maclaptop
Apr 21, 11:30 PM
Record-breaking quarters and the position as the trend-setter in consumer tech.
These legal skirmishes haven't and won't result in any major untoward changes to Apple products. We all know this already.
Agreed.
That and Apples incredible profit is what makes them look so paranoid, petty, and stupid.
Instead of acting like the world class company they could be, Apple comes across as fools.
I must admit, I'm much happier being seen with my Galaxy S.
When one is seen in this town (New York) with an iPhone they look at you like "oh, you're one of those snobs".
Yet the irony is they're a dime a dozen here.
These legal skirmishes haven't and won't result in any major untoward changes to Apple products. We all know this already.
Agreed.
That and Apples incredible profit is what makes them look so paranoid, petty, and stupid.
Instead of acting like the world class company they could be, Apple comes across as fools.
I must admit, I'm much happier being seen with my Galaxy S.
When one is seen in this town (New York) with an iPhone they look at you like "oh, you're one of those snobs".
Yet the irony is they're a dime a dozen here.
nagromme
Aug 15, 12:53 PM
I believe icerabbit was referring to a feature to restore an item to its original location once putting it in the trash. Windows has this feature in the recycle bin and it's a handy little feature.
This isn't to do with Time Machine as the user has not yet deleted the item from the Trash and the system.
If so, that's a feature Macs had up until OS 9 (it was called Put Away) and it was nice--I'd be glad to have it back. Undo usually meets this need for me, but not always. (I think Put Away also worked for files you dragged onto the desktop.)
This isn't to do with Time Machine as the user has not yet deleted the item from the Trash and the system.
If so, that's a feature Macs had up until OS 9 (it was called Put Away) and it was nice--I'd be glad to have it back. Undo usually meets this need for me, but not always. (I think Put Away also worked for files you dragged onto the desktop.)
pcharles
Apr 15, 03:26 PM
Snow Lion? :rolleyes:
Everyone knows it will be Garfield!
Everyone knows it will be Garfield!
Unshra
Mar 31, 02:34 PM
Count me in among the "I don't like the leather look" camp. :(
Ditto, looks like they skinned the lion and wrapped the skin around iCal.
Ditto, looks like they skinned the lion and wrapped the skin around iCal.
Jazwire
May 1, 10:32 PM
How long till pics are leaked?
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 12:07 PM
4. Per Bash, i never said it wasnt part of GPL/GNU - it is - I agree.
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
Look, I'll just ignore you. Your knowledge of all of this is lacking and now you're backtracking. To answer that specific point. Yes, you did say Bash wasn't part of the GNU licensing, quite clearly showing you have no understanding of the situation :
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU
Doctor Q
Apr 28, 04:07 PM
Is this good for case manufacturers (more product varieties to sell, more shelf space allotted, more chance to sell a new case to a user who changes models) or a headache (less economy of scale, more customer confusion)?
ScottishDuck
Apr 15, 04:10 PM
OSX was built on UNIX. Just like Android is built in Linux.
I did make an off the cuff statement about ChromeOS. But my reasoning was that OSX is a little bit more than ChromeOS, so rolling it out and making it available is a little different.
OSX was not built on UNIX, it is Mach/XNU with a BSD subsystem, it is UNIX-like, much like linux.
OSX and Chrome OS are on par, both are heavily modified versions of an open-source operating system, with extensive APIs to make them more user friendly.
I did make an off the cuff statement about ChromeOS. But my reasoning was that OSX is a little bit more than ChromeOS, so rolling it out and making it available is a little different.
OSX was not built on UNIX, it is Mach/XNU with a BSD subsystem, it is UNIX-like, much like linux.
OSX and Chrome OS are on par, both are heavily modified versions of an open-source operating system, with extensive APIs to make them more user friendly.
Mystikal
Mar 16, 12:39 AM
Hi Avinash...I was there today at Brea and they handed out approximately 12-15 tickets. While I do not know numbers, the AT&T models were in less quantity than the Verizon and Wifi.
