backtop


Print 228 comment(s) - last by thelostjs.. on Feb 24 at 7:18 PM


  (Source: Universal Studios/Dreamworks)

Apple CEO Steve Jobs has gone to great lengths to preserve the secrecy of his coveted mobile electronics. His company reportedly maintains an army of secret spies on site and his suppliers have beaten those who would spill Apple's secrets.  (Source: Reuters)

Guards at a Foxconn facility in China that manufacturers iPods and iPhones recently assaulted a foreign correspondent who was trying to glean details about Apple's secretive nature.  (Source: Reuters)
Apple's takes secrecy to an extreme even for the guarded electronics industry

Apple's policy of secrecy has often led to criticism.  Apple once sued and eventually killed one of its biggest fan sites, Think Secret, for refusing to name the source of their leaks.  Last year this secrecy came under sharp criticism when an employee working at parts supplier Foxconn International was beaten and died under questionable circumstances that were ruled a suicide, after losing a fourth generation iPhone prototype.

Since it has been revealed that Apple has an army of secret police that monitor its employees and report potential leakers, which are then reportedly brought in for interrogation.  However, that may be mild to the virtual fortress-like security that Apple maintains in China.

In China, Apple primarily prototypes and assembles its electronics inside walled cities.  Those entering or exiting are searched and have to go through fingerprint scanners.  Inside the city are traditional businesses -- stores, restaurants, and banks.  One such city is the South China city of Longhua, run by Foxconn.

A worker inside the city comments, "Security is tight everywhere inside the factories.  They use metal detectors and search us. If you have any metal objects on you when you leave, they just call the police."

Company officials refused to comment on the remarks.  However, a Chinese industry insider anonymously stated that it was well known that Apple went to "extreme lengths" to preserve secrecy.

Much like Apple reportedly gives U.S. employees fake information to ferret out leaks, sources say that Apple gives some manufacturers prototypes to make sure they're staying in the circle of trust.  If the units leak, Apple will punish the suppliers, often times terminating contracts.

A senior official at Hon Hai Precision Industry, the Taiwanese conglomerate that owns Foxconn, comments, "This ensures that the only people who have all the secrets to any Apple product is Apple itself.  Other tech companies will also look for their own sources of components to compare, but none of them do as many things in-house as Apple does."

The workers on assembly lines don't even know what they're assembling in Apple's case.  Describes one supplier, "The typical production line worker will not see the product until the very last minute when actual production takes place. It's all concentrated in the hands of a few product development teams."

During a recent investigative report a correspondent traveling to Foxconn's Guanlan plant was dragged away by two guards at the plant and beaten when he tried to escape.  The police officer who arrived on scene was unsympathetic, stating, "You're free to do what you want.  But this is Foxconn and they have a special status here. Please understand."

Foxconn has since apologized for the assault.

How far would Apple go to preserve that security?  The recent suicide of the Foxconn worker, which some claim was a murder, certainly raises that question.  However, for Apple secrecy, quite unlike anything else seen in the industry, is a way of life.  Describes a former U.S. Apple employee who worked at Apple's headquarters in Cupertino, Calif., "I didn't even talk about [the Apple work] with my wife.  It's a culture of silence and it's just accepted. You get used to not talking about your work, it becomes normal because everybody is doing the same thing."





Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

The official response is:
By PandaBear on 2/18/2010 1:16:35 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
"I didn't even talk about [the Apple work] with my wife. It's a culture of silence and it's just accepted. You get used to not talking about your work, it becomes normal because everybody is doing the same thing."


The bosses told employees that when people said they knew what Apple is doing, the employees have to say "Hmmm... That's interesting", and when people ask the employees what they are doing, the official answer is "nothing".




RE: The official response is:
By DEredita on 2/18/2010 1:41:14 PM , Rating: 5
Well, apparently they are doing nothing....

$2500 starting price for their top of the line Macbook Pro, which features an antiquated Core 2 Duo processor. There rest of the companies have moved on to the Core i3, i5, and i7 lines, which replaced the C2D. Apple seems to be doing nothing about it either.

Look at this mess:

MacBook Pro 15-inch Notebook: $1999
# 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
# 320GB Serial ATA Drive @ 5400 rpm
# NVIDIA GeForce 9400M + 9600M GT with 512MB
# SuperDrive 8x (DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)

Asus N61JQ-A1 15.6" Notebook: $999
# 1.6GHz Intel Core i7 720QM Quad Core (2.8 GHz Turbo-boost)
# 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB
# 320GB Serial ATA Drive @ 7200 rpm
# ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5730 with 1GB vram & DX11
# DVD Super Multi drive(DVD±R DL/DVD±RW/CD-RW)
# HDMI, eSATA, and USB 3.0

Sorry, but that is just sad that their 15" notebook with a dedicated video card is twice the cost of a machine that significantly outclasses it in terms of hardware.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By stubeck on 2/18/2010 2:41:40 PM , Rating: 5
You don't pair up the 9400 or 9600, you get one or the other. The 5730 is two generations newer than the 9600, which is getting a bit old in the tooth. The 1.66GHz Nehalem also has turboboost, so it will get faster.

I have the MBP you're talking about, and while it works well, it is definitely last generation technology. Going to Nehalem with quad core procs will be a significant improvement.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By marvdmartian on 2/18/2010 3:44:47 PM , Rating: 5
So then what you're effectively saying is that the Macbook, having virtually the same quality hardware and performance, is STILL TWICE THE PRICE?!?!?

Fanboyism at it's finest!


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By JediJeb on 2/18/2010 6:22:41 PM , Rating: 5
Just like it is kinda silly to pay 50% more for an Acura over a Honda which is virtually the same vehicle just with a pretty case.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Kurz on 2/18/2010 9:12:09 PM , Rating: 5
Umm... Its the same concept just different markets.
Snooty people with extra disposable income spend money on things that makes them look better and makes them feel better.

Its a social thing, to show look what I can afford!
I rather be debt free thank you very much. :)


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By EasyC on 2/19/2010 12:33:39 PM , Rating: 5
You are absolutely right. Don't you people see?? You gotta pay for the difference. Here are the benefits of owning a mac.

-Software, ever have an issue with a mac? You get to seriously develop your social networking skills by going to great lengths to find someone who's qualified to help you with your problem. You can probably meet hundreds of people in search of finding someone who knows how to even get a context menu to pop up on an item.

-Hardware, now why on earth do you want the latest and greatest hardware? Clearly because Pirks claims theres a 5% difference then why would I want to pay less for more? I mean computers aren't all about performance. They are clearly about other stuff like led backlit logos, and aluminum frames, and 1 button mouses... oh and yellow tinted screens for the color blind!

-LCD Screens. Macs clearly have the best screen technology. I mean for 1500$ you can get a 13.3" TFT screen with a nice resolution of 1280x800. How much better do you get?? Nevermind the new 14" sony with 1600x900. That doesn't count because it didn't fit into that price range (its 950$).

Seriously though why would I want to get the new sony for 950 that comes with a core i5 520m, dedicated gt330m graphics, 4gb of ddr3, a 500gb hd, and a blu-ray/dvd burner combo drive when the MBP is clearly the better machine. Well I can say that the deciding factor was the fact that the apple logo lights up. The sony does not.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By tastyratz on 2/22/2010 9:18:16 AM , Rating: 1
Pirks, have you ever noticed that your rated down almost exclusively and that the only people with a worst average rating than you are spammers? Do you see a trend here?

Its not a conspiracy, everyone really is against you... mostly because your consistently horribly and deathly wrong.

There are people who bring up very valid points and have very valid excuses for owning a mac. You are just not one of them.


RE: The official response is:
By Lerianis on 2/19/2010 11:55:11 PM , Rating: 2
You got it exactly right.... the people who are still buying Mac's are STUPID IDIOTS who love to overpay for their software and hardware.

Heck, I could BUILD a machine for 1/2 of that MacBook's specs, that would BLOW AWAY that machine in terms of sheer power and speed.


RE: The official response is:
By cscpianoman on 2/18/2010 4:50:55 PM , Rating: 3
OK here are some benches: first column is the test, 2nd the 720qm and the third is the P8800. Last column is the percent difference.

