KT Walrus
Apr 13, 02:42 PM
Makes more sense to me that Apple would work to standardize AirPlay as a built-in feature of all new HDTV's, blu-ray players, and other set top boxes like Apple TV. In addition to AirPlay input to the HDTV, the HDTV would do AirPlay output from a TV connected webcam/microphone (if any). I don't see Apple trying to sell actual HDTVs, but the iPad would make a great SmartTV content controller that would replace the need for an Apple TV module.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
motulist
Aug 15, 09:14 PM
Is anyone else bothered by the button to buy more batteries?
Yes, it seems like a Microsoft thing.
It's actually a very Apple thing to do. Apple has always been about making a totally integrated, complete end-to-end computing environment and Apple has also always been dedicated to transforming things that had been difficult for non-techies to do into some so simple and effective that even advanced technical users decide it's the best method. This is probably not the first time an option to buy hardware has been built into software, but just like Time Machine is revolutionary because it's the first SIMPLE file-by-file backup system and not because it's the first backup system ever, so too this "Buy Battery" button is revolutionary because of how simple and integrated it is.
I'm hardly an Apple apologist, I complain quite loudly when they do things that are lame. But I think this is a very Apple thing to do and a feature that isn't just a built in advertisement. If I had an OS X button to buy a new battery when I wanted one, rather than tracking down the battery model number I needed and having to worry about who to buy from and bothering with technical details, I'd definitely appreciate being able to just click that button.
Making the entire computer experience simple, easy and fun is what Apple has always been about, and this is a natural continuation of those ideals. In fact, I hope they expand this functionality to include upgrading ram and hard disks (as long as they don't go overboard with the prices like in the b.t.o. options at the apple store).
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
Yes, it seems like a Microsoft thing.
It's actually a very Apple thing to do. Apple has always been about making a totally integrated, complete end-to-end computing environment and Apple has also always been dedicated to transforming things that had been difficult for non-techies to do into some so simple and effective that even advanced technical users decide it's the best method. This is probably not the first time an option to buy hardware has been built into software, but just like Time Machine is revolutionary because it's the first SIMPLE file-by-file backup system and not because it's the first backup system ever, so too this "Buy Battery" button is revolutionary because of how simple and integrated it is.
I'm hardly an Apple apologist, I complain quite loudly when they do things that are lame. But I think this is a very Apple thing to do and a feature that isn't just a built in advertisement. If I had an OS X button to buy a new battery when I wanted one, rather than tracking down the battery model number I needed and having to worry about who to buy from and bothering with technical details, I'd definitely appreciate being able to just click that button.
Making the entire computer experience simple, easy and fun is what Apple has always been about, and this is a natural continuation of those ideals. In fact, I hope they expand this functionality to include upgrading ram and hard disks (as long as they don't go overboard with the prices like in the b.t.o. options at the apple store).
Really this is a wonderful new breakthrough in Apple's quest for computing easiness.
Mac-Addict
Oct 24, 08:28 AM
2GB of RAM :eek:
Wow, no one saw that one coming!!
Maybe something in the higher models needed 2gb of ram.. Or apple is just being its kinds self and giving us 2gb instead of 1gb to make us happy :) Or trick us into thinking we are getting a good deal for our money when we really arnt! Ahh the confusing ways of apples marketing structure! But I sure cant wait for my 2.33GHz stock 15.4inch Macbook pro! I will be paying that back for the rest of my life ;)
Has anyone esle seen that the apple.com/macbookpro image looks white.. kinda looks like a ibook
Wow, no one saw that one coming!!
Maybe something in the higher models needed 2gb of ram.. Or apple is just being its kinds self and giving us 2gb instead of 1gb to make us happy :) Or trick us into thinking we are getting a good deal for our money when we really arnt! Ahh the confusing ways of apples marketing structure! But I sure cant wait for my 2.33GHz stock 15.4inch Macbook pro! I will be paying that back for the rest of my life ;)
Has anyone esle seen that the apple.com/macbookpro image looks white.. kinda looks like a ibook
CDCC
Apr 22, 11:04 PM
Several reasons. It's very fast - Mannheim is about a year, and Dusseldorf about two. You can't raise invalidity of the patent as a defense. You have to very early in the case explain your theory of non-infringement, etc. The system works very differently than the U.S.
Apple is glad it's fast! They are glad the system works very differently.
How long did the MS vs Apple and MS antitrust suits last?
Apple is glad it's fast! They are glad the system works very differently.
How long did the MS vs Apple and MS antitrust suits last?
more...
Leddy
Mar 31, 05:54 PM
If I wanted a physical calendar and all that entails - torn off pages etc. I'd buy one, but I'm working on a computer. First impressions are that this is naff. It reminds me of the overblown animations when arrange by name is selected and I rename a file on the desktop. It's all a bit too cutesy and look at me. Turd brown leather is not my idea of stylish but YMMV. Please may there be an option to switch it off for those of us easily offended by gratuitous eye-candy.
ucfgrad93
Apr 27, 04:05 PM
Something about -aggie- and his non-bolded vote yesterday makes the hair on the back of my neck stand up.
more...
MrNomNoms
Apr 15, 04:58 PM
The "view" buttons in finder changed back to the old style.
