Blorzoga
May 4, 05:21 AM
pfft, this should not be front page news, hell not even second page... just a bunch of hearsay from a CR that knows nothing about it and speculates BS.
Yeah, customer service reps are always soooo reliable.
Yeah, customer service reps are always soooo reliable.
Mac Fly (film)
Aug 15, 05:03 PM
I like to see little changes in the details... I can't wait to see what else develops over the coming months.
Nearly 8 months till spring?
Nearly 8 months till spring?
Mr.Gadget
Oct 24, 08:26 AM
Sending my current 17" MBP refurb back on the 14 day satisfaction period. I know it may cost a few bucks... But hey, that is why I went refurb!
Besides, my refurb has the circle on the palm rest defect anyway!
:D
Besides, my refurb has the circle on the palm rest defect anyway!
:D
likemyorbs
May 2, 01:11 AM
From a moral standpoint, I can't be happy that he is dead. No one deserves to die. He should have spend the rest of his life in a prison cell
NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN! He deserved to die.
NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN NEIN! He deserved to die.
more...
mkjj
Jul 25, 09:16 AM
Your kidding?
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
carlgo
Oct 1, 08:51 AM
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
The solution to this is to create smaller cell sites that cover a smaller area (and therefore will have fewer users at any given time). The problem with this is that each new cell site requires a new tower. With all the opposition to new tower construction it can take months or years to get approval to build one.
With the massive growth in cell usage companies are having to create smaller and smaller cell sites. Because of the way the system works putting up one new tower requires the reconfiguration of all the adjacent towers. Their signal area must be changed, their frequencies must be changed and it all must be integrated together.
When you get a dropped call, it's usually because you are moving into another cell site (serviced by a new tower). Your call must be handed off to the new tower. If this new tower is at capacity or overloaded, failures happen.
This is why it sucks for very high density areas.
Luckily in Minneapolis we have very good AT&T coverage. I get very fast 3G speeds and <1% dropped calls everywhere I go. Thank you urban sprawl for spreading everyone out.. When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
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.
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
The solution to this is to create smaller cell sites that cover a smaller area (and therefore will have fewer users at any given time). The problem with this is that each new cell site requires a new tower. With all the opposition to new tower construction it can take months or years to get approval to build one.
With the massive growth in cell usage companies are having to create smaller and smaller cell sites. Because of the way the system works putting up one new tower requires the reconfiguration of all the adjacent towers. Their signal area must be changed, their frequencies must be changed and it all must be integrated together.
When you get a dropped call, it's usually because you are moving into another cell site (serviced by a new tower). Your call must be handed off to the new tower. If this new tower is at capacity or overloaded, failures happen.
This is why it sucks for very high density areas.
Luckily in Minneapolis we have very good AT&T coverage. I get very fast 3G speeds and <1% dropped calls everywhere I go. Thank you urban sprawl for spreading everyone out.. When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
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.
more...
sanPietro98
Apr 11, 07:16 PM
I've been in a "water" mood lately...
http://gallery.me.com/pdibona/100093/IMG_2745/web.jpg?ver=13006675340001
http://gallery.me.com/pdibona/100093/IMG_2745/web.jpg?ver=13006675340001
Eidorian
May 3, 08:06 AM
Finally, a quad core desktop class machine (in processors only I suppose) with ample I/O and a decent . . . . for Apple . . . . price.
Shocked that Apple would give us TWO TBolt ports on the 27" with quad core across the line.
The $1700 has my cheap side tingling but my professional side is telling me to wait for a Mac Pro update so I can at least consider a machine I can expand myself.
On the plus side, that 21.5" is not a bad machine for the price.Once again, the iMac packs more processing power than the Mac Pro. (Even if you have a single hex-core.)
Shocked that Apple would give us TWO TBolt ports on the 27" with quad core across the line.
The $1700 has my cheap side tingling but my professional side is telling me to wait for a Mac Pro update so I can at least consider a machine I can expand myself.
On the plus side, that 21.5" is not a bad machine for the price.Once again, the iMac packs more processing power than the Mac Pro. (Even if you have a single hex-core.)
more...
Cuthbert
Apr 13, 01:49 PM
wohoo!
I would be greatly interested in this. Likely would not buy the first generation. It would aso depend on size and actual features. Ive been greatly disappointed in the revamp of the apple tv and am looking for apple to do more for my living room than this past pathetic attempt at ATV2.
I would be greatly interested in this. Likely would not buy the first generation. It would aso depend on size and actual features. Ive been greatly disappointed in the revamp of the apple tv and am looking for apple to do more for my living room than this past pathetic attempt at ATV2.
FloatingBones
Nov 19, 10:50 AM
Hopefully, the websites that provide their videos through a legacy Flash wrapper will soon be providing their users with a choice.
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
It would be better if Apple provided its users with a choice of whether they want to enable a flash plugin or not in their devices instead of screwing us all over by making so many web sites unusable
See above, MagnusVonMagnum. I listed four very good reasons why enabling Flash in iOS Safari would be a terrible choice. If you wish your argument to be convincing, you need to address those four specific reasons.