Super Pi:
1M 16 19 +19%
2M 19 44 +22%
32M 800 961 +20%

3DMark06-CPU 3083 2401 -22%
Dhrystone 40115 24450 -39%
Whetstone 33000 18000 -45%
CB R10:
Single 3314 2936 -11%
Multi 9433 5415 -43%
wPrime32 26 30 -15%
wPrime1024 870 982 -13%

Now be careful how you read this pirks, this is percent difference. The smallest number is 13% difference, the biggest is 45%. In other words almost twice as fast and this is a 1.6Ghz processor vs. 2.66Ghz. Keep that in mind.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By CurseTheSky on 2/18/2010 6:41:37 PM , Rating: 3
It's significant when one computer costs twice as much as the other. Obvious if you stop being *a* fanboy.


RE: The official response is:
By Iketh on 2/18/2010 7:00:44 PM , Rating: 5
The poster overestimated your experience with benchmarks. The lower Super Pi result is faster.

It's possible you're just trolling tho...


RE: The official response is:
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/18/2010 10:35:19 PM , Rating: 5
when is he NOT trolling?


RE: The official response is:
By B3an on 2/19/2010 5:30:59 AM , Rating: 5
FFS people it's PIRKS. Any remotely regular reader of this site knows about this fanboy moron. Just rate him down and DONT reply.


RE: The official response is:
By Etern205 on 2/19/2010 9:46:45 AM , Rating: 2
He brings chaos along with entertainment, how can we not ban him? :P

And if I recalled correctly one of his post states he owns a PC (might be wrong).


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By TSS on 2/19/2010 7:25:46 AM , Rating: 5
You guys must be new here. It seems that once again, Pirks brought his army of apple fanboys to smite the troll horde of Reader1 to obtain the goblet of intarwebz-fire.

And somewhere behind the scenes Jason is going "yes dance puppets DANCE!" ^^


RE: The official response is:
By cscpianoman on 2/18/2010 8:02:53 PM , Rating: 3
Ah, see I even warned you about reading percent difference. the other poster was right I way overestimated your ability to read benchmarks.


RE: The official response is:
By redbone75 on 2/19/2010 10:13:07 AM , Rating: 3
Stop trying to reason with the sheeple!


RE: The official response is:
By Redwin on 2/18/2010 5:08:53 PM , Rating: 5
I know i'll ultimately regret replying to such an obvious troll post, but here's your requested numbers (on the GPU, i'll leave someone else to lookup the CPU numbers):

Radeon 5730: scores around 8000 avg in 3dMark06
GeForce 9600gt: scores around 5000 avg in 3dMark06

So around 62% faster, here's the source of the benchmark numbers.
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-H...
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9600M-...


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 1:56:45 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
This 62% difference translates into much less of a difference in real world games

Proof? No? Buh bye then.


RE: The official response is:
By Calin on 2/19/2010 3:11:00 AM , Rating: 2
As this is a synthetic benchmark, this 62% could translate into less or more difference in real world games. Also, some new games really like to have more than 512 MB or video RAM, so there is another source of performance difference.
Not to mention the improvement one could get from the faster processor.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Camikazi on 2/19/2010 10:19:10 AM , Rating: 2
I am sure even artists (specially ones working with 3D) would benefit from a more powerful GPU if their program can use the GPU to render images. That alone would cut down the rendering time, making the more powerful newer GPU in the Asus better. The faster CPU would benefit those same artists since faster CPUs help rendering and processing too, again Asus laptop would win that one. O yea the 7200 RPM HDD vs the 5400 RPM makes a difference in performance as well, again Asus one would be at an advantage there, and it costs less then half the price. Not a leg to stand on for the Mac at all.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By yomamafor1 on 2/19/2010 11:49:27 AM , Rating: 2
So basically your argument of MBP having a lower spec AND cost twice as much is because most people don't game on Macs.

Very strong argument there.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Camikazi on 2/19/2010 12:24:29 PM , Rating: 2
That is true, which is why I would pick the Asus, the GHz is lower but the the CPU IS better then the Macs, so is the GPU and the HDD, overall it has much better price to performance ratio, BTW I buy my car based on fuel efficiency, safety, performance and price, which *gasp* would be like picking the Asus over the overpriced under-performing Mac.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Black69ta on 2/21/2010 6:27:15 AM , Rating: 1
Behold! Someone Cut and paste this to Steve Jobs!

Do I hear an air of honesty from a Apple Fanboi?
Admitting that a MBP is not the end all be all of Portable Personal Computers? Can this be so?
quote:
Nah, games are not an argument for a Mac because Mac is not a gaming machine
Judges?? Ding, Ding, Yes, this is an admission of humanity, "The MBP is not the Holy grail of the Consumer User World." Apple may the the Deity of PC design aesthetics but they admitted performance defeat when they surrendered to Intel and took Intel's most expensive form factor, 'Server' Clock for clock and dollar for dollar how can Apple be competitive in raw performance and value using FB-DIMMs, Server Boards, and Xeons. They demanded Stability over Value, if they used the same parts as a garden variety "Dell" and it had even minor instability, then how could Apple boast better stability in Microsoft's face?


RE: The official response is:
By Calin on 2/19/2010 3:12:38 AM , Rating: 1
As this is a synthetic benchmark, this 62% could translate into less or more difference in real world games. Also, some new games really like to have more than 512 MB or video RAM, so there is another source of performance difference.
Not to mention the improvement one could get from the faster processor.


RE: The official response is:
By yomamafor1 on 2/19/2010 11:40:39 AM , Rating: 1
Here are the benches:
http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-H...
http://www.notebookcheck.net/NVIDIA-GeForce-9600M-...

Radeon 5730 scores at least 3000 points above 9600M GT in 3DMark 06.

And Core i7 720QM can be turbo-boosted (came as standard on ASUS laptops) to 2.8Ghz, as opposed to the 2.6Ghz C2D on the MBP. No matter how you look at it, MBP's spec is just not impressive considering its massive price tag.


RE: The official response is:
By stubeck on 2/20/2010 10:03:06 AM , Rating: 1
I didn't use marketing slogans and didn't bash Apple. I simply said that the technology in the MBP which I own is getting a bit old and a refresh would make sense.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/21/2010 8:52:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
refresh would make sense
Definitely agree, a bit of refresh never hurts, and Apple will refresh MBP line for sure. I see no problem here. You?


RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/18/2010 3:14:02 PM , Rating: 3
You need to go read up on what i7 processors are about and how easily they outclass the c2d. Not only is the i7 a QUAD core compared to a DUAL core C2D, but also i7 1.66ghz "overclocks" itself by disabling non-working cores. This allows it to run up to at 2.8Ghz when needed.

As for the 9400+9600GT - 5730 should at least match those or be faster. Also 5730 supports dx11 versus dx10. And besides - why the hell would I want 2 GPU chips for a performance of 1 GPU chip? BTW 9600GT on the mobile is 9500GT desktop.

So yeah - easily outclasses Apple system at half the cost.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/18/2010 4:39:24 PM , Rating: 3
Given that 9600gt, ahem 9500gt, is based on at least some 3+ years old architecture, and 5730 is based on the latest and greatest architecture and has a current mid-range specs - it is more likely that 5730 thrashes 9500gt.

As for i7 1.66ghz comment - clock for clock the i7 is about 15% faster at most tasks than C2D. The fact that you numskull can't seem to realize the Turbo feature which up-clocks the CPU to 2.8ghz (obviously < 4 cores) also shows how much you really understand i7. Sure it won't be the same difference in performance noticed between a typical HDD and a SSD but the performance boost is there.

Regardless the other factor is that I get a latest greatest generation CPU too - allowing future upgrades to if one wants.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 5:27:02 PM , Rating: 5
At least you are upholding the stereotype of Mac fanboys not knowing anything about technology.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/18/2010 5:34:33 PM , Rating: 2
you do realize that 57xx is more like a mainstream chip whereas the 8800gtx was high-end chip? Anyhow even then the 5770 would have no problem beating 8800gtx down to a pulp. Not only the 5770 consumes lot less power, it has more features and offers better performance too. So here from a performance/watt standpoint, 5770 would easily smack 8800gtx in the same way a SSD does to a HDD.

dumba5s.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 5:59:27 PM , Rating: 4
At a CPU limited resolution of 1280x1024, fail again. You just have no clue what you're talking about.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 6:20:57 PM , Rating: 5
Yea, because that is only a 53% increase...


