GekkePrutser
Apr 22, 08:12 AM
Yeah I'm sure it can be done, but it could have needed a redesign of the keyboard backlight, so they could have left it to the next generation.
For example, the old-style backlight such as present on the MBP's, seems to have a whole load of visible 'dots', either separate LEDs or glass fibres or something. Either way there's a bunch of bright dots around the keys. I noticed this all the time because on my old MBP the backspace key was tilted forward a bit so the bright dots came into view at the edge and it was actually fairly annoying. This way of building a keyboard backlight is probably relatively thick.
They could replace this setup with a simple layer of Electroluminescent foil, or a lightspreader such as used behind an LCD screen. That requires only the thickness of the foil, and a slightly thicker edge at one end where the light goes into it, but that can be placed at the thickest part of the device. Apple manages to put a backlight in the extremely slim screen of the MBA so this should be possible as well. It probably won't be as light as direct LEDs underneath each key but it should be sufficient in situations where you really need it. I always ran my key backlight at the very lowest setting anyway.
So I won't be surprised if it makes its way back. I guess the more people will complain, the more incentive Apple will have to design something that will fit.
For example, the old-style backlight such as present on the MBP's, seems to have a whole load of visible 'dots', either separate LEDs or glass fibres or something. Either way there's a bunch of bright dots around the keys. I noticed this all the time because on my old MBP the backspace key was tilted forward a bit so the bright dots came into view at the edge and it was actually fairly annoying. This way of building a keyboard backlight is probably relatively thick.
They could replace this setup with a simple layer of Electroluminescent foil, or a lightspreader such as used behind an LCD screen. That requires only the thickness of the foil, and a slightly thicker edge at one end where the light goes into it, but that can be placed at the thickest part of the device. Apple manages to put a backlight in the extremely slim screen of the MBA so this should be possible as well. It probably won't be as light as direct LEDs underneath each key but it should be sufficient in situations where you really need it. I always ran my key backlight at the very lowest setting anyway.
So I won't be surprised if it makes its way back. I guess the more people will complain, the more incentive Apple will have to design something that will fit.
ratzzo
Apr 22, 04:24 PM
They should really keep the teardrop design to the Air.. it wouldn't really fit the iPhone, which is a phone after all. If that were a true design to come, I wonder just how awkward holding it could be.
Bigger displays are always welcome. I was already going to get an iP5 (got a BB Bold) anyway. Awesome for screen size, not so much for the design.. which seems suspiciously thin.
Bigger displays are always welcome. I was already going to get an iP5 (got a BB Bold) anyway. Awesome for screen size, not so much for the design.. which seems suspiciously thin.
ucfgrad93
Feb 28, 04:37 PM
I feel bad for the rest of the cast and crew that are now not receiving a paycheck because of Sheen's idiocy. :mad:
DrJohnnyN
Apr 14, 06:18 AM
Can't wait.
more...
KPOM
Apr 17, 07:49 PM
Clock speed isn't everything. The sandy bridge i5 should be considerably faster. With that said, buying a MBA to do intensive things with is questionable to begin with.
x2. Considering that Apple is the company who first talked about "megahertz myth" back in the days of the PowerPC, it's amazing how much ignorance there is about the Sandy Bridge Core i5. The CPU will be significantly faster. Look at the 13" MacBook Pro for some indication. The Core i5 in the 13" Pro is nearly as fast as the Core i7 was in the 2010 MacBook Pro.
That said, we will see about a 30-40% drop in GPU performance. Gamers may want to stay away from the next MacBook Air. That said, those who don't game ought to be able to do "intensive things" with the Sandy Bridge CPU. MP3 encoding, photo editing, complex spreadsheets, etc. ought to be nice on the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air.
To me, the decision on whether to upgrade will depend on what else is in the mix. If it comes with Thunderbolt and a backlit keyboard, I may pull the trigger. If it's the same computer but just with the Core 2 Duo/NVIDIA 320m swapped out for the Core i5/Intel HD3000 I might wait it out.
x2. Considering that Apple is the company who first talked about "megahertz myth" back in the days of the PowerPC, it's amazing how much ignorance there is about the Sandy Bridge Core i5. The CPU will be significantly faster. Look at the 13" MacBook Pro for some indication. The Core i5 in the 13" Pro is nearly as fast as the Core i7 was in the 2010 MacBook Pro.
