puma1552
Apr 20, 01:00 AM
How many people think this is some elaborate scheme to get people to think it will come out in the fall, when they might be setting people up for a surprise with the release of iphone 4 -white as the new ip5?
My guess is they are intentionally delaying the IP5 just so they can go "Oh look we delivered the white IP4 as we promised!" without drawing the criticism of releasing it right before the model gets dumped for the new one.
My guess is they are intentionally delaying the IP5 just so they can go "Oh look we delivered the white IP4 as we promised!" without drawing the criticism of releasing it right before the model gets dumped for the new one.
fswmacguy
Apr 25, 06:12 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
The size of screen is irrelevant. It's resolution that matters here.
512x512 icons expanded on an ultra high resolution will come out horribly blocky and pixelated since the pixels of the image are no longer 1:1.
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
The size of screen is irrelevant. It's resolution that matters here.
512x512 icons expanded on an ultra high resolution will come out horribly blocky and pixelated since the pixels of the image are no longer 1:1.
toddybody
Apr 5, 02:28 PM
Nothing wrong with a Scion there, buddy. ;)
HA ha! Guess what my first new car was (when i turned 17)...an 05' Scion TC.
The thing was underpowered, not great fuel econ, a fuel injection sensor went bad at 30k miles, the window motors got really slow quickly, the dash looked like Kabul after a while, and of course as soon as i bought one...so did everyone else. It was a happy happy day when I got a used SAAB:) Sorry for the rant...SCIONS are just crappy cars...but i guess you get what you pay for :p
HA ha! Guess what my first new car was (when i turned 17)...an 05' Scion TC.
The thing was underpowered, not great fuel econ, a fuel injection sensor went bad at 30k miles, the window motors got really slow quickly, the dash looked like Kabul after a while, and of course as soon as i bought one...so did everyone else. It was a happy happy day when I got a used SAAB:) Sorry for the rant...SCIONS are just crappy cars...but i guess you get what you pay for :p
snberk103
May 3, 10:52 PM
Lord, lol! :D
Feel sorry for you, bud. XD
One more Canadianism.... The Globe and Mail today was reporting on the Bin Laden raid. Apparently his balcony had a wall 2.2 metres high, just enough to conceal a man 6 ft 4 inch. You can't make this stuff up. Most Canadians just make the conversion and move on.:D
Feel sorry for you, bud. XD
One more Canadianism.... The Globe and Mail today was reporting on the Bin Laden raid. Apparently his balcony had a wall 2.2 metres high, just enough to conceal a man 6 ft 4 inch. You can't make this stuff up. Most Canadians just make the conversion and move on.:D
dom91932
May 8, 05:36 PM
This has never happened
I meant it might happen, it's just a thought.
I meant it might happen, it's just a thought.
jcgarza
Mar 29, 12:48 PM
Am I the only one who thinks that the fact that you can't use this service on iOS has more to do with Apple than it does with Amazon? (Remember lala.com?)
res1233
May 6, 05:37 AM
WOW.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First off, why do you care where you get your apps from? Second, I highly doubt Apple is going to make Mac OS as closed as iOS. It just makes no sense. They would have to redesign too much of the OS to make it that closed, and they'd have to take away so many features that it wouldn't be the same OS anymore. I doubt Apple is stupid enough to do that. It's true that Apple wants to have as much control over the entire process as they can get, but I firmly believe that there are limits to it. They wont sabotage their own OS because I don't think i've ever met anyone clueless enough to think that that would be a good idea.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First off, why do you care where you get your apps from? Second, I highly doubt Apple is going to make Mac OS as closed as iOS. It just makes no sense. They would have to redesign too much of the OS to make it that closed, and they'd have to take away so many features that it wouldn't be the same OS anymore. I doubt Apple is stupid enough to do that. It's true that Apple wants to have as much control over the entire process as they can get, but I firmly believe that there are limits to it. They wont sabotage their own OS because I don't think i've ever met anyone clueless enough to think that that would be a good idea.
kwikdeth
May 7, 10:32 AM
I've heard similar rumors about MobileMe going free. Makes sense if Apple could leverage the new iAd system to generate targeted campaigns, and effectively subsidise the cost of opening the system up to more users.