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By omnicronx on 2/18/2010 6:29:15 PM , Rating: 5
So let me get this straight.. you don't think 15-23fps is a big variance?

So by your logic Apple could say, lower their pricing by 40% and there will be no skin off their back. There is hardly any difference right?

Apparently someone lost the left side of their brain as a child, as you seem to be lacking math skills.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 6:38:17 PM , Rating: 3
53 53 53 53 53 53 53% better better better better. Nobody understands you, because you're special.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 2:04:31 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
I'll deal with dozens of posts here from people who don't understand me but yet reply to me :P

How can we understand you when I doubt you even understand yourself.

You've been proved wrong on many occasions in this article.

Man up and STFU.


RE: The official response is:
By f7 on 2/18/2010 6:52:42 PM , Rating: 3
lol. He gaves you benches and you make an excuse... again haha


RE: The official response is:
By seamonkey79 on 2/18/2010 7:19:46 PM , Rating: 2
I'm not sure what planet you come from, but man, you are about the dumbest Apple person I've ever read. You complain that they don't give benchmarks, so they do, and then you complain that it's still not playable...

So

What?

The fact that it's 53% faster IS a valid point being made, the fact that it's still lower than 30fps is a non-issue at this point. When comparing performance, you're doing just that, comparing how well something does something. Whether that's good enough for you or not doesn't matter.

So... here we have further proof that you, Pirks, are a fanboi that is uninterested in facts, so long as you get to keep pretending you're superior.

Props to you for continuing to remember to breathe.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By xDrift0rx on 2/19/2010 9:47:40 AM , Rating: 2
its funny because you say the 8800GTX is SO GREAT, which is the G80 architecture,

the 9800GTX which is the G92, and ALSO a 8800GTS(512MB not 320/640MB) does better!

Pirks makes me laugh everytime i read one of these articles. I think hes just butthurt he bought a mac at its over-priced tag and needs to find a way to justify it so he trolls us here.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 10:38:15 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
It was easy actually, just one Crysis bench and voila :P

You were proved wrong. 53% increase in performance for a mid range card is excellent.

Then you go off on a tangent of 24FPS is still unplayable, there's no difference between 60 and 600FPS yada yada cry cry.

Continue digging yourself a deeper hole. One day you might get stuck in it.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 10:57:04 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Number wise, not experience wise

Sure it is.

If for example you had a game that played at ~40FPS on an 8800, and ~60FPS on a HD 57XX. You would get more playable framerates, giving you a better gaming experience.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 6:02:32 PM , Rating: 2
RE: The official response is:
By catavalon21 on 2/18/2010 10:18:38 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
... nVidia 8800GTX pwns all you puny 57xx...


So the 8800GTX being (even if just a little bit) slower in every example you cited is what you mean by it "pwns" the 5770?


RE: The official response is:
By mm2587 on 2/19/2010 8:41:49 AM , Rating: 2
of course it does. and don't forget the fact that is was a $650 card at launch vs. a $150-$170 card that is still overpriced due to a lack of competition from nvidia.

Perfectly fair comparison.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 10:42:51 AM , Rating: 1
quote:
Any more questions?

Sure. Is 53% incrase in performance not classed as beating into a pulp?


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:04:15 AM , Rating: 2
Performance wise? Yes.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:24:05 AM , Rating: 2
So a game running at 40FPS vs 60FPS is only 5% increase in gaming experience?


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/18/2010 5:20:15 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
yeah yeah 1.6 GHz quad _significantly_ outclasses 2.6 GHz dual, riiight... hehehe :) funny

I LOL'd at this.

How much performance is yielded per clock is more important than just raw clock speed. On top of that, Core i7's have added L3 cache, HT and an IMC. Adding the ability to overclock itself to higher clockspeeds than 2.6GHz for good measure, and it's clear that this chip outclasses it's Core2 counterpart.

Enough of my ranting, eat some benchmarks -

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/laptops/2009/11/1...


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Kurz on 2/18/2010 6:39:59 PM , Rating: 2
Depending on the Application it will own a Dual Core.
Those programs they use don't really take full advantage of all the Cores. Don't forget the Quad has Hyper Threading.
8 threads able to run at the same time.

Please keep viewing your porn on your Mac Book.
You have no idea whats going on in the hardware world.


RE: The official response is:
By ArcliteHawaii on 2/19/2010 2:41:09 AM , Rating: 2
Don't forget it costs half as much...


RE: The official response is:
By Kurz on 2/19/2010 3:28:54 AM , Rating: 3
I rather convince with performance since Fan-boys love to spend money on second rate technology.


RE: The official response is:
By f7 on 2/18/2010 6:55:16 PM , Rating: 3
No. Its not significant. But its more performance and it is cheaper.

You are so retarded. Everyone here is not wrong. You are.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 10:45:03 AM , Rating: 2
Any increase in performance is significant considering the price difference between the i7 notebook and the MBP.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:29:27 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Considering difference in hardware/design between MacBook Pro and this Asus it may be significant depending on what you value the most

I understand what you're saying, but what 99.9% of us can't work out is what is it that MBP owners value the most? Because from the looks of it, they value their ability to waste money the most.

What is it that justifies the extra $1000, with even less performance?


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By cyyc009 on 2/19/2010 5:27:24 PM , Rating: 2
You an idiot, Pirks? 1-2% ?? Really? Really?
Go do some productive research before commenting here. I actually own a Macbook Pro too, and you are making me ashamed of that fact.

In addition to my MBP, I also have a Core i7 860 Windows 7 system (a fine and polished OS, just like OS X 10.6 is also a fine and polished OS), and there are obvious reasons why I went with Core i7 instead of a a power last-gen like a QX9775 (much rather a Core 2 Duo system).


RE: The official response is:
By DEredita on 2/18/2010 11:43:55 PM , Rating: 2
The Core i7 Mobile (720QM, 820QM, and 920QX) processors outclass many desktop processors as well. I recall reading somewhere that they even out class a bunch of desktop quad core processors from AMD and even Intel (Core 2 Quad series).

It's definitely drool-worthy to have all that power in a notebook. I major knock is the battery life, which makes a huge sacrifice in the face of performance. I was reading a review this evening on a 720QM Core i7 laptop that got 89 minutes of battery life with a 6 cell battery.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By xDrift0rx on 2/19/2010 9:57:54 AM , Rating: 3
well maybe if you understood technology, as architecture changes, IPC (INSTRUCTIONS PER CLOCK) changes, which means it takes a higher clocked old architecture to try compare to the newer one.

this is why the world record 8GHZ pentium D cannot pass, or even come close to the super pi, or any other benchmark of newer architectures running at stock speeds!

/end rant.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By xDrift0rx on 2/19/2010 10:40:41 AM , Rating: 2
look at the P4's vs Athlons...they ran at ~2GHz compared to Prescotts running 3+

same story different day.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:14:22 AM , Rating: 1
But a 2.66GHz i7 outclasses a 3.4GHz Phenom II.

Your self-righteousness is unbelieveable.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 12:14:13 PM , Rating: 3
Whatever helps you to sleep at night, Pirks.


RE: The official response is:
By DEredita on 2/19/2010 4:05:41 PM , Rating: 2

I quickly found this, which details out the Core i7 architecture :

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2008/11/03/i...

Here is a detailed review of the Intel Core i7 720QM processor, which is proven to be quicker than a 2.8 GHz Core 2 Duo processor, and also a 3.4 GHz Quad Core AMD processor.

http://hothardware.com/Articles/Intel-Core-i7-Mobi...


RE: The official response is:
By DEredita on 2/19/2010 3:57:16 PM , Rating: 3
With that logic Pirks, a Pentium 4 would outclass almost every Core 2 Duo and Quad processors, just because they had very high clock speeds.

