GorgonPhone
Apr 14, 11:12 AM
white iphone is ugly late and unnecessary so apple can keep it.. they never made it cause demand was always lower for white ones and the white design look worse on iphone 4 than on 3gs..
twoodcc
Oct 11, 08:20 AM
I am liking this upward trend we have going right now. We need to keep that up. We need major releases of folding clients to be posted on atleast page 2 if not page one to get some interest.
yeah i am as well, though it looks like we will get passed pretty soon though.
yes that would spark a lot of interest. but i doubt it will happen
yeah i am as well, though it looks like we will get passed pretty soon though.
yes that would spark a lot of interest. but i doubt it will happen
NathanMuir
Apr 25, 04:45 PM
Eldiablojoe, just because.
RBR2
Apr 12, 02:15 PM
The Thunderbolt Wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thunderbolt_(interface)) has a diagram showing the TB controller's access to things. The accompanying description ("Thunderbolt can be implemented on graphics cards, which have access to DisplayPort data and PCI express connectivity, or on the motherboard of new devices, such as the MacBook Pro.[5][17][22]") implies that a TB compatible PCIe graphics card could bring older systems up-to-date. That would be interesting.
more...
twoodcc
Nov 23, 09:29 PM
Something just happened in the stats, we got a big jump and many teams too. Yet I don't think this is the whole catch up as we still miss points as a team and I still miss a big unit...
That was enough to get us to #58 though, just by a hair...
Yes indeed, we just passed club lexus, I'll have to take a look to see if I got my points back.
yeah, but i still haven't gotten my points back yet
That was enough to get us to #58 though, just by a hair...
Yes indeed, we just passed club lexus, I'll have to take a look to see if I got my points back.
yeah, but i still haven't gotten my points back yet
kainjow
Nov 3, 06:19 PM
Right, and Cocoa isn't the slightest bit bloated? :rolleyes: (can you say runtime messaging and binding overhead?)
I'm not saying that the actual virtualization should be done in Cocoa (ha yeah right), but the GUI definitely should. Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
I'm not saying that the actual virtualization should be done in Cocoa (ha yeah right), but the GUI definitely should. Parallels takes way too long to launch, and the GUI sucks.
Plus, do you really think a Qt C++ wrapper around Carbon is faster than direct Cocoa calls? :rolleyes:
I just want a nice documented-based Cocoa app that behaves like a Mac app, with a fast virtualization at its core :)
more...
maclaptop
Apr 22, 09:37 AM
QImage (http://www.dailygalaxy.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/05/17/southpark_scientology.jpg)
Tom Cruise, John Travolta & Steve Jobs at their finest.
Tom Cruise, John Travolta & Steve Jobs at their finest.
Demoman
Jul 10, 09:37 PM
I entirely agree with you on these points. Apple is barely marketing iWork at all, let alone in a way which would help people understand its value. At MW last January I made a point of mentioning the Mac owner confusion over what Pages does to one of the reps on the floor who was demonstrating the new version. He also happened to be on the Pages programming team. (Which game me an opportunity to show him a bug I'd found. :))
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
That is really a sound idea. Personally, I do not mind paying the $79 for iWork, in fact it is a zero issue for me (I own Final Cut Studio, Macromedia Studio, Adobe Creative Suite, Shake, Lightwave, etc). I think establishing a user base is what Apple should be focusing on.
Migration into the business world can be a very tenuous undertaking, just ask Taligent (or Steve with Next). Having the best product does not guarantee success. In fact, the history of computers, especially PC's, is littered by the failures of superior technology. In the 80's there was a slogan among corporate computer buyers; "No one ever got fired for buying IBM". The simple truth is, corporations are usually very conservative when it comes to buying technology. Sure, there are exceptions. But, the majority has the mindset, "never put yourself in a position where you can be criticized.
I am an IT Manager and have brought in Macs on a trial basis. I convinced the technology budget oversight committee that we are better off with Mini�s, rather than Citrix thin clients. We still have to license each thin client for Office. The economics are:
Mini � Standard w/1GB RAM, iWork and Keyboard = $856.00 � before business discount
Thin - HP t5520, 64MB, Windows CE = $359 � Office Standard $335 � keyboard/mouse $75 = $769.00
With the Mini you actually have a fine computer. The thin client cannot do anything without momma. This is a very easy choice unless you have to add another ~ $400 for Mac:Office. That is why the spreadsheet is so important. I already know Pages works for the majority of my users. Any changes that make it more appealing is just that much better.
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
That is really a sound idea. Personally, I do not mind paying the $79 for iWork, in fact it is a zero issue for me (I own Final Cut Studio, Macromedia Studio, Adobe Creative Suite, Shake, Lightwave, etc). I think establishing a user base is what Apple should be focusing on.