Seeing as I did not get the version I wanted, I will also be joining you at Brea around 6:00AM! 32GB Black Wifi here I come!!!!! :D
6 am is a good time. Good luck to you all!
Seeing as I did not get the version I wanted, I will also be joining you at Brea around 6:00AM! 32GB Black Wifi here I come!!!!! :D
6 am is a good time. Good luck to you all!
Chupa Chupa
Apr 12, 09:05 AM
Bolding mine... As a point of contention. Especially since iDevices don't even saturate the USB bus. I doubt Apple will spend more money to use faster Flash storage. Especially when (as of right now) Windows PCs don't have ThunderBolt.
Theoretically, but those of us that remember the iPod FW days know reality from benchmarks.
TB will only start to get popular when its released on Windows.
True, which is why Apple has a 1 year head start. Manufacturers will be jumping to get onto the Apple early adopter bandwagon b/c the profit margins will be fat. It will then spill over to the PC world.
When is that going to happen? I am not against Thunderbolt; not at all. I would love to have that kind of features in my iMac and a new Macbook Air if possible.
But when are we going to see those devices which take full advantage of Thunderbolt/LightPeak ports.
For eg,
- would it be possible to backup and sync full 64GB full iPad in 20s?
At the moment, NO.
- would it be possible to backup a whole TB of harddrive on an iMac in < 15 min?
At the moment, NO.
The question is:
For a consumer/pro-sumer, is Thunderbolt redundant for now? Will it take another generation of macbook pro's to generate pro-consumer Tunderbolt supported products?
Thanks for answering.
TB isn't redundant right now, it's dormant. The TB port on the MBPs right now is effectively useless until there are peripherals to connect to it. But as this thread demonstrates they are coming. First to the pro market but it will drip down during the course of the year. I think Mac OS X 10.7 and iOS5 are going to provide more urgency for TB in consumer markets as well. WWDC will be the big kick off.
Theoretically, but those of us that remember the iPod FW days know reality from benchmarks.
TB will only start to get popular when its released on Windows.
True, which is why Apple has a 1 year head start. Manufacturers will be jumping to get onto the Apple early adopter bandwagon b/c the profit margins will be fat. It will then spill over to the PC world.
When is that going to happen? I am not against Thunderbolt; not at all. I would love to have that kind of features in my iMac and a new Macbook Air if possible.
But when are we going to see those devices which take full advantage of Thunderbolt/LightPeak ports.
For eg,
- would it be possible to backup and sync full 64GB full iPad in 20s?
At the moment, NO.
- would it be possible to backup a whole TB of harddrive on an iMac in < 15 min?
At the moment, NO.
The question is:
For a consumer/pro-sumer, is Thunderbolt redundant for now? Will it take another generation of macbook pro's to generate pro-consumer Tunderbolt supported products?
Thanks for answering.
TB isn't redundant right now, it's dormant. The TB port on the MBPs right now is effectively useless until there are peripherals to connect to it. But as this thread demonstrates they are coming. First to the pro market but it will drip down during the course of the year. I think Mac OS X 10.7 and iOS5 are going to provide more urgency for TB in consumer markets as well. WWDC will be the big kick off.
lbro
Apr 22, 06:18 PM
Who thumbed down every post on this page?
Except one from aggie...
Except one from aggie...
NinjaHERO
Mar 31, 10:43 AM
Not a fan of the look. But the current Ical is lacking in functions I would like to have. So if the new look comes with new options and features, I'll happily deal with it.
tctony
Apr 22, 04:59 PM
That looks hideous.
network23
Jul 11, 03:55 PM
Steve Jobs knew about this in January... this says a lot about his vision. I'm confident that he is already well-prepared for this and has something up his sleeve to counter it.
There will NOT be a sudden exodus to Argo from iPod. If it ever happens, it will be gradual and easy to fix.
I would agree, but then I think about how Microsoft was late to the party regarding the internet and their release of IE. The exodus from Netscape to IE was virtually overnight.
There will NOT be a sudden exodus to Argo from iPod. If it ever happens, it will be gradual and easy to fix.