Clock Speeds are no longer as important. It's the architecture of the processor, the cache size, the pipeline in the processor, and many many other contributing factors.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 10:51:16 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
There is ONE GIGAHERTZ of a clock difference between them

+ QPI/IMC

+ L3 Cache

+ HT

+ Turbo Boost

Get it?


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:32:36 AM , Rating: 3
+ 2 extra cores.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 12:32:51 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
All of this does compensate for 1 missing GHz of clock but is not enough to outclass the older chip.

How on earth does Turbo Boost only compensate when it overclocks to 2.8GHz? It does far more than just compensate. It flat out destroys the C2D with this feature enabled.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 1:03:17 PM , Rating: 2
2.8 GHz single core is easily pwned by 2.6 GHz of two cores in C2D :P


RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 1:32:36 PM , Rating: 2
It really depends on the application in use.

What you have to remember is, yes, only one core will overclock to 2.8GHz, but you still have the another 3 cores at 1.6GHz available.

It doesn't all-of-a-sudden turn into a single core processor just because Turbo Mode is enabled.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 1:45:41 PM , Rating: 1
you seriously think other cores work as usual while one core is boosting to the top? I guess we can end our discussion right here then.


RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 4:30:51 PM , Rating: 2
Umm....no, I don't think. I know! Why on earth not? The other 3 cores aren't suddenly disabled.

Why is it I am able to overclock individual cores on my Phenom II X4 945 using the AMD Overdrive Utitity, whilst all other cores function as usual?

You're an idiot.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 4:45:33 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
Why on earth not?
because of TDP limits


RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 5:45:16 PM , Rating: 2
Ok, so I just read this.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turbo_Boost

Seems you were right. Dependant on the overclock, other cores are disabled.

My apologies for jumping the gun.

However, a 2-core overclock would result in 2.4GHz, which I am pretty sure would outperform it's Core 2 Duo counterpart.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 8:24:11 PM , Rating: 2
yeah, a couple percent, big deal :P


RE: The official response is:
By Camikazi on 2/19/2010 12:33:46 PM , Rating: 2
Actually it means that a lower clock frequency (and in turn less heat and power usage) is all that is needed to exceed the previous generation. At 1.66GHz it beats the 2.66GHz, at the Turbo Boosted 2.8GHz it DESTROYS the 2.66GHz. Like you said GHz is not everything, the devil is in the details and you seem to miss a hell of a lot of details.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 1:09:29 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
2.8GHz it DESTROYS the 2.66GHz
2.8 GHz single core destroys 2.6 GHz dual? are you nuts?


RE: The official response is:
By Camikazi on 2/19/2010 6:34:23 PM , Rating: 2
Ok maybe single core 2.8GHz it won't (but I have feeling it will be close even then), but Dual Core Turbo Boost of 2.4GHz, it will beat it, the higher IPC will easily allow it to outperform the older 2.6GHz architecture.


RE: The official response is:
By f7 on 2/18/2010 5:04:22 PM , Rating: 2
It is much faster. Apple's new line will feature an i7 and some benches comparing the current C2D to that are staggering.

No offense you are the clear fan boy here.

http://www.primatelabs.ca/blog/mac-benchmarks/

The T9500 MBP benches at 3318. While the new yet to be released that is an i7 (and more comparable to the i mentioned) scores 5260 (http://browse.geekbench.ca/geekbench2/view/210968)...

Also as pointed out, even if they are 100% same performance one costs $2000 for the same hardware. Not too mention that Mac isn't really a grand gaming platform.

You think because people say something without numbers that it isnt true. You are wrong. The new mobile ATI cards dominate the very old nvidia 9 series mobile chips in every single game amac can run.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/18/2010 5:39:56 PM , Rating: 3
you truly are a dumba5s. That's all.

It is a waste of time to describe to you architectural and performance and performance/watt benefits of the i7.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By f7 on 2/18/2010 6:51:03 PM , Rating: 2
"it's a waste of time to describe to you what is the real difference between power efficiency in Macs vs PCs and why they are usuallly that different."


RE: The official response is:
By Ard on 2/18/2010 10:23:23 PM , Rating: 2
Everyone else has effectively done my job for me. I'll only add this: do the world a favor and kill yourself. You add nothing to any conversation you take part in. You're nothing more than a pathetic troll and Mac zealot.


RE: The official response is:
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2010 5:50:31 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
# 2.66GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
# 4GB 1066MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 2x2GB


Odd. Why are they pairing an old Core2 with DDR3 ?? As I understand it, you get no real benefit with a Core2 by using DDR3 over DDR2. Am I right ?

Just another excuse to charge more I guess. You would see FAR MORE gain by going with DDR2 and just using an SSD drive instead of a slow ass 5400 RPM HDD.


RE: The official response is:
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2010 6:00:27 PM , Rating: 2
Well yeah DUH I just remembered. DDR3 is for triple channel. Core2's are dual channel. There is no reason to pair a Core2 with DDR3. NO reason at all.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By Reclaimer77 on 2/18/2010 6:32:20 PM , Rating: 5
Right the goal here was less power consumption. Which is why the Apple uses an old power hog CPU, and a HDD instead of an SSD.

Pirks I'm starting to think you aren't just a troll. But that you actually believe the things you say. And that honestly scares me.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By f7 on 2/18/2010 6:59:01 PM , Rating: 3
My final post with this idiot. All you need to know can be summed up here:

"Pirks has posted a total of 3626 comments at DailyTech, the average comment rating was 0.88. Below, is a listing of Pirks's latest comments."

After 3500+ comments most people think what you say is stupid. Why do we respond to you. You never even make an admission you aren't right.


RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 2:23:31 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
Why do we respond to you.

Because we need someone to laugh at whilst Reader1 is not around.


RE: The official response is:
By Kurz on 2/19/2010 9:03:25 AM , Rating: 3
Hmm... Could it be Reader1's alternate Log in.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 9:35:00 AM , Rating: 2
No, because I like to laugh at tech illiterates like Reclaimer here, who don't know squat about memory tech, then try to bash Apple and fall flat on their face when they discover basic facts about DDR3 power consumption :P


RE: The official response is:
By themaster08 on 2/19/2010 11:09:37 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
No, because I like to laugh at tech illiterates like Reclaimer here, who don't know squat about memory tech, then try to bash Apple and fall flat on their face when they discover basic facts about DDR3 power consumption :P

No, because we like to laugh at Apple zealots like you here, who don't know squat about graphics and CPU tech, then try to bash PC's and fall flat on your face when you discover benchmarks that prove you wrong.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 11:50:30 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
benchmarks that prove you wrong
There were no benchmarks proving that 5730 outclasses 9600 or that 1.6GHz i7 outclasses 2.6GHz C2D. It feels like a bit faster machine when you actually work on it, but it's very far from outclassing, eh?


RE: The official response is:
By Lerianis on 2/19/2010 11:58:44 PM , Rating: 3
Sorry, but the benchmarks are out there is you look. As the community said...... MAC ZEALOT and MAC-TARD! That's what you are!


RE: The official response is:
By thelostjs on 2/24/2010 7:18:16 PM , Rating: 2
neither one of these computers would make a great portable to me..

you can count on apple to deliver a better *mobile* lcd
probably only because it too is three years old. anyone else notice lcd quality slipping across the board?

how many batteries do you have to carry with the asus to = the macs 1 battery? a 15 inch with the quad. i want one. i dont want any of the negatives they imply today


RE: The official response is:
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/18/2010 10:47:40 PM , Rating: 2
You are just now figuring out he believes what he says? Of course he does and it's obvious.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 9:38:57 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, I believe in facts about DDR3, facts that dumb Apple bashers like Reclaimer don't know. Funny, eh? ;)) You liked how nicely I pwned Reclaimer yesterday, didn't ya? ;)


RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 6:05:38 PM , Rating: 2
Well, no it isn't. DDR3 is for any motherboard that supports it. Triple channel is just what the x58 motherboards use, DDR3 works fine on P45 or P55 boards just fine.

You are right about it offering little to no advantage over DDR2 in a Core2 system though.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 6:45:09 PM , Rating: 1
And the 5730 is more power efficient than the mac solution(9400-9600gt), as is the i7 mobile chip. All while being more powerful.