Migration into the business world can be a very tenuous undertaking, just ask Taligent (or Steve with Next). Having the best product does not guarantee success. In fact, the history of computers, especially PC's, is littered by the failures of superior technology. In the 80's there was a slogan among corporate computer buyers; "No one ever got fired for buying IBM". The simple truth is, corporations are usually very conservative when it comes to buying technology. Sure, there are exceptions. But, the majority has the mindset, "never put yourself in a position where you can be criticized.
I am an IT Manager and have brought in Macs on a trial basis. I convinced the technology budget oversight committee that we are better off with Mini�s, rather than Citrix thin clients. We still have to license each thin client for Office. The economics are:
Mini � Standard w/1GB RAM, iWork and Keyboard = $856.00 � before business discount
Thin - HP t5520, 64MB, Windows CE = $359 � Office Standard $335 � keyboard/mouse $75 = $769.00
With the Mini you actually have a fine computer. The thin client cannot do anything without momma. This is a very easy choice unless you have to add another ~ $400 for Mac:Office. That is why the spreadsheet is so important. I already know Pages works for the majority of my users. Any changes that make it more appealing is just that much better.
more...
Keleko
Apr 13, 07:44 PM
Angklungs are one of the instruments we use at my church. We also used a didgeridoo and an oboe during Lent on the same song.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5108/5617367013_e08f8902d7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5617367013/in/photostream)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5108/5617367013_e08f8902d7_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/22077805@N07/5617367013/in/photostream)
bep207
Jul 24, 06:41 PM
anyone know how long it usually takes from FCC to retail?
more...
res1233
Apr 14, 02:32 AM
Maybe a sign of universal iOS+Mac apps?
It wouldn't be too difficult for Apple to provide something like Rosetta for iDevice apps. It sounds extremely un-apple though. The only reason Apple provided Rosetta was to ease the PowerPC-Intel transition. I don't think there is any real benefit here because many iDevice apps would not translate well to a mouse and keyboard. It's possible that new iOS apps would have a "mac mode" that would solve this, so who knows.
It wouldn't be too difficult for Apple to provide something like Rosetta for iDevice apps. It sounds extremely un-apple though. The only reason Apple provided Rosetta was to ease the PowerPC-Intel transition. I don't think there is any real benefit here because many iDevice apps would not translate well to a mouse and keyboard. It's possible that new iOS apps would have a "mac mode" that would solve this, so who knows.
dXTC
Jan 2, 10:47 AM
Whether she eats 300 or 300,000 calories will have no affect on that. Current food production is more than enough to meet world needs, but for numerous reasons, produced food is often used for applications other than human consumption.
Emphasis mine. Let's put corn ethanol for vehicle fuel and soy biodiesel aside for a minute. You may be shocked when you find out how much corn and other food is given to livestock to bulk them up for human consumption as meat. It's quite possibly the most inefficient calorie conversion we humans can conjure-- just because we like meat too g**d*** much.
Vegan: The New Ethics Of Eating by Erik Marcus opened my eyes quite a bit about this kind of thing.
(Disclaimer: For a period of time, I was vegan because of what I read in that book and other resources. Nowadays I'm "flexitarian", eating meat for only about 10% of my intake, mainly in the interest of family harmony; I could "go veg" again rather easily.)
Emphasis mine. Let's put corn ethanol for vehicle fuel and soy biodiesel aside for a minute. You may be shocked when you find out how much corn and other food is given to livestock to bulk them up for human consumption as meat. It's quite possibly the most inefficient calorie conversion we humans can conjure-- just because we like meat too g**d*** much.
Vegan: The New Ethics Of Eating by Erik Marcus opened my eyes quite a bit about this kind of thing.
(Disclaimer: For a period of time, I was vegan because of what I read in that book and other resources. Nowadays I'm "flexitarian", eating meat for only about 10% of my intake, mainly in the interest of family harmony; I could "go veg" again rather easily.)
more...
cvaldes
Apr 22, 11:11 AM
Of all the things that iPhone needs soon, LTE is not one of them.
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
Correct, while most of the world is committed to LTE, commercial grade operational networks are not online in most markets, although deployment is happening right now.
What makes the most sense right now is bumping up the iPhone to HSPA+. Practically all GSM/UTMS markets have commercial networks open for business right now (the U.S. is basically the last), many markets have already gone to their third iteration of HSPA+ (speed increases).
We can all wait until its widespread, and usable.
Correct, while most of the world is committed to LTE, commercial grade operational networks are not online in most markets, although deployment is happening right now.
