how my iPod touch has switched me to a mac


Recommended Posts

I bought my ipod touch on June/11/2009 ,, about 11 days ago and just love it the mac like os using it for everything the first 3 days i had to charge it twice a day because i was using it sooooo much even for internet surfing from my bed rather than grabbing my net book.

i got about 6 pages of appsgames and such. and also the past 3 dayd i didnt even use my laptop i just my ipod for all my computing needs

i like mac os and the ipod great job apple

just planning only thing is i have a 3 month old netbook asus that runs vista........... my technology budget for this year or 2 is already spent (1500usd every 2 years ) i just like the touch its self i do everything i ever did on my big laptop with that little itouch 8g 2nd gen with os 3.0 its just right for me to get used to maac os like settings and changing and doing things

There's a big difference between the iTouch's OS and Mac OSX....

Aye, but still. It was the 2g iPhone that switched me to mac, and i have never looked back.

My mac purchases:

2g iphone - 1.2ghz mac mini - Early 2008 White macbook - iPhone 3g - 2.4ghz Unibody macbook

And i think my next desktop will be a 24inch imac.

Hmm i guess this happend to me aswell,

the very first computer i purchased new Was a Dell Dimension 8250 paid $1300 for it and Lexmark AIO,came with XP, later upgraded to Vista.

upgraded Power supply to install a new nvidia GT 6800 OC and a X-fi extreme Pro (before the Fatal1ty series) i loved this computer but it rapidly became obsolete mostly because it had a very short lived type of memory wich became impossible to upgrade.

anyway i got my first ipod after they first introduced 80gb with video and i was hooked

i now how have an ipod80gb,ipod classic 160gb,ipod touch 1g 8gb,ipod touch 2g 32gb, iphone 2g 8gb, iphone 3g 16gb, a white plastic macbook 13in and an early 2009 iMac 24'

i purchased plastic Macbook two months before the iphone 3g was released from a friend who was selling it for $400 i did this because i had not used a mac since the original Macintosh computers my School had, wich were THE very first computers i ever used.

then about 3 months ago i got the iMac 24' and i have never been happier, i can't wait till i save up enough for a Mac Pro.

don't get me wrong i still use Windows just from a boot camp partition, the day i bought the iMac i even stopped at office depot and bought a FULL version Vista Ultimate just for the purpose to install it on the iMac lol (really excited for Windows 7 to !)

So thats my story and im sticking to it :)

There's a big difference between the iTouch's OS and Mac OSX....
A mobile multi-touch OS got a you so impressed that you decided to switch to a non multi-touch desktop OS?

Agree with both of these... Mac OS is way too proprietary, Almost useless in gaming and overall not as groundbreaking as the iTouch OS was.

There's a big difference between the iTouch's OS and Mac OSX....

Obviously. Mac OS X is far more powerful and feature packed.

Anyway, buying an iPod Nano switched me to Mac. Because the iPod Nano worked as advertised - ditto for Mac OS X in my experience..

iPhoneOS is not MacOS, try the OS at a store or something before you jump ship, judging your decision based on the iPod Touch is a mistake.

My experience shows otherwise and I've never been happier. :pinch:

There's a big difference between the iTouch's OS and Mac OSX....

That's most likely not what is at stake here. I have bought an iPod Touch in February 2008 and it has been such an amazing device so far. It really changes the way you think about Apple because you know what they're capable of and you understand better the way they intend the stuff they do to work.

Still... im not saying it's perfect but i can't imagine having a better PDA.

There's a big difference between the iTouch's OS and Mac OSX....

True, but it does give a good introduction into the type of product one should expect from Apple - by move to Apple was more the result of using Mac OS 10.2.x for a few months than anything to do with an overwhelming dislike of Windows.

Agree with both of these... Mac OS is way too proprietary, Almost useless in gaming and overall not as groundbreaking as the iTouch OS was.

You realise that the entire OS X kernel is open source and Apple actually offers quite a few programs source codes via the MacOS Forge?

How is Windows less proprietary, I wonder?

You realise that the entire OS X kernel is open source and Apple actually offers quite a few programs source codes via the MacOS Forge?

How is Windows less proprietary, I wonder?

Those who claim that Mac OS X is too proprietary tend to be those who don't know what proprietary means. Debating with such people is an exercise in futility that isn't even worth getting into.

The world according to them; if they can assemble their own computer and install Windows on any machine they've assembled, it makes their PC non-proprietary.

You realise that the entire OS X kernel is open source and Apple actually offers quite a few programs source codes via the MacOS Forge?

How is Windows less proprietary, I wonder?

He never even mentioned Windows or its proprietary status.

As for OS X, Darwin (the underlying system) and XNU (the kernel) are open source, but neither the underlying code (Open Firmware) or the overlaying system (Aqua) are.

Well then, why say something is too proprietary when you're using even more proprietary system yourself?