So yes, please spoon feed me, then give me a fucking spongebath you twit.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 9:50:23 AM , Rating: 2
yea yea trying to squeeze out here punchy? we were discussing stupid Reclaimer's remarks about DDR3 not worth dealing with if there's C2D inside as a CPU. did you get it why Reclaimer fell flat on his face this time, or do you want that killa wikipedia link again, eh? ;)


RE: The official response is:
By ClownPuncher on 2/19/2010 1:45:53 PM , Rating: 2
Ah, I see. Percentages like 62%, 53% and 22% in performance metrics don't mean a goddamn thing, but a *theoretical max* of 16% power savings on a low power piece of hardware is somehow worth the doubling of the price.

I'm getting so dizzy with you running circles around me like this. ;)


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 2:20:54 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
16% power savings on a low power piece of hardware is somehow worth the doubling of the price
16% lower power consumption is JUST ONE of many reasons the price is double, but you'll never get it, dizzy boy :P


RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/18/2010 8:09:18 PM , Rating: 3
You got that wrong:

DDR3 was first supported by Desktop i7 that well had Triple channel support. The fact that it is a DDR3 has nothing to do with Triple channel support or not.

Even though some processors use the i7 moniker they do not support triple channel. Only the Bloomfield, LGA1366, version of i7 support triple channel, not the LGA 1156 (mainstream).

There is no real performance benefit to be had between DDR3 and DDR2 at the same speed - in fact DDR3 might be slower due to latencies. However DDR3 provides you a longer upgrade option in the future if you wanted whereas DDR2 production should probably stop soon.


RE: The official response is:
By iamezza on 2/19/2010 8:20:50 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
DDR3 was first supported by Desktop i7 that well had Triple channel support.


Actually the intel 3 series chipsets (eg P35, X38) were the first to support DDR3 memory.
Motherboard manufactures had the option of supporting either DDR2 or DDR3.
The 3 series was released in June 2007.

i7 however was the first platform to support triple channel memory. It was released Nov 2008.


RE: The official response is:
By XZerg on 2/19/2010 10:29:14 AM , Rating: 2
ah true that. i stand corrected.


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: The official response is:
By petrosy on 2/18/2010 6:32:34 PM , Rating: 2
The bottom line is if one want a pc so be it and if someone else wants a crApple more power to them.

I personally prefer to spend my money on something that is functional and gives me bang for my buck.

There is no app on the Mac that makes me want to rush out an buy one and the need to sit in a coffee shop pretending to be an individual like all the other douchebags in the same coffee shop does not float my boat.

I prefer to have a machine that allows me to do with it what I want and not what Steve tells me I want to do with it.

OSX usability is great... if you do not know how to use a computer. It treats everyone like an idiot which is why its so popular. Windows is fine and most of its stability issues is from usrs loading too much crap they pulled from the internet on it.... maybe if MS treat its users like idiots people would think it was more stable than apple. When I say stable , i mean perception and not fact.


RE: The official response is:
By mfergus on 2/18/2010 7:14:41 PM , Rating: 3
Not agreeing or disagreeing with anything you say but why do you still make so many smiley faces in all your posts? It doesnt make it look like you're "winning" the argument, it just makes you look like a 14 year old girl.


RE: The official response is:
By mfergus on 2/18/2010 7:15:07 PM , Rating: 2
to pirks ofcourse


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 9:44:40 AM , Rating: 2
I laugh too much at dumb Apple bashers here, sorry. Just can't stop laughing reading lunacy about 8800GTX from XZerg or about DDR3 from Reclaimer, soo funny hahahaha :))) Sorry again ;)


RE: The official response is:
By mfergus on 2/19/2010 7:31:00 PM , Rating: 2
you could say haha or lol, makin faces just looks retarded


RE: The official response is:
By jbizzler on 2/19/2010 8:12:22 AM , Rating: 2
People always make the specs comparison! But a computers is so much more than its specs.

The Macbooks are far lighter, thinner, and sturdier than other notebooks in their performance-range. They also have 3x-4x more battery life.

PCs that are either that sturdy, light, or have that much battery life, don't have that kind of performance and are over-priced (but still not as pricey).

And the CPUs in the current Macbooks are far from "antiqued". Just because Apple didn't release a new notebook the day Intel released Arrendale doesn't mean they're falling behind.

I don't own any Apple products and don't want to, but I know it's not as simple as everyone makes it sound. The two platforms have their own pros and cons. I wouldn't buy the $2000 Macbook before the $1000 Asus notebook either, but it's not better in every way and there are reasons to buy the Macbook.

In this day and age when any new computer can play video and browse the web, unless you're a gamer or a graphics professional, the raw specs don't really matter.

You don't have to be mindless sheeple to buy Apple's products. The two most knowledgeable computer people I know: a mind-blowing network guru and an electrical engineer graduate student who spends his summers working at VMWare, prefer Macs for reasons other than "they're shiny."


RE: The official response is:
By Pirks on 2/19/2010 10:20:19 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
a mind-blowing network guru and an electrical engineer graduate student who spends his summers working at VMWare, prefer Macs for reasons other than "they're shiny."
Man, you're wasting your time, lemme deal with PC fanatics here. Stay away and refrain from posting reasonable thoughts about Macs here or you'll be immediately downrated by PC fanatics. Look at my rating hehe ;)


RE: The official response is:
By Voo on 2/19/2010 12:13:14 PM , Rating: 2
Well I never owned a Mac and probably never will, but you're right that many laptops aren't of the same build quaility as Macbooks and it's really hard to get good built laptops with quality LCDs..

Also every review I've read so far shows that Macs have a much better battery life.. under OS X - not suprising given that they only have to support a small variety of hardware.

But I don't agree that the core2 plattform isn't "antiqued" compared to the new nehalems. It just misses a lot of nice features (just think about powergating) and if the only thing you're doing is play video and browse the web than a descrete graphics card and the CPU is so or so overkill - I personally like to do more with my laptop than just that.

@Pirks: The difference between you (i.e. mindless troll with no clue) and other people is, that you can argue with them based on facts..


RE: The official response is:
By mircea on 2/20/2010 3:51:26 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
The Macbooks are far lighter, thinner, and sturdier than other notebooks in their performance-range.


Yeah that's true. But that's because you have to search the $400-600 laptops to match that performance.

In all seriosness, while a Mac notebook can be considered in most cases a better built machine, and does have some advantages it doesen't justify the price, or the mindless posts made by Apple appologetics. Most of them have no clue about technology, and the ones that do, as PIRKS clearly does, just ignore facts either by dellusion or just the fun of seeing the ones that answer go out of their mind trying to prove what is already known and proven many times.

As some Apple fan posted, macs are luxury items (he said goods but I disagree). For me it's just like buying a sandwich at a restaurant, the same unhealthy piece of crap that I can make at home, but prefer to pay $15 for it.


RE: The official response is:
By dzz on 2/21/2010 6:37:47 PM , Rating: 2
I agree. I've owned both Macbooks and PC laptops before, and I'll have to say that for my needs, I prefer Macbooks over PC laptops anyday.

It's not because of performance. I think someone has already pointed out that you can get a PC laptop with the same or better specs for a lot cheaper. I'll have to agree that the higher end macbooks are wayyy overpriced, however, the Macbooks in the under $1500 range are a little more reasonably priced.

The thing I like about Macbooks is that OSX is much more polished than Windows. I think a Macbook with OSX is a perfect balance between performance and battery life, which is what I needed. I've researched PCs with similar battery life before buying my Macbook, and they all turn out to be way under powered. I also tried to find a PC with a decent processor and a decent graphics card, and their battery life all turned out to be in the under 4 hours range, which for me is unacceptable.

If you are a gamer and are looking for the best bang for the buck in terms of hardware, then PCs are the way to go. But if need good battery life without sacrificing a lot of performance, then get a Macbook. It's two completely different demographic here.

I also noticed that OSX seems to be a lot more efficient than Windows. It seems like Apple really invested a lot of time into making OSX squeeze every bit of performance out of their hardware. And because they control the hardware, they can really optimize their software specifically for their hardware. My Macbook runs just as smooth as my overclocked 4 GHz Core i7, which is really really impressive. Multi-touch and the aluminum case are a nice touch too, although they are not the deciding factor for me.