What makes the most sense right now is bumping up the iPhone to HSPA+. Practically all GSM/UTMS markets have commercial networks open for business right now (the U.S. is basically the last), many markets have already gone to their third iteration of HSPA+ (speed increases).
vand0576
Aug 16, 05:20 PM
Many people have brought up how it may be a difficulty to control a "none-touch" type interface by never coming in contact with it (try holding your current iPod and making swirls around the clickwheel without contacting it, not the easiest or most comfortable thing to do). Others are worried about getting the screen all smudged by placing fingers on it.
I currently use a 4G iPod with a polycarbonate casing from Contour Design. It even has a mylar cover for over the click wheel where it is exposed. I would never be caught without the case, as I fear scratches most as I plan to resell it sometime in the future. The remarkable thing about the clickwheel is that you (or at least I) can still control it through my pants pocket on the outside of my jeans. That essentially is a "none-touch" concept my finger having never been in direct contact with the iPod. I remember the reports of the "none-touch" design to be able to distinguish contact from non-concact through the medium within direct proximity to the device. What would be great in my mind is that if the next gen iPod did have a full screen and could be controlled through "non-touching" is that you could enclose the entire apparatus in polycarbonate while allowing the sensors to detect the "none-touch" still (something the current click wheels cannot do, aside from a few thin layers of fabric), but having it be easier to control because you can then come in contact with the polycarbonate casing. It would fully protect from scratches, and i have never noticed any fingerprints on the polycarbonate casing any way, so it would seem that this implementation of the "none-touch" would be win-win. Complete enclosure and no fingerprints.
I currently use a 4G iPod with a polycarbonate casing from Contour Design. It even has a mylar cover for over the click wheel where it is exposed. I would never be caught without the case, as I fear scratches most as I plan to resell it sometime in the future. The remarkable thing about the clickwheel is that you (or at least I) can still control it through my pants pocket on the outside of my jeans. That essentially is a "none-touch" concept my finger having never been in direct contact with the iPod. I remember the reports of the "none-touch" design to be able to distinguish contact from non-concact through the medium within direct proximity to the device. What would be great in my mind is that if the next gen iPod did have a full screen and could be controlled through "non-touching" is that you could enclose the entire apparatus in polycarbonate while allowing the sensors to detect the "none-touch" still (something the current click wheels cannot do, aside from a few thin layers of fabric), but having it be easier to control because you can then come in contact with the polycarbonate casing. It would fully protect from scratches, and i have never noticed any fingerprints on the polycarbonate casing any way, so it would seem that this implementation of the "none-touch" would be win-win. Complete enclosure and no fingerprints.
more...
unvjustintime
Jan 27, 08:57 AM
The people who own AAPL stock are not like you and me. I'd be shocked if they've even heard of Macworld. They don't use or own Apple computers, they just automatically buy whatever hot stock happens to have gone up this week. When it starts going down, they sell off. Tech stocks are especially prone to this kind of short-sighted selling. It's cold in New York, investors are selling in order to go on vacation. Simiple as that.
I own 957 shares and visit this site every day.
I own 957 shares and visit this site every day.
alent1234
Apr 29, 02:44 PM
can anyone tell me why this market is so important? even at .99 cents a song the margins for the retailer can't be that much.
more...
Orme
May 2, 12:43 PM
I really hope that it comes tomorrow as my apple store credit card is on fire waiting to be spent. ;) however @dpdesilva on twitter is rumoring that apple will delay imac refresh due to leaks and rumors being overshadowed by Bin Laden's Death. Personally I think it might be B.S. I care more about my Imac than the story of his death.
Sounds like a load of bs to me.. someone is fame hungry.. Why would the news of Osama's death overshadow rumors/leaks of the new iMac.. they are both on totally different scales and subjects. One is world breaking news.. one is not and I don't see how it's going to stop people like me from being worried about other things like my life, daily routine and this iMac that I want ever so desperately..
[Edit] and if it's true that the refresh is going to be delayed because of Osama's death.. THEY'RE SO LETTING HIM WIN!! :mad::mad::mad:
Sounds like a load of bs to me.. someone is fame hungry.. Why would the news of Osama's death overshadow rumors/leaks of the new iMac.. they are both on totally different scales and subjects. One is world breaking news.. one is not and I don't see how it's going to stop people like me from being worried about other things like my life, daily routine and this iMac that I want ever so desperately..
