Jump to content

Advertisement



 Photo

iTunes Store Facilitating Donations to Support Nepal Eart...

Today, 05:43 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News
Apple today rolled out a feature through the iTunes Store that allows users to contribute to the American Red Cross in support of relief efforts following the Nepal earthquake that has killed over 2,400 people.

itunes_nepal_earthquake.jpg
The feature leverages the hundreds of millions of credit cards already on file to allow iTunes users to easily donate $5, $10, $25, $50, $100, or $200 to the relief efforts. Apple will be passing along 100 percent of the donations to the Red Cross.

Aid NepalDonate in iTunes#iTunes #Nepal #NepalEarthquake pic.twitter.com/s9seJp8RZV

— Philip Schiller (@pschiller) April 26, 2015

This is not the first time Apple has used to iTunes Store to raise money for charity, with the company most recently raising money for City of Hope last October. Other previous relief effort fundraising campaigns have included the 2013 Philippine typhoon, the 2011 Japanese earthquake and tsunami, and the 2010 Haitian earthquake.mf.gif


rc.img
rc.img
rc.img

a2.imga2t.img
MacRumors-All?d=yIl2AUoC8zA MacRumors-All?d=6W8y8wAjSf4
Hs0kud6Mqzg

View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Best deals of the week: 96% off the Microsoft Office Mast...

Today, 04:15 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News
Cult of Mac is your go-to destination for major savings on top tech gear, services, and courses. Grab the week’s best deals, including the Microsoft Office Mastery Bundle, a lifetime subscription to Theme.Works WordPress builder, Jive Jumbo Bluetooth speaker, andmf.gif


rc.img
rc.img
rc.img

a2.imga2t.img

View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Best Apple analyst posts AAPL Q1-Q2 estimates: Macs shine...

Today, 04:04 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News

kgi-aapl-estimates.jpg?w=704&h=434

KGI’s Ming-Chi Kuo, one of the few analysts we feel credible, has his Apple numbers ready for Q1 2015. The analyst projects iPhone, iPad, and Mac shipments to be 58.2 million, 10.1 million, and 4.5 million respectively. He also estimates that Apple Watch shipments are currently at 631,000 units.

img.php?z=1288305&k=0d0633b70e3c2bda246a

Kuo believes that iPhone shipments have peaked and that Apple will see a quarter over quarter decline of 21.8 percent in Q1 and an 11.6 percent quarter over quarter decline in Q2 for shipments of 51.4 million, which would still represent a record quarter for the company. The morale of the story here is that Apple is still selling a lot of phones and there’s no need to worry yet.

iPhone shipments have peaked. We estimate iPhone shipments to decline 21.8% QoQ to 58.2mn units in 1Q15, milder than the seasonal pattern. While we look for QoQ decline of 11.6% to 51.4mn units for 2Q15, still better than seasonality, we believe shipments doesn’t just mean market demand but also partly represents pulled-in 3Q15 orders from Apple. Coupled with slowing shipments from the peak, we are neutral on iPhone supply chain shares.

Next, Kuo anticipates that iPad shipments will decline 52.7 percent quarter over quarter to 10.1 million units un Q1, while shipments in Q2 2015 will decline 28.5 percent quarter over quarter to 7.2 million units. Kuo attributes these “lackluster” numbers more to industry structural challenges than to slow seasonability. Earlier this year, we broke down 10 reasons why Apple is to blame for the decline in iPad sales. Those reasons seem more poignant now than ever.

Regarding the Mac, Kuo says it will be an area of significant growth for Apple. For Q1, Kuo estimates shipments of 4.5 million units, which is a quarter over quarter decline of 17.5 percent. Heading into Q2, however, the analyst predicts a 21.5 percent increase to 5.5 million thanks to the new 12-inch MacBook and back to school demand.

We see a positive outlook for Mac. We look for QoQ decline of 17.5% to 4.5mn units for Mac shipments in 1Q15 and 21.5% QoQ growth to 5.5mn units in 2Q15 on new product attraction and back-to-school demand. We are positive on Mac supply chain shares on stronger shipments momentum than the PC sector average.