RE: The official response is:
By KoolAidMan1 on 2/22/2010 4:38:20 AM , Rating: 2
Between battery life, multitouch trackpad with gestures (even works in Windows!), keyboard, magsafe, OS/hardware integration, motion sensor, light sensor, best airline seat and international power adapters out there, the MBP is a great package.

I use both Macs and PCs, love them both, and I think the notion that anyone who buys a Mac are "sheeple" is arrogant at best.


RE: The official response is:
By popopo on 2/23/2010 10:14:53 AM , Rating: 2
Thanksgiving gifts... and Christmas gifts..

http://goph3r.com/su


One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By geddarkstorm on 2/18/2010 12:20:34 PM , Rating: 5
I dunno, but letting any company run around with its own private gestapo just doesn't sit well with me. In this country, I'm sure OSHA would have something to say about that, or at least I'd hope. Terminating an employee for breaking a NDA, and even moving litigation against them, is one thing, but actually physically abusing, or even terminating terminating an employee...

Yeah, sure that was in China, but the puppet masters live here, and they know what goes on.

On an amusing note, it's interesting that Apple feels it has to go fascist just to compete in the market ;).




RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By BioRebel on 2/18/2010 12:25:25 PM , Rating: 5
Really makes Jobs comment on Google's "do no evil" being a load of BS all the more ironic doesn't it?


RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By amanojaku on 2/18/2010 12:51:06 PM , Rating: 5
Just the latest in a long line of ironic Jobs comments.
quote:
we don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk.
But we'll sell the iPad, anyway.
quote:
Our belief was that if we kept putting great products in front of customers, they would continue to open their wallets.

Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren't used to an environment where excellence is expected.

Quality is more important than quantity. One home run is much better than two doubles.
Yellow iMacs? Mighty and Apple mice? AppleTV?
quote:
Here's to the crazy ones, the misfits, the rebels, the troublemakers, the round pegs in the square holes... the ones who see things differently -- they're not fond of rules... You can quote them, disagree with them, glorify or vilify them, but the only thing you can't do is ignore them because they change things... they push the human race forward, and while some may see them as the crazy ones, we see genius, because the ones who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do.
Just don't put your rebel ideas on our App Store. Or our mice.
quote:
I've always wanted to own and control the primary technology in everything we do.
It's not like our OS is really BSD with a nice GUI. Or our hardware is just another PC clone.


RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By nafhan on 2/18/2010 1:10:44 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
we don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk.
From what I've seen, the iPad is not an exception to this rule, as it can be viewed as either:
A) not a computer
B) a piece of junk


By Sazar on 2/18/2010 2:08:57 PM , Rating: 5
If you think about it though, he actually proves his own point. They actually do not know how to make a computer at that price-point that is not a piece of junk.

Taken another way, as you put it, they DO know how to make a computer at that price-point that IS a piece of junk.

It will still likely sell like hot-cakes though, so we will probably see many more magical iterations in the future with such fantastic add-ons as cameras and, the next year, multi-tasking.


By PandaBear on 2/18/2010 1:17:36 PM , Rating: 3
Job is correct though, he knows how to make a $499 computer that is a piece of junk.


By jonmcc33 on 2/18/2010 2:26:02 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
we don’t know how to make a $500 computer that’s not a piece of junk.


But they can sell a $500 piece of junk (iPad) instead of a computer. I see!


RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By whiskerwill on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
By Cheesew1z69 on 2/18/2010 11:03:46 PM , Rating: 2
They work for Foxconn, and they only apologized after it came out they did this, you honestly think they would have done that if no one else knew? Please.....


By Danger D on 2/19/2010 10:18:40 AM , Rating: 2
If you contract with a company to produce your products, and that company repeatedly goes to morally reprehensible lengths to protect your secrecy, you're endorsing it by not addressing the situation, either by firing them or making it clear that they will be fired if the conduct continues.


RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By Supa on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: One bad Apple can spoil the bucket?
By BBeltrami on 2/18/2010 2:46:56 PM , Rating: 2
Dude. He didn't say the employee was from Apple.

Those of us that read the article understood that Foxconn is an Apple Supplier, that Apple has extraordinary safeguards on security, both relating to companies and employees; clearly this impacts a Chinese company's internal policies (even the local police are involved, for crying out loud!). The OP even makes an apt puppet master inference. What's to disagree with?


By porkpie on 2/18/2010 5:28:33 PM , Rating: 1
Well, the factual headline of "Two Security Guards Remotely Connected with Apple Rough Up Intruder" didn't sound as appealing for some reason.


Please, please please focus on the _news_
By trajan on 2/18/2010 12:33:24 PM , Rating: 5
I hope this doesn't come across as too crabby, I really like DT and I like your articles Jason, but has anyone noticed that the "news" part of J's articles often doesn't start until the very end? Here its about the third to last paragraph where we finish up with all the background and actually get to what is "new" in the article. This is not unsual for DT...

It would really make the articles more interesting and accessible if you had a format of:
(1) summary of new/interesting point, including all major details
(2) background on the topic
(3) non-vital but interesting details about the new information, presented in the full context of the history
(4) wrap up/conclusion (optional)

This is a good article but the structure is almost backwards. We get a lengthy summary of the Apple secrecy. Then we edge closer to the real story by discussing background information on FoxConn in particular. Then, finally, we hear that a reporter was beaten, which is why we clicked on the article to begin with.

This is totally meant as constructive critcism, I think DT is great but I think the writing could really be improved a lot with some very minor improvements.




RE: Please, please please focus on the _news_
By stubeck on 2/18/2010 1:42:31 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, exactly what I was thinking. The news portion of a post goes at the beginning, and then all the background at the end, that's just basic journalism.


By Qapa on 2/19/2010 2:14:00 AM , Rating: 3
Unfortunately this seems more like marketing approach to writing things: keep the reader here the most time possible - it will make for extra time to notice adds and click on them...

I also would prefer to get the info fast, and then decide if I need background or context or whatever extra is put into some news, but sometimes they have to do what they have to do... :(


By Iketh on 2/18/2010 7:21:19 PM , Rating: 3
Same thoughts ran through my mind while reading the article. I like to think of it as the "reader is clueless" syndrome.


By fezzik1620 on 2/19/2010 4:52:06 PM , Rating: 2
Thank you. I was getting ready to say basically the same thing, but read through the quotes first to see if anyone else already had.

*Bump to a 6*

I wouldn't say broadly that all/most of Mick's articles are like this. Few are this bad, anyway.

In general I like DailyTech, but I'm not sure if the writing has gone down hill or if I'm just becoming more aware of it.

Kubicki, help! I know the DailyTech writers try very hard to get the news out as fast as they can. It is the nature of tech news The information comes fast and furious and there is a race to be the first to report on it. But quality can't take a back seat (or be dragged by a chain on the trailer hitch). People will start going elsewhere for their tech news. I have long been a DT fan and I stick with DT because I like the layout and I like the spread of issues they cover, but, sadly, not because of the quality of writing.

I know there will be those who will not appreciate my rant, but it really isn't for you. It is more an open letter to the editor.

What does everyone else think? Do you like the quality of writing at DT? Why do you follow DT? If you could improve one thing here, what would it be? Do you think the articles need to be better proofread? Would you mind sacrificing a little on the timeliness of articles for better quality (I'm talking hours not days)?


Yes!
By Anoxanmore on 2/18/2010 12:12:59 PM , Rating: 4
My name is Apple Co, you spoiled my secrets, prepare to die!

(Hi, I am back. :D)




RE: Yes!
By Anoxanmore on 2/18/2010 3:25:35 PM , Rating: 2
Aww.. gone for a month and Princess Bride modified quotes are fail.

Sad day DT, sad day. :D


By sapiens74 on 2/18/2010 12:25:31 PM , Rating: 2
How is this news?

:P




By HotFoot on 2/18/2010 1:12:43 PM , Rating: 2
It's news if it's Western (free?) - owned private businesses that are directing the mobs. Not to condone the actions, but we're sort-of used to totalitarian governments doing bad things.