I don't think he mentioned his operating system either. He could be using a GNU/Linux distribution or even one of the *BSD systems for all we know. Although his comment about games hints towards Windows, I don't believe he intended to push Windows as less proprietary.

One of his points, and the one you chose to criticize is that the MAC OS X is not as proprietary as many may think and that is correct up to some extent. Whether or not Windows is more or less proprietary is something very debatable and certainly not the main point of his argument.

The iPhone works and has appeal because it is a fairly limited and simplistic gadget (a good thing, gadgets are good). Once you enter the world of general purpose computing though, things are very different. Maybe you should at least try to play around with a Mac (maybe a friend's) for a few hours before you invest your hard earned money so that you know just what you're getting (which is not just a bigger iPhone).

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • Qualcomm takes on NVIDIA with new Dragonfly CPU and AI chips by Pradeep Viswanathan Microsoft, Google, Amazon, AMD, Meta, Apple, OpenAI, and several others have been developing their own chips for AI infrastructure. However, NVIDIA still remains the dominant player in the market. Today, Qualcomm announced a major expansion of its data center infrastructure portfolio to better compete with NVIDIA. The new lineup includes the Qualcomm Dragonfly C1000 CPU, Qualcomm High Bandwidth Compute technology, the Dragonfly AI300 inference accelerator, new connectivity products, and custom silicon solutions. Qualcomm claims that this new lineup improves performance per watt, token throughput, and total cost of ownership for AI data centers. The Dragonfly C1000 is a new data center CPU built with Qualcomm’s custom Oryon cores. This chip will feature more than 250 cores, frequencies above 5GHz, and a chiplet-based design. Qualcomm claims that this new C1000 can deliver more than 2x better performance per watt compared to existing server CPU offerings based on specifications. The Dragonfly C1000 will support PCIe Gen 7 with more than 2TB/s of connectivity, along with CXL, advanced RAS features, and both air and liquid cooling. Qualcomm expects the Dragonfly C1000 to be commercially available in 2028. Additionally, Qualcomm and Meta announced a multi-year, multi-generation agreement under which Qualcomm will supply Dragonfly C1000 data center CPUs for Meta’s next-generation server fleet. Qualcomm also announced High Bandwidth Compute, a new near-memory computing architecture designed to address AI’s memory bandwidth bottleneck. HBC Gen 1 will debut with the Dragonfly AI250, which is expected to sample in mid-2027. The AI250 will deliver 133TB/s per card, an 18x increase in effective memory bandwidth compared to the AI200 with LPDDR5X. The new Dragonfly AI300 with HBC Gen 2 is a rack-level AI inference platform from Qualcomm. Qualcomm claims that the AI300 can deliver 4x to 8x better performance per watt compared to existing GPU-based architectures based on memory bandwidth per watt per card. The Dragonfly AI300 is expected to be available in 2028.
    • IBM reveals sub-1nm chip technology, production expected in another 5 years by Pradeep Viswanathan TSMC is now leading the chip manufacturing industry with its 2nm-class process node called N2. Samsung Foundry also has a 2nm-class process node called SF2. TSMC says N2 entered volume production in Q4 2025. Samsung says SF2 started mass production in 2025. Today, IBM announced the world’s first sub-1-nanometer chip technology, marking another major semiconductor research milestone. The new technology is based on a 0.7nm, or 7-angstrom, node and uses a new transistor architecture called “nanostack.” The new design vertically stacks and staggers nanosheet-based transistors so that more components can fit into the same chip area while also improving performance and power efficiency. IBM claims that this new sub-1nm chip can pack nearly 100 billion transistors onto a chip the size of a fingernail. This offers almost twice the density, up to 50 percent higher performance, or 70 percent better energy efficiency when compared to IBM's 2nm node design announced back in 2021. Also, IBM mentioned that this new architecture can deliver 40 percent SRAM scaling. It is important to consider that this announcement from IBM is a research milestone rather than a near-term process node launch. Back in 2021, IBM unveiled the world’s first 2nm chip design, claiming 50 billion transistors on a fingernail-sized chip and major performance and efficiency gains. Five years later, IBM’s 2nm technology has still not entered mainstream commercial production. That is because IBM is no longer a major commercial chip manufacturer. It sold its chip manufacturing business to GlobalFoundries years ago and has since then focused only on semiconductor research, IP development, and partnerships. To productize its 2-nm chip technology, IBM partnered with Japan’s Rapidus, but it has not resulted in anything shipping at scale. IBM says that its new sub-1nm technology can reach production as early as within the next five years. If that happens, it will likely depend on manufacturing partners, advanced EUV tooling, and years of yield improvements.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Week One Done
      Meta Plast earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • First Post
      kinowa earned a badge
      First Post
    • Rookie
      krychek57 went up a rank
      Rookie
    • Grand Master
      Jaybonaut went up a rank
      Grand Master
    • One Year In
      Philsl earned a badge
      One Year In
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      454
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      170
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      135
    4. 4
      Michael Scrip
      78
    5. 5
      Xenon
      77
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!