It would also pave the way for multiple cloud-based user accounts for the iPad.
Nail on the head right there. From a business standpoint that makes tremendous sense. Apple would likely pull in much more revenue from advertisers placing content on a regular basis than they would from a limited subscription base. Make the service free, more people use it, apple brings in more $ from iAd services.
It would also pave the way for multiple cloud-based user accounts for the iPad.
Nail on the head right there. From a business standpoint that makes tremendous sense. Apple would likely pull in much more revenue from advertisers placing content on a regular basis than they would from a limited subscription base. Make the service free, more people use it, apple brings in more $ from iAd services.
Avicdar
Jul 29, 09:11 PM
I can see the crafty photoshop composites now...a keypad from this funky german gadget, a display from an old star trek episode, a set of floating M&Ms stylized as hot buttons...
there we go!
there we go!
heisetax
Aug 4, 09:09 AM
Isn't that what Rosetta is for :p :D
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
Hardly Apple's fault. Apple has managed to transition all it's apps - Adobe is certainly dragging their collective feet.
Maybe you should blame AMD. They outdid Intel by increasing their % of the market. This put pressure on Intel to release their Core duo, Core 2 duo & Xeon 5100 6 months to a year or so early. This made Apple bring out their new Intel Macs much earlier than expected.
Because of the amount of work involved & the original Intel/Apple schedule, Adobe made the plan to skip the UB for CS2 & just make it part of CS3. This was to be on the same timetable as the original Intel Mac changes. They weere just too far into their schedule to make such large changes for a 6 month - year time.
MicroSoft just has a lot of problems doing upgrades. Virtual PC 7 was 6-9 months late. They quietly admitted that the programming was much harder than they thought it would be. That reason adds to the problem that the new version of MS Office also is changing to an XML file format for all of their programs. This means twice the trouble for MS. MS Office for Windows is usually a year ahead of the Mac MS Office upgrades. That means that if MS brings out their new Mac MS Office program in 2007 they will be the same year as MS Office for Windows. This actually means that the Mac MS Office program would be coming out a year ahead of schedule, not a year behind the schedule that many Intel Mac people believe shuld be the case. Also MS in my opinion has said that they will have 2 veersion of Office for the Mac, one PPC only & the other Intel Mac only. It just seems like they have said that they will have no UB for MS Office. This double programming may takke loner. It also will probably mean that the PPC Mac will not have as good of product upgrading/changes.
In another year the most of the software will be ready for the Intel Mac. By that time we may be seeing the 3rd group of Intel Macs, 4 or 5 if they keep up with the Intel/AMD Windows world.
Bill the TaxMan
amateurmacfreak
Jul 22, 02:04 PM
I would really like to see Apple have a laptop cheaper than $1,100, and I think there would be a definite market for the, especially for teenagers looking into getting a Mac. I know that's unlikely, but...
Anyways I hope that the MBPs get the processor update (and a new enclosure) very soon and I really hope the MBs and Mac Minis follow soon after.
I don't get any reason for Apple not too, and I think with Intel it would be possible for Apple to get some cheaper computers out there. It would be nice, but seems unlikely.... *sighs*
Anyways I hope that the MBPs get the processor update (and a new enclosure) very soon and I really hope the MBs and Mac Minis follow soon after.
I don't get any reason for Apple not too, and I think with Intel it would be possible for Apple to get some cheaper computers out there. It would be nice, but seems unlikely.... *sighs*
doctor-don
May 7, 11:02 PM
What are the uses for this MobileMe? Why would I use / need it?