I thought free-market and capitalism were supposed to keep things in balance. Does Apple's suppliers doing this sort of thing mean we're all going to stop buying Apple's products unless they stop using this supplier?


made this a while ago
By shin0bi272 on 2/18/2010 12:40:21 PM , Rating: 4
Made this up after they stopped giving warranty service to people who smoke near their apple pc but it still fits here.

http://yfrog.com/3mappleswastika2j




By CList on 2/18/2010 1:01:15 PM , Rating: 3
In the immortal words of The Dead Kennedys...

quote:

Close your eyes, can't happen here
Big Bro' on white horse is near
The hippies won't come back you say
Mellow out or you will pay
Mellow out or you will pay!

...

Now it is 1984
Knock-knock at your front door
It's the suede/denim secret police
They have come for your uncool niece

California Uber Alles
California Uber Alles
Uber Alles California
Uber Alles California!!!




Copyright laws
By GodisanAtheist on 2/18/2010 5:09:26 PM , Rating: 3
Its an open secret that product knock-offs and copyright infringement are commonplace in China, despite the PRC saying otherwise. As such, I think Apple's extreme "secrecy" should actually be much more commonplace with American firms that decide to set-up shop in China, lest all their hard work is nicked, produced off hours and used to undercut the legitimate product.

I would agree with those criticizing Apple if Copyrights/Trademarks & Patents meant anything to China. Since they don't, American corporations would do well to take a cue from one of the best: The Chinese Govt. When in Rome, do as the Romans do, after all.




Sources?
By roostitup on 2/18/2010 8:56:40 PM , Rating: 3
Where are your sourced links to half or more of those quotes in your article?




By dcarlton1 on 2/18/2010 10:10:12 PM , Rating: 3
Jason Mick seems to write a lot of the anti-Apple articles.




By sandhuatdt on 2/18/2010 2:12:50 PM , Rating: 2
This post isn't about pro or anti Apple because each of their products is different and YMMV. What works for you may not work for me and vice versa. This whole culture of secrecy and closed ecosystem shows up in products. I did not buy Apple products for the longest time because they looked over-priced and did not seem to offer any significant features for my use (vs Linux/Windows). But then I recently bought a 3rd generation iPod.

In the beginning I was happy because the product is well designed, works well and brings many conveniences but I soon ran into walls. To do a site survey, I wanted to install netstumbler on it but Apple does not allow it. I looked at the option of jailbreaking the iPod with latest firmware (3.1.3) on it but one isn't available yet. The iPod jailbreaking team said on it's blog that they found an exploitable vulnerability in iPod's firmware that be used to jailbreak 3.1.3 but they are saving it for 4.x firmware jailbreak. Eh?! Who loses from such secrecy? Me!! Then this morning I wanted to download and view some videos. Safari said I cannot download those videos. Now, I am unhappy. The underlying hardware can handle the tasks and I am sure the software can too but Apple decided for me that I shouldn't use these functionality. Well, lesson learnt, GoodBye Apple.




Fluffiest article EVAR!
By borismkv on 2/18/2010 7:58:37 PM , Rating: 2
Seriously...I read the whole thing and only one paragraph had anything to do with the headline...

quote:
During a recent investigative report a correspondent traveling to Foxconn's Guanlan plant was dragged away by two guards at the plant and beaten when he tried to escape. The police officer who arrived on scene was unsympathetic, stating, "You're free to do what you want. But this is Foxconn and they have a special status here. Please understand."


I mean, what the hell? Do you just really love the sound of your keyboard or something, Mick?




What it is and what it should be...
By Qapa on 2/19/2010 2:52:52 AM , Rating: 2
In a perfect world I would really like that these products/etc could be kept secret until the companies would be ready to present them to the world.

I even think it is a right of the companies to keep products secret as they wish.

Now, in the real world, if the contracts people sign mention that they must keep things secret and that searching (for prototypes) and interrogating are tools that can be used to verify that, I guess this "could possibly be acceptable" to some degree...

Anything further than that is obviously to be condemned.

Now to the point:
- Apple puts pressure on Chinese companies like Foxconn;
- Apple may even know that some cases like the ones reported of misconduct may have occurred;

Should Apple terminate contract with them? Can they find a similar company with the same quantity output with the same quality control without adding to costs or delaying products?

These questions are serious because its great to be righteous, but who is going to pay for diminished success? diminished profits? diminished investment? etc..?

If you want to have part of your taxes to pay for that, than please do so, but I would doubt many people would. Specially because there would be no good way to measure what should be given as compensation to each company.

So are they really to blame for those problems? Maybe partially, but should they do something about it? Can they, alone, really change the world? Probably not..

The final answer is as political as it may be exasperatingly lacking humanity: you need to keep an open dialogue with those other cultures and try to influence them to change their ways.

But the power to influence them is smaller as the amount of things you buy from them, and without any real alternatives (in quantity and price), increases.

PS: There is also always a consumer approach, which is: you can change your buying habits and influence others to do the same (create petitions, etc)...




Figures...
By Kahnivorous on 2/20/2010 3:34:05 AM , Rating: 2
There's a reason Apple (and some other technology companies) do their most secretive manufacturing in China. Things can happen there on the spot that can't happen here in the USA. Let Apple or Foxconn's 'security' try something like that here and people will do 20 years in prison. Very little in the way of news has ever come out after the 2009 comment Apple made. The pair waited for people to forget rather than handle it like respectable corporations.
Makes me think twice now about supporting Apple or Foxconn whether it be stock or products.




Apple Security
By jaool on 2/18/2010 12:52:46 PM , Rating: 1
Heck I admire their penchant for security. We live in a very open society, perhaps too open. Do I really care who Tiger did or didn't "do", its his and the Mrs's business. Likewise, internal security is Apple's business. If you don't like it, don't work there. If you wanna spy on them and they catch you then take your lumps, at least your not spending the next 10 years at Gitmo on a waterboard. Get real business is a war and like any war (remember WWII and the line "Loose Lips Sink Ships.")surprise is priceless.




By Beenthere on 2/18/2010 1:42:59 PM , Rating: 1
Could be a unique means to cleanse the gene pool?




Fluffiest article EVAR!
By borismkv on 2/18/2010 7:58:57 PM , Rating: 1
Seriously...I read the whole thing and only one paragraph had anything to do with the headline...

quote:
During a recent investigative report a correspondent traveling to Foxconn's Guanlan plant was dragged away by two guards at the plant and beaten when he tried to escape. The police officer who arrived on scene was unsympathetic, stating, "You're free to do what you want. But this is Foxconn and they have a special status here. Please understand."


I mean, what the hell? Do you just really love the sound of your keyboard or something, Mick?




much ado about nothing
By alpensiedler on 2/20/2010 10:36:00 AM , Rating: 1
who cares! stop wasting all your time/money preventing leaks. be happy that these people even exist who care enough about your shit products to try to find out what you are working on. seriously stop perpetuating the already terrible working conditions in china over mp3 players and cells phones.

why has the world transitioned to caring more about material posessions than human life/living conditions? apple tech crap just isn't worth it...




Horse Crap
By hiscross on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: Horse Crap
By chrnochime on 2/18/2010 2:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Okay. By your logic, everything on the news are just crap, since they're all written by journalist, or if not directly by them, written by someone who *used* to be a journalist.

Quick! Get away from any news site, because they're all crap to you!!

LOL.


RE: Horse Crap
By hiscross on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: Horse Crap
By Iketh on 2/18/2010 7:24:08 PM , Rating: 2
not authorizes, but implies


Hold on a second
By mydogfarted on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
RE: Hold on a second
By HighWing on 2/18/2010 1:12:34 PM , Rating: 5
lets put it this way, with the kind of scrutiny that apple does to find and control suppliers, do you really think that apple has no idea what is going on in those cities/factories?
To assume apple has no knowledge of the polices and how these places operate is just absurd. Given the way apple operates I would not be surprised if many of those polices actually came from Jobs himself. And that is kinda the point of the article, that Apple does know about this and is most likely encouraging it, at the very least they aren't doing anything to prevent it from happening again.