I would agree, but then I think about how Microsoft was late to the party regarding the internet and their release of IE. The exodus from Netscape to IE was virtually overnight.
southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.
People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.
So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?
Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.
Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.
Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss
The fact is, we've been through this before. The iPhone 1 was going to be a huge failure because it didn't have 3G. They were concerned about coverage and battery life. It's the same issue now.
People are saying apple should make those sacrifices now to keep up with technology. But nobody is addressing the fact that apple has historical evidence that this is a sound approach.
So many people just love to see every issue from the Apple perspective. There are people who get paid for that. Should not you - as a consumer - care more about the gadget you want than Apple success?
Using two separate chips eats battery life. Not to mention LTE is still "just" coming out, so it won't be widespread enough to take advantage of it until 2012 anyway.
Apple does not have to use two chips. They could just design separate phone for Verizon (just like iPhone 4) which does not support GSM. Not ideal but that's where technology is today. At least Verizon customers could enjoy iPhone 5 with LTE.
Im a shareholder. Similar to many others here that you mindlessly dismiss
ed724
Jun 6, 06:24 PM
There should be a setting something like:
- Never ask for password for purchases of $X and under.
- Always ask for password for purchases of $Y and over.
The first one would be nice so it I could set it to free and easily update my apps.
The second would help prevent cases like the OP.
Yea, Great !!! Lets make everything more complicated because there are idiots out there. WTF !!!
- Never ask for password for purchases of $X and under.
- Always ask for password for purchases of $Y and over.
The first one would be nice so it I could set it to free and easily update my apps.
The second would help prevent cases like the OP.
Yea, Great !!! Lets make everything more complicated because there are idiots out there. WTF !!!
erlendscott
Jul 10, 12:46 PM
I'm still on iWork 05, couldn't really see the need to update it every year so I'm waiting until iWork 07.
I agree that there is loads of potential in Pages, and found it very usable once I got used to it. I would also like to see a standard 'word processing mode' as using the templates as the main focus of the application doesn't work awfully well for regular word processing.
I also prefer the sidebar palette in Word as you can easily drop down multiple sections rather than having to have open 2 or more inspector panes.
These would be welcome additions and would definitely make me more likely to upgrade in the new year.
I agree that there is loads of potential in Pages, and found it very usable once I got used to it. I would also like to see a standard 'word processing mode' as using the templates as the main focus of the application doesn't work awfully well for regular word processing.
I also prefer the sidebar palette in Word as you can easily drop down multiple sections rather than having to have open 2 or more inspector panes.
These would be welcome additions and would definitely make me more likely to upgrade in the new year.
simX
Oct 18, 07:51 PM
Why, my friend, do you think that a "cash cow" has to be the thing that gains the most revenue/profit? Not sure what dictionary you're using; please let me know.
Why, my friend, by "the iPod is Apple's cash cow", you imply that there is only one cash cow. But if you want to use the traditional definition (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=cash+cow) of "cash cow", "a project that generates a continuous flow of money," then the Mac would be more of a cash cow than the iPod, because it has always represented a larger proportion of Apple's profits and revenues. Not once has the iPod represented more of Apple's revenues. So the Mac generates a larger continuous flow of money.
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
Why, my friend, by "the iPod is Apple's cash cow", you imply that there is only one cash cow. But if you want to use the traditional definition (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=cash+cow) of "cash cow", "a project that generates a continuous flow of money," then the Mac would be more of a cash cow than the iPod, because it has always represented a larger proportion of Apple's profits and revenues. Not once has the iPod represented more of Apple's revenues. So the Mac generates a larger continuous flow of money.
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
randomrazr
Apr 14, 09:44 AM
if someone actaulyl waited all this time for whtie iphone 4 than u really got problems XD
wmk461
Jan 30, 05:27 PM
*Twilight Zone music playing...*
Let me correct myself... I didn't mean to say occupy, I meant that we have troops in US bases in over 200 countries.
Let me correct myself... I didn't mean to say occupy, I meant that we have troops in US bases in over 200 countries.
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 02:03 PM
That's typical Apple. Intel chipset does not support USB 3.0? No USB 3.0 for Apple fans!
It's not built into the current Intel platform standards. That doesn't mean it doesn't support it. Most of Intel's reference boards even include it.
NVIDIA GPUs do not work with SandyBridge? Stick with outdated C2D CPUs for years.
Nvidia GPUs work fine with the Sandy Bridge platform. The problem was that they were not licensed to make chipsets for intel processors past the Montevina platform.
What's more important - CPU/chip or case? In case of Apple, the case always wins. Apple is all about image. Once designed, the case should stay unchanged for many years. Apple will wait until somebody designs a "suitable" chip. Is not it kind of backward?
Apple is using the same CPUs as everyone else, for which their enclosures are extremely competitive in terms of dimensions.
Then we hear excuses from Apple fans why Apple could not use separate USB 3.0 controller. This would require redesign of the motherboard - Wow! Think of it - redesigning a motherboard! Some companies redesign tens of motherboards every year but Apple? No way. Now iPhone users will be stuck with outdated technology for a year or two and they will be feeding us all kinds of excuses why LTE can not be used in iPhone. Just ridiculous.
There's no question that two radio chips would have caused the tiny logic board inside the iPhone 4 to grow. That means the battery gets smaller or they make some other sort of sacrifice which potentially changes the housing. Too much work to release the same iPhone on a different network, especially since apple wouldn't want to sacrifice battery life.
Since apple has to design to the greatest common denominator, I doubt they'd increase the size of the phone given the number of outspoken size critics on this forum.
It's not built into the current Intel platform standards. That doesn't mean it doesn't support it. Most of Intel's reference boards even include it.
NVIDIA GPUs do not work with SandyBridge? Stick with outdated C2D CPUs for years.
Nvidia GPUs work fine with the Sandy Bridge platform. The problem was that they were not licensed to make chipsets for intel processors past the Montevina platform.
What's more important - CPU/chip or case? In case of Apple, the case always wins. Apple is all about image. Once designed, the case should stay unchanged for many years. Apple will wait until somebody designs a "suitable" chip. Is not it kind of backward?
Apple is using the same CPUs as everyone else, for which their enclosures are extremely competitive in terms of dimensions.
Then we hear excuses from Apple fans why Apple could not use separate USB 3.0 controller. This would require redesign of the motherboard - Wow! Think of it - redesigning a motherboard! Some companies redesign tens of motherboards every year but Apple? No way. Now iPhone users will be stuck with outdated technology for a year or two and they will be feeding us all kinds of excuses why LTE can not be used in iPhone. Just ridiculous.
There's no question that two radio chips would have caused the tiny logic board inside the iPhone 4 to grow. That means the battery gets smaller or they make some other sort of sacrifice which potentially changes the housing. Too much work to release the same iPhone on a different network, especially since apple wouldn't want to sacrifice battery life.
Since apple has to design to the greatest common denominator, I doubt they'd increase the size of the phone given the number of outspoken size critics on this forum.
Xavier
Oct 23, 11:45 AM
What is this thing?
Its a bicycle roller, used like this:
http://citybicycleworks.com/images/library/site/calender_mar9_rollers_m.jpg
for training
Its a bicycle roller, used like this:
http://citybicycleworks.com/images/library/site/calender_mar9_rollers_m.jpg
for training
arkitect
Mar 31, 10:29 AM
I am not too keen on this "cartoony" 3D effect Apple seem to be going for.
Torn off pages… faux-leather binding… I mean doesn't anyone else think it is a bit corny?
It really does seems as if the cutesyeness of the iOS is spreading over to OSX.
I'd prefer a clean modern OS with usability first and foremost.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy…
Torn off pages… faux-leather binding… I mean doesn't anyone else think it is a bit corny?
It really does seems as if the cutesyeness of the iOS is spreading over to OSX.
I'd prefer a clean modern OS with usability first and foremost.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy…
Sodner
Apr 12, 09:22 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Pretty much agree with everything you said though I do HOPE for a increased screen size on the 5.