[Edit] and if it's true that the refresh is going to be delayed because of Osama's death.. THEY'RE SO LETTING HIM WIN!! :mad::mad::mad:
c0ry138
Apr 14, 04:31 PM
I have owned all 4 Iphones and though this white iphone looks awesome it is nothing new... where is the Iphone 5? or Iphone 4gs? no one really cares about the new color... Iphone fans want the new and improved phone! now i agree the iphone 4 is still way up there on the totem pole but still just like the Iphone 3g the Iphone 3gs brought few but much wanted additions to a phone. i think a Iphone 4gs is a must if not then build the iphone 5 but dont leave us dry with the same phone with a different color. i do belive that should of been done like a year ago when you first released the iphone 4. I highly doubt apple will recieve a hug growth in sales with this.... :mad:
blackstarliner
Oct 24, 08:50 AM
Heres a pic if anyone has missed it.
Check out the footnote to the Swiss site (where the text is correct)
Die Tests wurden von Apple im Mai 2006 mit Prototypen des 2 GHz MacBook und aktuellen 1,42 GHz PowerPC G4 basierten iBook G4 Computern durchgef�hrt.
Check out the footnote to the Swiss site (where the text is correct)
Die Tests wurden von Apple im Mai 2006 mit Prototypen des 2 GHz MacBook und aktuellen 1,42 GHz PowerPC G4 basierten iBook G4 Computern durchgef�hrt.
dethmaShine
Apr 12, 10:21 AM
Just buy what you like, but being all anal about specs is lame. Having the currently superior specs isn't gonna make anyone's penis any bigger, despite what you may think.
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
And what exactly do you plan to run on that extra horsepower? What effect does it have on battery power.
Congratulations on being caught up with the sheep in the new CPU clock speed race.
Uh... oh!
I thought people here could understand sarcasm better. I think, it was pretty clear. Never mind.
Ok, I'm convinced.
Also, comparing a product that hasn't been released yet to a product that hasn't been announced yet is a rather weak argument and makes zero sense.
And what exactly do you plan to run on that extra horsepower? What effect does it have on battery power.
Congratulations on being caught up with the sheep in the new CPU clock speed race.
Uh... oh!
I thought people here could understand sarcasm better. I think, it was pretty clear. Never mind.
minnesotamacman
Oct 19, 07:55 AM
As always, the iPod is Apple's real cash cow.
Too bad for those of us who wish they would divert a little more of their attention to their computer line.
Did I not see that 58% of the revenue came from the computers? How does this make the iPod the cash cow?
Too bad for those of us who wish they would divert a little more of their attention to their computer line.
Did I not see that 58% of the revenue came from the computers? How does this make the iPod the cash cow?
SmileyBlast!
Apr 13, 02:13 PM
ATV + dock connector is much more realistic.
ATV = All Terrain Vehicle?
Now you are talking. I could see Apple Vehicles.
Way Cool.
ATV = All Terrain Vehicle?
Now you are talking. I could see Apple Vehicles.
Way Cool.
appleguy123
Apr 30, 12:13 PM
Is the new Ravenvii and Chrmjenkins' game next? I'm eagerly waiting from the sidelines to see what it will be like.
DeathChill
Apr 30, 11:05 PM
Of course there is. iOS runs on two currently available Apple smartphone models: 3GS and 4. The iOS that runs on these phones is sufficiently different in feature sets from the iOS that runs on Tablets, media consumption devices, and Apple TVs:
-Larger resolution on tablets
-Communications handled separately - No phone app or visual voicemail on Tablet or iPod Touch
-No installable apps on Apple TV
I think you already understand the differences. You just would like to lump everything together so that it seems that Apple still has dominant marketshare.
Pretty disingenuous use of statistics, if you ask me..
You are honestly trying to act as if slight hardware and software features and differences make it a completely different platform, regardless of whether or not it has an effect on applications? Seriously? That's like saying Android devices from different manufacturers can't be lumped together because of different resolutions or skins.
EDIT: Also, I was only mentioning that AppleTV technically runs iOS, not that it should be officially be counted.
The only thing disingenuous is to try and compare an entire platform against a single device in a platform and call it fair.
-Larger resolution on tablets
-Communications handled separately - No phone app or visual voicemail on Tablet or iPod Touch
-No installable apps on Apple TV
I think you already understand the differences. You just would like to lump everything together so that it seems that Apple still has dominant marketshare.
Pretty disingenuous use of statistics, if you ask me..
You are honestly trying to act as if slight hardware and software features and differences make it a completely different platform, regardless of whether or not it has an effect on applications? Seriously? That's like saying Android devices from different manufacturers can't be lumped together because of different resolutions or skins.
EDIT: Also, I was only mentioning that AppleTV technically runs iOS, not that it should be officially be counted.
The only thing disingenuous is to try and compare an entire platform against a single device in a platform and call it fair.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий