please see these links to help clear your misconceptions up.
*https://blog.mozilla.org/blog/2014/04/05/faq-on-ceo-resignation/
*http://blog.gerv.net/2014/04/your-ire-is-misdirected/

Anyone receivig a lot more spam in the last few days?

I've been getting 5-10 spam messages a day whereas a week ago I would only get a one or two every few days. Has there been an increase in spam from new botnets? My customers are also receving a lot more spam than normal. CASE has been updated to the latest and we continue to send the emails to [email protected] but we continue to get them. If this is just due to more spam worldwide and the ESA can only catch so much then that's fine, but if anyone has any suggestions that can resolve this, it would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
Danny

Hello Danny,
In regards to your spam issue, normally to diagnose why emails are passing the system when you open a case with us; if you could get the actual spam emails where all original headers are available, or to send them to [email protected] as submissions where the automated system will review, but in instances where the emails are still passing.
Once the case is opened, provide us the date and time you sent said submissions and we'll escalate it.
A larger sample size is always best as well if you're able to provide.
It is also important to ensure that you also have the message tracking reflecting these emails ready for us to verify the mail flow to ensure it was not bypassing anything and such.
I hope this helps.
Matthew

17" is lot more cheaper than 15"

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for