Finally, Kuo echoes his sentiments from earlier this month, saying that it’s too early to tell if the Apple Watch will be a success. He believes that, at this point, most of the buyers are hardcore Apple fans, not the average consumer. Kuo estimates shipments at 631,000 units so far, which is far less than the expected 2-3 million units. Kuo cites labor shortages and inadequate production of the haptic feedback vibrator and AMOLED display. For Q2, Kuo estimates 3.8 million Apple Watch shipments.

Apple is set to hold its quarterly earnings call on April 27th.


Filed under: AAPL Company, Apple Watch, iOS Devices, Mac Tagged: analyst, Apple watch, iPad, iPhone, KGI, Mac, sales 377012 377012 377012 377012 377012 377012 377012 b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos

Visit 9to5Mac to find more special coverage of AAPL Company, iOS Devices, and iPhone.

What do you think? Discuss "Best Apple analyst posts AAPL Q1-Q2 estimates: Macs shine, iPads disappoint, iPhone has peaked, 3.8M Watches" with our community.


View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Review: Misfit’s Bolt LED bulb promises iPhone and wearab...

Today, 01:00 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News

bolt-1.jpg?w=704&h=470

Two of the hottest product categories at this year’s CES were home automation and wearables, which Apple is now tackling with HomeKit and the Apple Watch. As has historically been the case, the price premiums Apple has set for its products have left plenty of room for more affordable alternatives. Misfit, a company co-founded by former Apple CEO John Sculley, is now competing in both categories: the just-released Bolt Wireless LED Smart Light Bulb ($50) joins a small collection of Bluetooth-controlled lights, while its late 2014 wearable fitness and sleep tracker Flash ($33-$50) is in the process of being upgraded to control Bolt.

Misfit’s pitch for Bolt is interesting. It’s billing the color-shifting bulb as producing “gallery-quality light,” and focusing its new Misfit Home app for iOS on creating “Lightscapes” — lighting scenarios including neutral bright white, warm sunrises and sunsets, candlelight, forest and volcanic tones, amongst other “scenes” where the color is set but the brightness is adjustable. When Bolt works, it’s a wonderful source of light, but as is common these days, some post-release tweaks will be needed to exploit its full potential…

img.php?z=1288305&k=0d0633b70e3c2bda246a

Key Details:

  • Bluetooth LE-controlled light bulb rivals 60-Watt bulbs with only 13W power draw
  • Color-shifting LEDs let you control white balance, mimic candlelight, sunrises, sunsets
  • Approximately 20-year lifespan
  • Controlled by Misfit Home app, also control via wearable Flash fitness/sleep tracker in “future”
  • Early bugs likely to get resolved with future app updates

 

bolt-2.jpg?w=704&h=470

If you’ve seen Philips’ Hue or the Flux Bluetooth LED Light Bulb, or many of their competitors, Bolt’s design will look very familiar: a glass dome atop a heat-wicking aluminum base, with a standard electrical socket connector at the bottom. Unlike rivals, Bolt’s nearly black base is dark enough that you may be able to see it through some ceiling fixtures — a reason to consider switching multiple bulbs in the fixture at once. Alone, it’s an unusually handsome bulb inside standing lamps and other types of fixtures.

bolt-6.jpg?w=655&h=437bolt-7.jpg?w=655&h=437

Misfit notes that the dome “uses a proprietary light-diffusion coating” to eliminate uneven bright and dark light dispersion, and although you’d really have to stare into lightbulbs to notice the difference, Bolt’s light does look uniformly bright from edge to edge. In addition to promising a roughly 20-year life span under normal usage conditions — par for the course with today’s LED light bulbs — it draws only 13 Watts of power while delivering 800 lumens of light, equivalent to a 60-Watt bulb. That’s very close to GE’s Link, an inexpensive 60-Watt equivalent bulb with 800 lumens of output and a 12-Watt draw.

bolt-5.jpg?w=655&h=437bolt-4.jpg?w=655&h=437bolt-3.jpg?w=655&h=437

Apart from their price tags, the big differences between Bolt and Link are Bolt’s color-shifting capabilities and use of Bluetooth LE technology. Both are important. Bolt’s color-shifting is accomplished using the new Misfit Home app, which makes initial setup painless — just load the app, set up or sign into your Misfit account, and search for the bulb. At that point, you’re given the choice between 11 different scenes.