There are over 120M iOS devices in the world. Those owners have extremely attractive demographics for websites. If website owners haven't begun converting their content off of a proprietary wrapper, they just don't care.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
(although I'm sure the author of Skyfire is thrilled about that choice since it's making him rich beyond his wildest dreams all because Apple is run by an egomaniac).
I don't know what "him" you are talking about. DVC labs (http://www.skyfire.com/component/weblinks/63-press-releases/26-dvc-labs-raises-48-million-in-financing-announces-board), provider of the Skyfire app we're discussing, was founded in 2006. They have apps on a variety of handheld platforms; they have now expanded to the iOS platform.
The Skyfire app is distinct from most apps: for the App purchase price, they must also provide the video translation service. They must provide servers and purchase substantial incoming and outgoing bandwidth for the videos. Skyfire does have a lot of experience providing this kind of service on other handheld platforms; they should be able to pull it off and have a reasonable return for their investment.
Skyfire has figured out a way for users to run Flash-wapped videos without ever having to expose their handhelds to the risks of running Flash. That's a neat trick; they should be rewarded for those efforts.
Any Flash developer has the ability to cross-compile and release their Flash code as an iOS app. If there are Flash apps that do something that no third-party iOS app does, it should be trivial for those Flash developers to add their app to the App Store. They can either release those apps for free or make money on them.
What exact Flash code are you running that there is not already an iOS App that can do exactly the same job? Please be specific. If there are unique Flash apps, have you asked the developer why they don't release it as a standalone iOS app?
There. That's two more reasons why Apple's choice was a good one. If you wish to continue this discussion, please make sure to address all six. Thanks!
I am elated that iOS Safari has no Flash support. I do not want the CPU suck, the identity suck, the unpredictable behavior, and the exposure to Adobe bugs. If you want those things, feel free to get an Android device.
It would be better if Apple provided its users with a choice of whether they want to enable a flash plugin or not in their devices instead of screwing us all over by making so many web sites unusable
See above, MagnusVonMagnum. I listed four very good reasons why enabling Flash in iOS Safari would be a terrible choice. If you wish your argument to be convincing, you need to address those four specific reasons.
There are over 120M iOS devices in the world. Those owners have extremely attractive demographics for websites. If website owners haven't begun converting their content off of a proprietary wrapper, they just don't care.
Even Adobe has acknowledged that a Flash-only choice is a bankrupt strategy (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999). After websites start offering their content with an open standard, you've gotta ask: what exactly is the value in continuing to prop up Flash?
(although I'm sure the author of Skyfire is thrilled about that choice since it's making him rich beyond his wildest dreams all because Apple is run by an egomaniac).
I don't know what "him" you are talking about. DVC labs (http://www.skyfire.com/component/weblinks/63-press-releases/26-dvc-labs-raises-48-million-in-financing-announces-board), provider of the Skyfire app we're discussing, was founded in 2006. They have apps on a variety of handheld platforms; they have now expanded to the iOS platform.
The Skyfire app is distinct from most apps: for the App purchase price, they must also provide the video translation service. They must provide servers and purchase substantial incoming and outgoing bandwidth for the videos. Skyfire does have a lot of experience providing this kind of service on other handheld platforms; they should be able to pull it off and have a reasonable return for their investment.
Skyfire has figured out a way for users to run Flash-wapped videos without ever having to expose their handhelds to the risks of running Flash. That's a neat trick; they should be rewarded for those efforts.
Any Flash developer has the ability to cross-compile and release their Flash code as an iOS app. If there are Flash apps that do something that no third-party iOS app does, it should be trivial for those Flash developers to add their app to the App Store. They can either release those apps for free or make money on them.
What exact Flash code are you running that there is not already an iOS App that can do exactly the same job? Please be specific. If there are unique Flash apps, have you asked the developer why they don't release it as a standalone iOS app?
There. That's two more reasons why Apple's choice was a good one. If you wish to continue this discussion, please make sure to address all six. Thanks!
more...
BrianMojo
Jul 24, 10:33 PM
The new Ipod has no buttons, no scroll wheel, no headphone jack, no dock connector. In other words freedom from everything. The most aesthetic piece of technology ever conceived.
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
...
*ipod Nano will still have dock connector for now.
A non-physical hold switch would be highly impractical. I just want to be able to slip the thing into my pocket without worrying about changing the volume -- I don't want to have to use a fingerprint identification to do that.
Also, this was all posted on AppleInsider last week, why is this front-page news?
AtariMac
Mar 31, 10:58 AM
That looks awful.
more...
thirteen1031
Apr 22, 04:40 PM
Yeah, yeah, yeah...but is it gonna come in white? :p
trainguy77
Nov 23, 03:38 PM
Hi everyone, just joined the team.