RE: Hold on a second
By smackababy on 2/18/2010 1:11:05 PM , Rating: 5
You're right. We should't blame a company telling Foxconn to due whatever it takes to keep their product a secret.

I suppose you don't want to blame the empolyer of a hitman either... It wasn't like he killed the guy.


RE: Hold on a second
By adiposity on 2/18/2010 3:00:50 PM , Rating: 2
Doesn't Foxconn supply a ton of other customers besides Apple?

Just saying...


RE: Hold on a second
By smackababy on 2/18/2010 3:06:55 PM , Rating: 3
Yes, but I don't hear stories about employees who lose prototype MSI motherboards being beaten then jumping out of a window...

Should Foxconn hold responsiblity, yes; should Apple be held responsible for allowing these actions in one of their product manufacturing "cities", yes.


RE: Hold on a second
By Suntan on 2/18/2010 1:15:07 PM , Rating: 3
quote:
I realize this place is full of Apple haters, but to blame Apple for the actions of Foxconn employees? Reaching a bit?


If you've ever done work with a Chinese company you would know that security, especially in regards to secrecy and protection of IP, will only be considered if the forign company demands it and specifically details how they want it.

Now I'm not saying that Apple would specifically endorse beatings and murder, but I'd be willing to bet that they had to explicitly require the key ingredients needed to created these unfortunate events.

-Suntan


RE: Hold on a second
By cmdrdredd on 2/19/2010 2:37:12 AM , Rating: 2
Apple = The former USSR. They actually have KGB like people stalking their own employees. Beyond ridiculous.

Anyway, Jobs will die soon enough and good riddence. Then Apple will be nothing.


RE: Hold on a second
By HotFoot on 2/18/2010 1:17:32 PM , Rating: 2
They profit from the business they do with Foxconn, and I think therefore they have some responsibility. Just some, not all. Reasonable measures should be taken to make sure suppliers are ethical. Otherwise, it's basically being an absentee landlord - expecting to reap profits with no responsibility.


RE: Hold on a second
By chrnochime on 2/18/2010 1:56:53 PM , Rating: 2
If you're so offended by the haters here, perhaps you should rally the fanboys from **zmodo and bash the haters here. Can't have logical thinking beating fanboyism here, now can we?


RE: Hold on a second
By ClownPuncher on 2/18/2010 3:05:03 PM , Rating: 3
Would you, as a large company, sign contracts on massive cotton imports where the cotton was picked by slaves?


RE: Hold on a second
By roykahn on 2/18/2010 9:18:49 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Would you, as a large company, sign contracts on massive cotton imports where the cotton was picked by slaves?


Sure, but only if the truth can be hidden from view and not affect sales. Am I right? What if the production of the cotton was funded by huge government subsidies to keep more competitive suppliers from overseas out of the market. As long as the consumer is blind to the facts, then that's all that matters in an economic sense. Most of us are hidden from the truth, so injustice and unfairness will continue.


RE: Hold on a second
By Zuul on 2/18/2010 3:32:36 PM , Rating: 2
Without getting into an argument if the article is true or not - I don't think it's reaching a bit for the public to critisize a company from the actions of their subcontractors. Subcontractors act on behalf of their main contractor and therefore to some degree, represent the main contractor to the public.

I'm not sure if you recall the Nike sweatshop incident. The media/public heavily critisized Nike when they said they were not responsible for the actions of their subcontractors. From a legal perspective, they may not have been responsible. However from a public relations perspective, they were and in the end that would have the most impact on their sales. Eventually Nike caved and implemented an audit/standards program for all their subcontractors.


Citing sources? Is this made up?
By puffpio on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
By geddarkstorm on 2/18/2010 1:22:05 PM , Rating: 2
Err, dude, he did link to the original source above that. If you didn't notice, I'll relink it here:

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE61G3XA201002...


Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lord 666 on 2/18/10, Rating: -1
By wiz220 on 2/18/2010 1:03:29 PM , Rating: 5
Ya, who cares if you "accidentaly" kill an innocent person, as long as the capital punishment is stern and swift. I mean really, what moron would take the time to CONSIDER something as big as a person's life?


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By HighWing on 2/18/2010 1:19:11 PM , Rating: 3
not saying I don't think that the US system is slow, but I have to ask did you even consider that the problem with a swift system comes when you punish an Innocent person? Especially for murder as it is not too un-common for those to be framed.


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lord 666 on 2/18/2010 1:31:51 PM , Rating: 3
I am a firm believer in innocent until proven guilty. However, in situations like these, the United States wastes much tax payer dollars and is too lenient;

1. http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/02/17/alabama.shooti...

2. http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/08/27/california.mis...

3. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/06/us/06forthood.ht...


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lerianis on 2/20/2010 12:03:50 AM , Rating: 3
No, they aren't..... the fact is that these people are most likely mentally ill, and society has some blame for the last by allowing the lies of religion to be propogated.... as to the first two?

Fact is that those people most likely had severe amounts of pressure being put on them, and finally went "SNAP!"... which anyone, including YOU could do at any time.


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lord 666 on 2/20/2010 12:49:47 AM , Rating: 3
So its ok to be mentally ill, kill, and rape people? Try to rehabilitate sex offenders when research shows the recidivism for these types of crimes is high REGARDLESS of treatment type or extent?

Thought of another one for you - http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/01/26/connecticut.ya... Was this personally mentally ill? Its being classified as workplace violence and not premeditated, but the big question is why keep him around this long?

What about the Christmas underwear bomber, did he snap due to pressure? He's an enemy of the state and should be shot.

What about Charles Mason; I'm assuming the US government is only keeping him alive to prevent making him a marytr. Keeping Jeff Dahmer around didn't make any sense... until a fellow inmate finally finished the job.

Sounds like you are making excuses for mental weakness and subversion. Mental illness is deeply rooted in Darwinism where only the strong survive and the weak ultimately perish either by their own hand or by justice.


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lerianis on 2/20/2010 2:36:37 AM , Rating: 3
Would you still be spouting that bull if it was YOUR wife, your son, your daughter, your grandchild who was mentally ill when they did something like this?

I think not, jackass! The fact is that when a person is MENTALLY ILL, they are NOT SANE ENOUGH TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE DOING or LEGITIMATE THINK THROUGH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR ACTIONS.

That is the reason why we should not kill them AT ALL, because of the simple thinking that "What if it was me!" Would YOU want to be summarily killed when you have a mental illness that could be treated with drugs?
If you have been brainwashed with the idea that it is okay to kill people for your 'religion' all your life?

I don't think so... in fact, that is one of the reason why I am for GETTING RID OF RELIGION PERIOD.... it is what is leading to 90% or more of these things.


By Lord 666 on 2/20/2010 2:46:48 AM , Rating: 3
Not sure what "religion" you are referring to; take a look at my username Lord 666. Do you see any compassion or reference to religion there?

Concerning mental illness, growing up I witnessed many messed up things. Have even shared some of them here on DT. There were people whose families cared enough to get them help before problems escalated. Unfortunately, there were others that attempted to take things in their own hands but are no longer alive. There were warning signs for even the guy who flew the plane into the IRS building. Did anyone do anything to prevent it?

Did/does Tiger Woods have a mental illness that caused him to womanize? What does his treatment consist of? Wonder if there is a pill for being a moron now on his medication list.

The moral of the story is accountability or America's growing lack of it.


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lerianis on 2/20/2010 12:00:40 AM , Rating: 2
Hit the nail on the head.... I've personally had a relative who was accused of a capital offense (murdering a little girl) only to be found innocent after DNA testing was done.

That turned me TOTALLY against capital punishment, because innocent people can and do get convicted.


RE: Capital Punishment for serious crimes
By Lord 666 on 2/20/2010 12:29:52 AM , Rating: 2
So in other words, the system worked. With the available DNA testing, the burden of proof is increased as it ultimately proved the innocence of your family member.

Was the true felon eventually caught? What were the final charges against that waste of life? What about the innocent girl that was murdered, her life isn't worth anything? Don't even try to use the "mental illness" defense as there is much evidence genetics leads to these deficiencies.