“(Wake Up To A) Sunrise” is the only programmable scene, letting you set a time and watch as the light gradually shifts through sunrise-like colors until it reaches a full bright yellow at the appointed hour. The other scenes allow you only to change the brightness using a slider from “off” to intense: Welcome Home (gentle yellow), Bright Day (neutral white), Sunset (rich yellow), Date Night (orange candle-like light), Movie Night (dim blue), Forest (bright green), Volcano (light purple), Rainbow (ever-shifting color), Rocking Chair (light purple), and Salt Flats (aqua blue). Tapping on a + icon lets you save your own scene with whatever color and brightness you prefer, using a color palette, though Bolt doesn’t seem to properly reproduce reds. That’s a small issue; a somewhat larger one is that the bulb doesn’t save the last selected color, so if you flip the light switch off, you’ll need to load the app to set the color again.

img_4439.jpg?w=393&h=700img_4427.jpg?w=393&h=700img_4430.jpg?w=393&h=700img_4431.jpg?w=393&h=700

Misfit makes very little mention of Bolt’s use of Bluetooth — perhaps because some of its competitors instead use longer-range Wi-Fi or proprietary wireless standards — but that’s what’s under Bolt’s hood. On a positive note, Bluetooth eliminates the need for a wireless control hub, which adds extra beyond-the-bulb expenses to GE’s Link and Philips’ Hue systems. And when the Bluetooth works, it works well, with reasonably lag-free color and brightness adjustments. But it typically only works within the same room. And 1 out of 2 or 3 times, the app wouldn’t re-pair with the bulb, sometimes even when the iPhone’s Bluetooth indicator suggested they were in contact. Restarting the app sometimes worked. Restarting the app two or three times sometimes worked.

I was also disappointed to discover that there’s nothing in the Misfit Home app to connect Bolt to the Flash tracker, a feature Misfit has been marketing in the months leading up to Bolt’s release. Only when I looked at the in-app FAQ did I find an answer hidden within the question, “What is the difference between the Misfit app and the Misfit Home app?” Misfit says: “In the future, the apps will work together to create experiences such as controlling your Bolt via Flash.” When asked for more specifics on timing, the company said its latest date is “the end of May-ish.”

 

flash-2.jpg?w=704&h=470

For what it’s worth, Flash is a compelling fitness and sleep tracker for $50. Misfit achieved the price point by converting its earlier aluminum tracker Shine into an all-plastic version, complete with a coin-shaped pedometer that can be worn in an included shirt clip or wristband. You can press the center of the coin to display the time in an abstract way using 12 solid or flashing lights, hold the button down to activate an activity tagging mode, and assign activities to double- or triple-presses. Right now, you can play/pause a Spotify song list or send a “Yo!” to specific friends and family, neither super-compelling to me, but additional activities — including Bolt control — are supposed to be added.

flash-1.jpg?w=655&h=437flash-3.jpg?w=655&h=437

All of Flash’s parts feel as inexpensive as the $50 price point would suggest, but the band was surprisingly comfortable when I slept with it. Misfit’s app actually did a pretty good job of tracking my sleep, something that the Apple Watch doesn’t do, and a fair job of tracking my steps, which the iPhone and Apple Watch both do. Flash’s battery is replaceable, and thanks to Bluetooth LE wireless, rated for two years of use before that’s necessary, though the various plastic parts might not make it that long. For those of us who want to try out sleep tracking without breaking the bank, this is an affordable alternative.

img_4423.jpg?w=393&h=700img_4434.jpg?w=393&h=700img_4433.jpg?w=393&h=700

When Misfit pulls Bolt and Flash together as promised — as well as its other accessories — there could be a really nice synergy between home automation and wearables, and one that could benefit from (lower priced) bundling of both parts together. Thanks in part to Apple Watch app demonstrations, it’s not hard at this point to imagine a future where wearables control far more than light bulbs, but the software is going to be a critical part of making that happen. Bolt’s not quite there yet, but the more advanced functionality it promises is hopefully just a month and an app update away.

Manufacturer:
MisfitMSRP:
$50Compatibility:
All iPads, iPhones, iPod touches
Filed under: AAPL Company, iOS Devices, Reviews Tagged: Bluetooth LE, Bolt!, Flash, LED Light Bulb, misfit 375302 375302 375302 375302 375302 375302 375302 b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos

Continue reading more about AAPL Company, iOS Devices, and Reviews at 9to5Mac.