That said, we will see about a 30-40% drop in GPU performance. Gamers may want to stay away from the next MacBook Air. That said, those who don't game ought to be able to do "intensive things" with the Sandy Bridge CPU. MP3 encoding, photo editing, complex spreadsheets, etc. ought to be nice on the Sandy Bridge MacBook Air.
To me, the decision on whether to upgrade will depend on what else is in the mix. If it comes with Thunderbolt and a backlit keyboard, I may pull the trigger. If it's the same computer but just with the Core 2 Duo/NVIDIA 320m swapped out for the Core i5/Intel HD3000 I might wait it out.
levitynyc
Apr 29, 02:58 PM
Remember when tiered pricing was announced, Steve said more songs would be available for $.69 than $1.29...I have yet to see a $.69 song.
more...
twoodcc
Oct 13, 08:17 PM
To become a relevant team, we need to reach 250k units per day, almost double the current rate. We need 70 more iMacs/MacBooks or 5 8-core systems.
well i doubt that will happen over night. we just gotta try and get better one step at a time
well i doubt that will happen over night. we just gotta try and get better one step at a time
Jswoosh
Apr 22, 04:16 PM
I actually kind of like the design but I'll stick with my iPhone 4 till my plan runs out.
more...
Chip NoVaMac
Apr 13, 10:11 PM
It's a shame it's taken this long to be released, the iPhone looks gorgeous in white.
Glad for those that want the white iPhone; but prefer my cell phone in a darker color. But then this is from someone that really likes his iPad 2 in white! :D
Anyone feel confident buying a white one given the problems they've had getting one made?
I would wait to see what the "reviews" were before buying a white iPhone 4 for sure - but doubt that the issues that delayed it's release will be a real issue...
Glad for those that want the white iPhone; but prefer my cell phone in a darker color. But then this is from someone that really likes his iPad 2 in white! :D
Anyone feel confident buying a white one given the problems they've had getting one made?
I would wait to see what the "reviews" were before buying a white iPhone 4 for sure - but doubt that the issues that delayed it's release will be a real issue...
fatboyslick
May 4, 03:01 AM
Although I think the Rep is probably correct, their source of information is likely to be from forums such as this.
I know product managers at a telecoms company and they themselves do not get light of new products until very close to the release date
I know product managers at a telecoms company and they themselves do not get light of new products until very close to the release date
more...
BigReg
Jul 28, 10:16 AM
APPLE doesn't have much in a choice about keeping patents secret. We (the over-curious consumers) are the ones making all the hype for them.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
asphalt-proof
Apr 13, 06:23 PM
Why won't this rumor die?! Seriously. It makes MUCH more sense to make a set top box that is compatible with any tv, and thus have wider appeal and adoption than to make a TV that has to compete with every other TV manufacturer out there. This is not Apple's game. Their game it to look at a market that is not currently being exploited to its full extent, figure out what people may want, then come in and redefine that niche. Worked with the iPod, iPhone, and iPad. There were predecessor in each of these markets but Apple came in and completely dominated it because they redefined it and tied it into a (relatively) easy to use ecosystem. Ok, it a really easy to use ecosystem, just slow and bloated. :D
more...
willzzz88
Apr 17, 03:55 PM
No issues with any of those updates on AT&T.
Actually the reason for the battery drain is Apple updated the network baseband vocoder to the latest support UMTS/HSPA+ and better cell hand-offs in order to reduce dropped calls to an absolute minimum on GSM and similar on Verizon...
You get a trade off, worse battery life (some of it has to do with the software though, drain the BATTERY ENTIRELY, and recharge it should get to 80%-90% now... ALSO DO A SETTINGS RESET BECAUSE your phone is running on OLD settings PREVIOUS to 4.3.2) but improved performance in everything else or crappy voice calls because your iPhone can't use the latest network capacity enhancements AT&T/*insert GSM carrier here*/Apple has made or Verizon/*insert CDMA carrier here*/Apple has made.
Personally I like PERFECT VOICE QUALITY on GSM/CDMA.
When I'm @ work I charge on the computer/USB port anyways... Or in the car...
Actually the reason for the battery drain is Apple updated the network baseband vocoder to the latest support UMTS/HSPA+ and better cell hand-offs in order to reduce dropped calls to an absolute minimum on GSM and similar on Verizon...
You get a trade off, worse battery life (some of it has to do with the software though, drain the BATTERY ENTIRELY, and recharge it should get to 80%-90% now... ALSO DO A SETTINGS RESET BECAUSE your phone is running on OLD settings PREVIOUS to 4.3.2) but improved performance in everything else or crappy voice calls because your iPhone can't use the latest network capacity enhancements AT&T/*insert GSM carrier here*/Apple has made or Verizon/*insert CDMA carrier here*/Apple has made.
Personally I like PERFECT VOICE QUALITY on GSM/CDMA.
When I'm @ work I charge on the computer/USB port anyways... Or in the car...
damage00
Oct 1, 11:19 AM
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of cell towers is unworkable. You think it is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no coverage at all.
There has to be an entirely new technology for this, or the use of satellites or aircraft instead of silly towers. C'mon Apple, solve this problem.
That's like saying:
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of freeways is unworkable. You think traffic is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no pavement at all.
There has to be an entirely new form of transportation for this, or the use of maglev or star trek transporters instead of silly roads. C'mon Toyota (maker of the Prius), solve this problem.
I'm not picking on you, carlgo. I'm saying, what you suggest is a little like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
Cell works, and has been working since the mid-80's and trillions of calls have been successfully placed. Apple didn't design it so they don't get the credit or the blame -- all they did was bring a new gadget to market. It's not the tech that is bad, it's the implementation that is at fault.
And it's AT&T's implementation that is to blame -- because it is cheap. Take a look at their stock price since the iPhone was introduced. They *want* $100 bucks every month from every customer in the US, but they aren't willing to reinvest enough of that into an infrastructure to support the number of customers they negotiated for.
Corporations tend establish ad campaigns to counter bad press or customer concerns/complaints, not what they do well. For instance, AT&T has the iPhone and no one else does. That's good. You would think they want to tell the world about that. No. It runs television spots for their Samsung/LG/etc. but not the iPhone.
On the other hand, AT&T has lousy coverage. Just look at your bars in SFO or NYC or even most of New Mexico -- doesn't matter where -- that's not a bandwidth issue. It's coverage. That's bad, so they advertise "more bars in more areas". These ads usually play on emotions, like two young lovers being separated, or they borrow on another organizations goodwill, like a company that gives shoes to the poor. They do not use demonstration or facts, because there aren't any. When I see these, I interpret them as the corporation's admission there is a problem.
There has to be an entirely new technology for this, or the use of satellites or aircraft instead of silly towers. C'mon Apple, solve this problem.
That's like saying:
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of freeways is unworkable. You think traffic is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no pavement at all.
There has to be an entirely new form of transportation for this, or the use of maglev or star trek transporters instead of silly roads. C'mon Toyota (maker of the Prius), solve this problem.
I'm not picking on you, carlgo. I'm saying, what you suggest is a little like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
Cell works, and has been working since the mid-80's and trillions of calls have been successfully placed. Apple didn't design it so they don't get the credit or the blame -- all they did was bring a new gadget to market. It's not the tech that is bad, it's the implementation that is at fault.
And it's AT&T's implementation that is to blame -- because it is cheap. Take a look at their stock price since the iPhone was introduced. They *want* $100 bucks every month from every customer in the US, but they aren't willing to reinvest enough of that into an infrastructure to support the number of customers they negotiated for.
Corporations tend establish ad campaigns to counter bad press or customer concerns/complaints, not what they do well. For instance, AT&T has the iPhone and no one else does. That's good. You would think they want to tell the world about that. No. It runs television spots for their Samsung/LG/etc. but not the iPhone.