I have used Macs since they came into existence, and I have owned several of them the past 20 years. But I have not used either dotMac or MobileMe.
Only serious replies, please.
I have used Macs since they came into existence, and I have owned several of them the past 20 years. But I have not used either dotMac or MobileMe.
Only serious replies, please.
solaris7
Apr 23, 04:19 PM
My eyes! My EYES!!!
chaosbringer
Apr 29, 11:26 AM
They already provide fewer USB ports than the ICH10 actually provides (12 on the chip, but Apple only provides access to 5), so it's certainly possible this sort of thinking could be applied elsewhere.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
Isn't Apple using usb connections for other hardware?
Bluetooth come to mind, the physical connection may not me nothing like a usb port or header but a usb connection may still provide the means to connect the Bluetooth mini board...
On the PSU subject, since Transporteur confirms that there are no vents from the HDDs going into the PSU Area, the only thing that could justify movin the PSU to the bottom area of the case would be.. having the power cable closer to the ground :D lol
On the top location, it does serve to balance the existence of the 2 ODD, allowing that separate airflow area.
I also wonder what else they would consider denying access to in the X79 (i.e. RAID functionality in particular).
Isn't Apple using usb connections for other hardware?
Bluetooth come to mind, the physical connection may not me nothing like a usb port or header but a usb connection may still provide the means to connect the Bluetooth mini board...
On the PSU subject, since Transporteur confirms that there are no vents from the HDDs going into the PSU Area, the only thing that could justify movin the PSU to the bottom area of the case would be.. having the power cable closer to the ground :D lol
On the top location, it does serve to balance the existence of the 2 ODD, allowing that separate airflow area.
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:48 PM
At least on iPhone you can apply the updates on the day they come out (well, JB versions have to wait a couple of days) ... compare this to Android and WinMobile7 where you are at the mercy of the carrier to 'enrich' the update with their 'features' which might take many weeks or month - if it ever comes.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
You seriously see this as a feature? Apple only is able to do this by signing agreements with a carrier, and being on a 1-product line. Why do you think you get that release so quickly on your AT&T iPhone? Because they don't offer a T-Mobile iPhone, nor does T-Mobile or anyone else support it (until Verizon agreed to Apple's terms)... An android device is available on any carrier, and in this country we have multiple technologies (CDMA, IDEN, GSM 1700, GSM 2100, LTE, WiMax, etc etc)... if you're comparing the iPhone which has been offered on ONE network with ONE technology (which isn't even the latest as of 2010), that's a bad comparison. Furthermore, it's not difficult to release an all-device software update when "all devices" consist of ONE device.
If you're going to make a comparison, at least make it legit.
whiteblooder
Mar 30, 01:07 AM
to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.Why produce something for more money and less efficiently when it can be done better and cheaper elsewhere? This however are drastically improving though, not sure if we (Americans) could produce all of these things with taxes, restrictions, trade barriers etc.
matthewHUB
Nov 26, 04:24 PM
Too many buttons - if there were any more I'd think it was a Microsoft product. :D ;)
lol my point exactly... and look at the status lights! What a joke. Was this mock-up meant to be a joke, or was it actually serious? Kind of lacking in the apple-ness department (OSX aside)
Anyway... thank god at least for a new rumour. Was getting annoyed abotu having to read the 'thanksgiving sale confimed' BS.
give me an ultraportable... interface is up to steve.
lol my point exactly... and look at the status lights! What a joke. Was this mock-up meant to be a joke, or was it actually serious? Kind of lacking in the apple-ness department (OSX aside)
Anyway... thank god at least for a new rumour. Was getting annoyed abotu having to read the 'thanksgiving sale confimed' BS.
give me an ultraportable... interface is up to steve.
twoodcc
Aug 11, 09:53 AM
Would I be able to drop a Conroe processor in my Core Duo iMac?
whoops, i thought you meant Merom
whoops, i thought you meant Merom
iGary
Aug 7, 02:00 PM
Anyone drop one of these in their cart and press order yet?