What do you think? Discuss "Review: Misfit’s Bolt LED bulb promises iPhone and wearable control of color-shifting lights" with our community.


View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Users discover stainless steel Apple Watch scratches easi...

Today, 12:14 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News

scratch-lead.png?w=655&h=368

Now that the stainless steel Apple Watch is becoming widely available, owners are beginning to post photos showing their shiny steel Watches have already developed scratches on the casing. Since Apple’s videos touted its steel as specially cold-forged to achieve superior hardness, people have been surprised to discover that the finish is easily scratched – many comparing it to the back of an iPod. While this isn’t shocking for 316L stainless steel, it is concerning to customers who just spent $549 or more on the mid-range Apple Watch. But don’t panic! As I’ll explain below, you can easily fix the scratches yourself for around $5…

img.php?z=1288305&k=0d0633b70e3c2bda246a

First off, let’s get one thing straight: the fact that the steel Apple Watch can scratch is not a surprise or “scratchgate” scandal. Stainless steel is scratchable, and long-time Apple customers have plenty of experience with this: remember the backs of every full-sized iPod, up to and including the iPod classic? They were scratch magnets. So are other steel watches. Nearly every polished stainless steel watch made from 316L (commonly known as “surgical grade stainless”) or the 904L used on Rolex casings can be scratched, scuffed, and show normal signs of wear and tear.

There’s a simple solution. If your stainless steel watch gets scratched or scuffed, most of these issues can be fixed by just buffing out the scratches yourself — or take it to a jeweler or watch repair shop if you’re not comfortable with the DIY solution. All you need to do is pick up a $5 metal polish (here’s what I use), buff it out with a hand towel, and wash your hands afterwards. Simple. In the video below, I polish several surface scratches out from my Apple Watch, showing how the metal polish removes them completely.

If you’d like to learn how to remove scratches from Apple Watch, check out the video below:

Is it disappointing that the Apple Watch is scratchable, given the grade of materials and manufacturing process Apple used? Sure. But Science: stainless steel is not a super-hard material. The 316L grade used in Apple Watch is actually softer than the 7000 series aluminum used in Apple Watch Sport. If you’re curious as to where 316L is positioned within grades of stainless steel, check out this helpful chart. Apple could have chosen to go with more durable 904L stainless steel, but it’s much more expensive to manufacture and would raise Apple Watch’s price. With a polished finish, even 904L can still be scratched fairly easily. You won’t run into this issue with brushed stainless steel watches because that texture hides any accidental scuffs within the texture/finish.

befaft.png?w=655&h=368

My Apple Watch before and after polishing.

I spoke with a handful of local watch repair shops and received different answers about polishing my Apple Watch. Some of them said it wouldn’t be a problem to buff the casing for between $20 and $40, while others didn’t want to risk touching the brand new Watch, because they were concerned about damaging other components. Even they were clear, though, that this type of stainless steel (316L) can easily be polished and buffed. You just have to be careful not to get the polishing cream into the Watch’s little holes, and shouldn’t polish so frequently or deeply that the steel gets worn down.

borg.jpg?w=381&h=381

DetroitBorg on Instagram: “Scratched :(“

If this is your first steel Apple device, you might be surprised to find that your new Watch has been scratched, and that’s completely understandable. But it’s going to happen, and Apple Watch pricing does not reflect the durability of the materials being used — gold Editions certainly are going to be scratchable, too. In any case, minor surface and hairline scratches can easily be polished out of the casing using the compound mentioned in the video. DIY repairs might not be as great as a watch that never scratches, but that’s the reality of owning a polished stainless steel watch, no matter who makes it or what process is used.


Filed under: Apple Watch Tagged: Apple, Apple watch, scratches, scratchgate, smartwatch 376946 376946 376946 376946 376946 376946 376946 b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos

Visit 9to5Mac to find more special coverage of Apple, Apple watch, and Apple Watch.

What do you think? Discuss "Users discover stainless steel Apple Watch scratches easily, the $5 fix is even easier (Video)" with our community.


View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Consumer Reports initial tests unable to scratch Apple Wa...

Today, 11:39 AM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News
I can’t remember if we’re still mad at Consumer Reports for Antennagate but they seem to be doing a thorough job at testing the Apple Watch. Notable from their Day 1 tests is that the Apple Watch Sport screen does scratch but only after going pretty far down the Moh’s hardness scale.
consumer-reports-apple-watch.png?w=704&h
The Sapphire Apple Watch however, wouldn’t scratch under any circumstances though it doesn’t appear that Consumer Reports had a diamond pick to test it against.

So how did Apple’s watches fare? The sapphire crystal performed as expected, which is to say very well. It survived a 9-rated pick from our kit. The Apple Watch Sport made it up to a 7-rated pick without damage, but was scratched by an 8-rated pick.


So the face of the Apple Watch is definitely harder than that of the Apple Watch Sport. But the performance of the hardened glass of the Sport model is pretty impressive as well. An 8 on the Mohs scale is equivalent to topaz, just one step below sapphire, and it means that it takes quite an abrasive material to scratch Apple’s glass. (We also tried a completely unscientific attempt on the Sport model with a steel key, and it didn’t scratch the glass.)

Consumer Reports also did some heart rate sensor and step counting tests and so far found the Apple Watch sensors accurate. They also submerged the Apple Watch in water for 30 minutes in simulated 3 feet of water which matches up against its rating and found it waterproof.
From all of the tests, both scientific and not so scientific, Apple Watch seems to be passing w/flying colors.
Filed under: AAPL Company, Apple Watch Tagged: Apple watch, Consumer Reports, gorilla glass, Mohs scale of mineral hardness, Sapphire, smartwatch, Stainless steel http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ http://feeds.wordpre...ess.com/376966/ b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos
Continue reading more about AAPL Company, Apple watch, and Apple Watch at 9to5Mac.
What do you think? Discuss "Consumer Reports initial tests unable to scratch Apple Watch sapphire, find heart-rate sensors accurate" with our community.
http://rss.buysellad...600&c=870057566

View the full article

  0 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

10 of the weirdest Apple Watch apps

Yesterday, 07:00 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News
There are plenty of great apps for the Apple Watch, but what about the weird ones? It turns out that developers have some interesting ideas for what you’d want to do on your wrist. Here are some of the weirdest, mostmf.gif


rc.img
rc.img
rc.img

a2.imga2t.img

View the full article

  121 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Hot deals ending soon: Save 67% on 2-year subscription to...

Yesterday, 04:15 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News
Save big on top selling gear and services every day at Cult of Mac Deals. Time is running out to save big on a 2-year subscription to NordVPN, VOXOA HD wireless headphones, the GT-ZO1 touchscreen dashcam, and more. 2-Year Subscriptionmf.gif


rc.img
rc.img
rc.img

a2.imga2t.img

View the full article

  121 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

Apple Watch vs Apple Watch Sport: Unboxing and full compa...

Yesterday, 04:13 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News

lead.png?w=655&h=369

If you’re still debating on which Apple Watch model to order, we may have a bit of help/advice to offer. Apple Watch Sport is the cheapest option to go for, but what exactly will you be missing over one that’s more expensive? Well, we took the plunge, picked up a few of them, and put together a helpful comparison video between these models…

img.php?z=1288305&k=0d0633b70e3c2bda246a

First off, it’s important to note that not only is there a difference in materials between the Apple Watch and Apple Watch Sport, there’s also a major difference in presentation. Apple Watch is packaged to seem like more of a premium product over its sporty brother. That’s not to say one is definitely better than the other when it comes to opening the box, but there are a few things that could make the decision easier.

The packaging on Apple Watch is designed to appear like it came straight from a jewelry shop. The box it comes with is large and square (unlike the rectangular box with the Sport version) and inside you’ll find a compact case to protect the Apple Watch during storage or traveling. Apple Watch Sport includes a similar box (but much longer). While the Sport’s box isn’t low quality by any means, there’s something about Apple Watch’s presentation that makes the extra bit of money seem worth it. But check out the video below and be the judge yourself.

Watch our Apple Watch vs Sport unboxing & comparison video:

Obviously fancier packaging is not the only thing you’ll get with Apple Watch. The materials being used are very different as well. On the front side of Apple Watch, the display is covered in sapphire crystal, while Apple Watch Sport features a much weaker Ion-X glass. On the back side, the sensors are housed by a ceramic plate on Apple Watch, while the Sport variation is made up of composite.

The most visible difference between these two models comes down to the casing materials. Apple Watch Sport is made from 7000 series aluminum. The Space Gray Sport we’ve shown in the above video is a very sleek device, but nothing shines like the 316L stainless steel used to create the Apple Watch casing. Along with that, the 2m magnetic charging docks between these two are different. Apple Watch’s charger has a brushed steel casing, while the Sport’s is plastic.

As far as software goes, there won’t be any differences and the overall form-factor will remain the same unless you go with the much smaller 38mm casing shown in the comparison video above. Either way, hopefully this comparison video will help identify all of the differences between Apple’s smartwatch options. Personally, I prefer the Apple Watch over the Sport, but this is still a first generation product. You’re money may be better placed in a light investment of a Sport for now. Both models are great, but it really depends on what you’re looking for.


Filed under: Apple Watch Tagged: Apple, Apple watch, Apple Watch Sport, comparison, video 376920 376920 376920 376920 376920 376920 376920 b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos

Visit 9to5Mac to find more special coverage of Apple, Apple watch, and Apple Watch.

What do you think? Discuss "Apple Watch vs Apple Watch Sport: Unboxing and full comparison (Video)" with our community.


View the full article

  100 Views · 0 Replies

 Photo

First 12″ MacBook 1.3GHz benchmarks: top model rivals 1.4...

Yesterday, 02:50 PM

Posted By x-bot in iDevice News

gold-macbook-internals.png?w=704&h=321

Following Apple’s shipments of the first 1.3GHz versions of the 12″ MacBook this week, benchmarks have started to appear online for the new Intel Core M-5Y71 machine. Geekbench 3 shows the following results for each model, which vary based on the testing mode (32/64-bit) and number of processor cores used (single or multiple cores).

MacBook 1.1GHz

  • 32-Bit: Single-Core Average 2212, Multi-Core Average 4070
  • 64-Bit: Single-Core Average 2428, Multi-Core Average 4592

MacBook 1.2GHz

  • 32-Bit: Single-Core Average 2348, Multi-Core Average 4603
  • 64-Bit: Single-Core Average 2579, Multi-Core Average 5185

MacBook 1.3GHz

  • 32-Bit: Single-Core* 2271, Multi-Core* 4841
  • 64-Bit: Single-Core Average 2816, Multi-Core Average 5596

The 1.3GHz MacBook’s 64-bit scores represent 16%-22% improvements over the 1.1GHz model, and 8%-9% gains over the 1.2GHz model. Note that only one test result has been published so far for the 1.3GHz MacBook in 32-bit mode, which is why its single-core numbers look lower than expected compared with the other models’ averages. More details are below…

img.php?z=1288305&k=0d0633b70e3c2bda246a

Combing through Geekbench 3 results, the 1.3GHz MacBook’s scores compare most directly to Apple’s 1.4GHz Macs, such as the entry-level 21.5″ iMac and early 2014 entry-level MacBook Air. The latter model achieved Single- and Multi-Core scores in the 2400/4700 range for 32-Bit tests, and 2700/5300 for 64-Bit tests.

Geekbench 3’s Single-Core scores reflect the machines’ relative speeds when performing non-demanding tasks such as basic web browsing and word processing. Multi-Core scores demonstrate the machine’s ability to perform more complex tasks demanding additional processing power, such as video rendering.

The 1.3GHz MacBook is available only as a custom build-to-order model, but authorized resellers are now offering it at discounted prices.


Filed under: AAPL Company, General, Mac Tagged: 12" MacBook, benchmarks, MacBook, Retina MacBook 376911 376911 376911 376911 376911 376911 376911 b.gif?host=9to5mac.com&blog=22754319&pos

Visit 9to5Mac to find more special coverage of AAPL Company, Mac, and MacBook.

What do you think? Discuss "First 12″ MacBook 1.3GHz benchmarks: top model rivals 1.4GHz iMac, 2014 MacBook Air" with our community.


View the full article

  162 Views · 0 Replies


Site Navigation

Online Users

0 members, 138 visitors and 0 anonymous users

Google, Bing, Yahoo, Google Mobile


  • 564231 Total Posts
  • 529871 Total Members
  • tandat72vt Newest Member
  • 12756 Most Online

138 users are online (in the past 15 minutes)

0 members, 138 guests, 0 anonymous users   (See full list)


Google, Bing, Yahoo, Google Mobile


Portal v1.4.0 by DevFuse | Based on IP.Board Portal by IPS
IPB skins by Skinbox