On the other hand, AT&T has lousy coverage. Just look at your bars in SFO or NYC or even most of New Mexico -- doesn't matter where -- that's not a bandwidth issue. It's coverage. That's bad, so they advertise "more bars in more areas". These ads usually play on emotions, like two young lovers being separated, or they borrow on another organizations goodwill, like a company that gives shoes to the poor. They do not use demonstration or facts, because there aren't any. When I see these, I interpret them as the corporation's admission there is a problem.
more...
FX4568
Apr 19, 04:27 PM
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Well, I shall say first of all, welcome to the MacRumors forum :) I believe CPU is important to the computer as the GPU is. As current computers are, CPU have set a milestone where most users are not even able to use 100% of the capabilities hidden in such a powerful processor.
Now, you were complaining I used 100/100 in the CPU analogy? fine, I will change it. CPU will be 90/100 and GPU is 80/100 as the 30% increase in cpu and 30% decrease in gpu, we will see a difference of 117/100 and 56/100. Am I arguing that there will be nothing to be gained from a bump in processor speed? Definitely not! Who doesnt love the little extra power when we need it? Who doesnt want the latest in tech? What im saying is that the downgrading of the GPU outweights the upgrading of the CPU in terms of OVERALL performance.
Futhermore HT and Turbo dont work 100% of the times.
For you and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump will be indeed welcomed. But as of me and the I believe majority of MBA owners and will be owners, the difference of processor speed is negligible to a certain extent, but the performance lack of GPU will be noticed the moment we start using the Macbook Air.
+1, besides, the 13" MBP + 128GB SSD provide far better value-for-money than any present 13" MBA.
The cheaper solution, the 11", tells another story but even then anything past the base model comes so close to the price of a 13" MBP+SSD that it's impractical to get a 11" from a performance point of view, especially when it's equipped with the slow 1.4 C2D. The 1.4 i5 will provide far better performance (certainly far more than 40% of speed boost). We will still be able to watch FullHD movies despite the less capable IGP. Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
FX4568 said "We have enough to accomplish our tasks, and any more would be an overkill in the things we need our computer to process.". Overkill means the increased processor speed will not be of any use, or, in other words, useless.
You are comparing a cheaper price point by bringing a 128 SSD into the game. You must understand that even though many people have to choose between the 13 MBA and 13 MBP, both of them are made for a different purpose. You can play WoW on a 11" monitor. Why do you chain your MBA to tasks that you only think it will be able to accomplish.
Okay, sorry about my lack of further explanation, but I dont want this to sound personal, but what you are doing is taking my statement to a whole different level. I would like to infer that your intelligence would be above the mark where I dont have to expand on every single statement that I say. When I say that the C2D is enough to accomplish tasks, I am saying that it is good enough for the higher than average person. Handbrakers of course will face a time difference on the processor speed, but as many of us know, not everyone uses Handbrake, and if we do, it is not something we do daily. Processor speed is always welcome, but at the sacrifice of GPU from 320m to the Intel GPU is the difference between the ability to play Crysis on 19.3 FPS at Medium settings and not be able to playing it at all while the performance increase in CPU is the difference between 10-30 minutes in Handbrake.
Vizin
Apr 25, 11:33 PM
Same thing apple always does function not features.
LTE is a pretty fantastic function. Using 4G on my friend's Thunderbolt feels the same as using WiFi. The battery life is unacceptable though.
If Apple can't get LTE working in time for the iPhone 5 (not really in their hands), I seriously hope to see HSPA+ as a stop-gap.
LTE is a pretty fantastic function. Using 4G on my friend's Thunderbolt feels the same as using WiFi. The battery life is unacceptable though.
If Apple can't get LTE working in time for the iPhone 5 (not really in their hands), I seriously hope to see HSPA+ as a stop-gap.
more...
Macsterguy
Apr 25, 12:42 PM
I have been thinking same, new iMac and the iPad 2.