ChipWinter
Sep 11, 12:03 AM
So ... would a Beatles announcement be the cause for a London feed? Or would that be too big of a thing for this one event?
dosers
Aug 4, 02:48 PM
Unless I am wrong and haven't looked lately ;-) though, there are NO 64-bit branches for the Intel developer tools. In other words, if you look at branching, you have 32-bit PPC, 64-bit PPC and Intel. A 64-bit app for PPC is not equal to a 64-bit app on Intel, and it certainly seems XCODE at this point (in it's publicly released version anyway) does not include 64-bit for Intel.
Obviously that is changing, obviously Apple is working on it internally, but really, I don't see any widespread adoption of 64-bit anytime soon. No good reason - for trivial tasks, running in larger OP Code registers will take more time, not less than 32-bit.
A good 64-bit/32-bit hybrid system (i.e.. no emulation either way) is a great solution, and allows to have apps that truly are 64-bit IF they can take advantage of the additional flat memory addressing (which, as cool as 64-bit sound, is still by far the most practical advantage over 32-bit)....
my 2 cents
dan
sure we do. Developer Tools for example. also there are more 64 bit 3rd party apps out there, that I dont feel like looking up right now.
however, your right, consumer apps are primarily 32 bit, and os x apps like ical, mail etc, wont go 64 bit until leopard.
Obviously that is changing, obviously Apple is working on it internally, but really, I don't see any widespread adoption of 64-bit anytime soon. No good reason - for trivial tasks, running in larger OP Code registers will take more time, not less than 32-bit.
A good 64-bit/32-bit hybrid system (i.e.. no emulation either way) is a great solution, and allows to have apps that truly are 64-bit IF they can take advantage of the additional flat memory addressing (which, as cool as 64-bit sound, is still by far the most practical advantage over 32-bit)....
my 2 cents
dan
sure we do. Developer Tools for example. also there are more 64 bit 3rd party apps out there, that I dont feel like looking up right now.
however, your right, consumer apps are primarily 32 bit, and os x apps like ical, mail etc, wont go 64 bit until leopard.
Abstract
Apr 10, 08:02 PM
Wow. There are still people who think the answer is 2? I'll check back later, but please remember that not everyone is good at maths. Let it be. :p
Al Coholic
Apr 7, 12:48 PM
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is.And I see people are still taking the word monopoly used here too literally.
Yeah, we know what a real monopoly is. Thanks.
And here in the U.S. It generally starts with a company getting too much of the market and stifling out the competition. That's why there's the FTC.
Yeah, we know what a real monopoly is. Thanks.
And here in the U.S. It generally starts with a company getting too much of the market and stifling out the competition. That's why there's the FTC.
balamw
Apr 11, 01:06 AM
Surely we should not interpret everything following the first division symbol as belonging in the denominator, including an additional fraction.
You've just stumbled on a new notation for continued fractions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continued_fraction). Oh wait, we already have better ways of representing that.
:p
The only way it would be 288 is if it was written:
48/[2(9+3)]
Where do the square brackets fall in your interpretation of PE(MD)(AS) + left to right? And how in the name of all that is holy can you interpret that as giving 288 instead of 2. Wouldn't 288 require [2(9+3)] to evaluate to (1/6) so the final answer would be 48*6 = 228. I would have expected [48/2](9+3).
B
You've just stumbled on a new notation for continued fractions (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continued_fraction). Oh wait, we already have better ways of representing that.
:p
The only way it would be 288 is if it was written:
48/[2(9+3)]
Where do the square brackets fall in your interpretation of PE(MD)(AS) + left to right? And how in the name of all that is holy can you interpret that as giving 288 instead of 2. Wouldn't 288 require [2(9+3)] to evaluate to (1/6) so the final answer would be 48*6 = 228. I would have expected [48/2](9+3).
B