I have an iMac core duo going at it. She isn't much with her 1.83Ghz but it'll be at it 24h a day. It's about to complete it's first WU after 1day 19hours. It sounds a bit long to me compared to the times a say reading the thread, is this normal?
Keep in mind some of the people in this thread are using Mac Pros.
Which client are you using? Are both cores being used?
I have an iMac core duo going at it. She isn't much with her 1.83Ghz but it'll be at it 24h a day. It's about to complete it's first WU after 1day 19hours. It sounds a bit long to me compared to the times a say reading the thread, is this normal?
Keep in mind some of the people in this thread are using Mac Pros.
Which client are you using? Are both cores being used?
more...
lawrencewinkler
Oct 23, 06:40 PM
Regardless if you believe that you can install Vista Home under VMWare or Parallels, the real legal problem is MS has put VMWare and Parallels under legal notice that they may not write their software to allow the operation of Vista Home under their products, else they will be sued for contributory infringement.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
So, technical theory aside, if MS has the legal right to restrict such behavior, there will be no way VMWare or Parallels will produce such software, otherwise MS will sue them out of existence.
longtimelurker
Apr 28, 09:00 PM
White just looks bigger than black.
Just sayin'
Just sayin'
more...
whooleytoo
Jul 24, 03:37 PM
The frustration I feel when going from a Mighty Mouse with ball to a mouse with a scroll wheel, is the same as when going from a mouse with a scroll wheel to one with none. What a pity it requires a lot of rubbing/wiping and/or disassembling to keep it working!
Master-D
Apr 14, 03:20 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5101/5616448166_84b6fbd9a8_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/damoncrane)
Troll
Apr 27, 04:12 PM
Tuesday was yesterday. QUICK! Create a new thread saying that the new iMacs will be here NEXT TUESDAY!
dwd3885
Apr 29, 03:28 PM
Apple has proven that market share does not = profitability. I think Apple's focus is right.
I don't see how market share helps Amazon, in this case, if they are losing money on it and have no off-setting profit generated by the loss.
Also, I wonder when this comes into effect. I was just at the Amazon store and most the music I looked at was at $1.29 or $.99 a song - I only saw one $.69 song. Of course, my tastes don't trend toward a lot of pop.
Right. You need to look at new releases and top charts, there you will find mostly 69 cent tracks.
I don't see how market share helps Amazon, in this case, if they are losing money on it and have no off-setting profit generated by the loss.
Also, I wonder when this comes into effect. I was just at the Amazon store and most the music I looked at was at $1.29 or $.99 a song - I only saw one $.69 song. Of course, my tastes don't trend toward a lot of pop.
Right. You need to look at new releases and top charts, there you will find mostly 69 cent tracks.
SMM
Oct 23, 08:40 PM
I know that Bootcamp is not virtualization. What i am saying is that to run the OS in Bootcamp and a copy in parallels (legally) you would need to by the business or premium edition (or whatever they are called).
I have no issues with having the software installed once, although Apple allowing certain products to be installed on a desktop AND a laptop is great. But, I do not steal software. I really like what Apple does with their 'Family Packs'. You can add ~ 25-30% to the price and install it on five machines. That is great marketing and very fair.
I am not sure who is interpreting this EULA correctly and this thread sure does not need my uninformed opinion. But, if a single instance of a retail version of Vista cannot be installed anyway you like, that is a crock. With that being said, I have certainly not found a single 'scaled down' MS offering that was worth having, especially in a business environment.
It is part of my job responsibilities to evaluate and implement new technology. I am not even looking at Vista right now. Not that I like XP. MS is making my life very difficult.
I have no issues with having the software installed once, although Apple allowing certain products to be installed on a desktop AND a laptop is great. But, I do not steal software. I really like what Apple does with their 'Family Packs'. You can add ~ 25-30% to the price and install it on five machines. That is great marketing and very fair.
I am not sure who is interpreting this EULA correctly and this thread sure does not need my uninformed opinion. But, if a single instance of a retail version of Vista cannot be installed anyway you like, that is a crock. With that being said, I have certainly not found a single 'scaled down' MS offering that was worth having, especially in a business environment.
It is part of my job responsibilities to evaluate and implement new technology. I am not even looking at Vista right now. Not that I like XP. MS is making my life very difficult.
cloud 9
Aug 16, 05:21 PM
Uhm, is it me, or do i see more and more inconsistencies in the ui?
the buttons on the spotlight window or nothing like the buttons on the preview window for example..and i wonder why.
not that tiger is that consistent...
the buttons on the spotlight window or nothing like the buttons on the preview window for example..and i wonder why.
not that tiger is that consistent...
Eidorian
May 3, 08:12 AM
The way they've been able to keep the price low while using quad-cores in EVERY iMac has been by downgrading the GPUs. The Graphics Cards in EVERY model are now mobile. In the last line of iMacs they were full powered desktop GPUs.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
PBG4 Dude
Apr 22, 04:15 PM
That's gonna be sweet if apple comes out with that.
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น