Remote access with iPad to a Mac works fantastic with a number of programs / utilities... Just Do it :)
Remote access with iPad to a Mac works fantastic with a number of programs / utilities... Just Do it :)
inkswamp
Jul 21, 12:26 PM
Neither did I, but more market share means more software developers and more apps. That's the only reason I care.
I suppose there's some truth to that, but even when Apple was hitting its lowest points in terms of market share, there was no dearth of good apps. You may not be able to get some more esoteric stuff but that's not going to affect most people.
I suppose there's some truth to that, but even when Apple was hitting its lowest points in terms of market share, there was no dearth of good apps. You may not be able to get some more esoteric stuff but that's not going to affect most people.
iphone3gs16gb
May 1, 10:34 PM
I thank our special forces for killing and capturing that arab scumbag.
The U.S. carried out its promise :)
Now I wonder who is next?
The President is addressing the American people!
The U.S. carried out its promise :)
Now I wonder who is next?
The President is addressing the American people!
mjuarez
Apr 12, 09:27 AM
Agreed, put it on the second page. This "might/might not" constant chatter is not helpful.
arn
Apr 11, 01:39 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway? In a typical USB 2.0 external hard drive, what is the bottleneck in speed: The speed at which the hard drive spins, or the USB 2.0 connection? If it's the USB, then why do people even care about the RPM of a drive? If it's the RPM, then isn't USB 2.0 fast enough to run a hard drive at its native speed?
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2173844,00.asp
The bottleneck is (or can be) USB 2.0. Most people who worry about RPM aren't buying hard drives to be placed in external USB drives. Internal drives run on the faster SATA interface. Also, RAID enclosures makes the difference even greater, as you can access data faster.
arn
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,2845,2173844,00.asp
The bottleneck is (or can be) USB 2.0. Most people who worry about RPM aren't buying hard drives to be placed in external USB drives. Internal drives run on the faster SATA interface. Also, RAID enclosures makes the difference even greater, as you can access data faster.
arn
hayesk
Mar 31, 08:40 PM
That's terrible. I use a computer because I don't want to use paper. And I don't want to see paper on my computer screen. Bone-heads. Need to get rid of these old paper-centric fogies at Apple.
Really? I use the a computer because it is easier to enter, store, and edit information. Not because I don't want it to look like paper. The less "high-tech" a computer looks, the better, in my opinion. It makes it more friendly and approachable.
I'd like to see some testing done on whether these "like the real thing" UIs help. This leads to every window looking different, and while that may sound awful, it might be easier to see the window you want out of a see of windows. It also leads to the app being more approachable.
As for the distraction argument, full screen mode is supposed to eliminate that, so if iCal is in the background, you'll never see it. There's also the Hide function in every app.
Really? I use the a computer because it is easier to enter, store, and edit information. Not because I don't want it to look like paper. The less "high-tech" a computer looks, the better, in my opinion. It makes it more friendly and approachable.
I'd like to see some testing done on whether these "like the real thing" UIs help. This leads to every window looking different, and while that may sound awful, it might be easier to see the window you want out of a see of windows. It also leads to the app being more approachable.
As for the distraction argument, full screen mode is supposed to eliminate that, so if iCal is in the background, you'll never see it. There's also the Hide function in every app.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 11, 06:20 PM
Is "TB" going to be the abbreviation for thunderbolt?
It will be cumbersome when speaking of drives. "I bought a 2TB TB drive".
It will be cumbersome when speaking of drives. "I bought a 2TB TB drive".
rmwebs
May 4, 04:45 PM
iOS 5 at WWDC and new iPhone hardware at an apple special event in September. You heard it here first.
Shocking as this may sound, WWDC was not designed as a stage to release iPhone updates. WWDC is a DEVELOPER conference...not a release party.
If anything it should be Mac centric as without the Mac the iPhone wouldn't exist.
Developers, Developers, Developers!
Shocking as this may sound, WWDC was not designed as a stage to release iPhone updates. WWDC is a DEVELOPER conference...not a release party.
If anything it should be Mac centric as without the Mac the iPhone wouldn't exist.
Developers, Developers, Developers!