I always found the 'slider' buttons really out of place and difficult to get my head around - they always seemed to be out of place when it came to how one navigated the UI. The kind of 'slider' approach seemed to be more appropriate for a touch screen approach than if you were using a mouse or touchpad considering that you'll need 'click and movement' occurring at the same time which is difficult using the existing hardware (holding down the pad button then moving ones finger at the same time).
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
I highly doubt it given that the changes made in Leopard were a lot more substantial when compared to Snow Leopard and Lion. If you look through the WWDC sessions for that year there were many lower level parts that were completely removed and replaced, file notification API's (of which there were many) being replaced with a �ber one to rule them all, changes in the kernel for UNIX compatibility etc. Even if Apple didn't re-allocate some developers to iOS it is doubtful they could have pulled off an early Leopard release given what they had decided to change in the underlying operating system.
Regarding the re-allocation of resources to iOS, to be fair iOS needed a heck of a lot of TLC given how far behind other smart phone operating systems it was at the time. Fast forward to today and you'll see that there isn't the same level of urgency given that both iOS and Mac OS X are pretty mature. Where as 2-3 years ago there was a massive laundry list of features that were missing from iOS it has pretty much developed into a list of 'it would be nice to have' rather than 'really need this or the platform will fail'. For Mac OS X it is the final stretch of Cocoa-ilsation which is the completing of the last remaining frameworks developers have been waiting for (AV Foundation pretty much replaces QuickTime Framework) with Apple upgrading their own applications so their middleware is end to end Cocoa based.
I always found the 'slider' buttons really out of place and difficult to get my head around - they always seemed to be out of place when it came to how one navigated the UI. The kind of 'slider' approach seemed to be more appropriate for a touch screen approach than if you were using a mouse or touchpad considering that you'll need 'click and movement' occurring at the same time which is difficult using the existing hardware (holding down the pad button then moving ones finger at the same time).
OK, here is a historic example:
"Apple missed Leopard's release time frame as originally announced by Apple�s CEO Steve Jobs. When first discussed in June Jobs had stated that Apple intended to release Leopard at the end of 2006 or early 2007. A year later, this was amended to Spring 2007; however on 12 April Apple issued a statement that its release would be delayed until October 2007 because of the development of the iPhone."
(from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_OS_X_Leopard)
I do not believe that Adobe, Microsoft and other big companies need just a few months to make their apps Lion-compatible. Will Apple release Lion, if major companies do not support it? Unlikely. Q1 2012 is more likely.
I highly doubt it given that the changes made in Leopard were a lot more substantial when compared to Snow Leopard and Lion. If you look through the WWDC sessions for that year there were many lower level parts that were completely removed and replaced, file notification API's (of which there were many) being replaced with a �ber one to rule them all, changes in the kernel for UNIX compatibility etc. Even if Apple didn't re-allocate some developers to iOS it is doubtful they could have pulled off an early Leopard release given what they had decided to change in the underlying operating system.
Regarding the re-allocation of resources to iOS, to be fair iOS needed a heck of a lot of TLC given how far behind other smart phone operating systems it was at the time. Fast forward to today and you'll see that there isn't the same level of urgency given that both iOS and Mac OS X are pretty mature. Where as 2-3 years ago there was a massive laundry list of features that were missing from iOS it has pretty much developed into a list of 'it would be nice to have' rather than 'really need this or the platform will fail'. For Mac OS X it is the final stretch of Cocoa-ilsation which is the completing of the last remaining frameworks developers have been waiting for (AV Foundation pretty much replaces QuickTime Framework) with Apple upgrading their own applications so their middleware is end to end Cocoa based.
podiki
May 3, 07:57 AM
Hm, how would I be able to connect my DVI monitor to one of these? I need my high quality Eizo to do photo editing on. I'm not going to do that on the main screen.
more...
Force10
Apr 22, 04:58 PM
Well, Rumors I hear suggest this may be a new iPhone but not the new iPhone.
Cook said he wanted a more affordable one. What better than an iPod Touch that can make calls if you buy credit on a pay-as-you go basis?
This will have A4, 4-8GB, retina res but not IPS and sell for under $200 with no contract.
Existing Touch will be replaced by a 5-6" game-centric model with A5 and 1024 x 768 retina screen.
Cook said he wanted a more affordable one. What better than an iPod Touch that can make calls if you buy credit on a pay-as-you go basis?
This will have A4, 4-8GB, retina res but not IPS and sell for under $200 with no contract.
Existing Touch will be replaced by a 5-6" game-centric model with A5 and 1024 x 768 retina screen.
Eduardo1971
May 3, 07:40 AM
Cool. After all this waiting...
more...
satkin2
Apr 26, 02:26 PM
Until this speculation is confirmed and Apple reveal what their plans really are, I'll reserve judgement on whether this is value for money or not. But it wouldn't surprise me if they do charge something. To not charge would mean adverts, I'd rather pay a small premium, much like a do with Mobile Me than have adverts. Each to their own though.
gri
Jun 17, 02:20 PM
Well, I guess the app contain an official exam and your results get posted directly... Obviously, it's not only a "text book" kind of app...
That examen is worth nothing than - I would have the textbook lying next to me. Did you ever do a board examen here in the US...? No cell phones, no watches, no nothing. Camera watching you all the time...
That examen is worth nothing than - I would have the textbook lying next to me. Did you ever do a board examen here in the US...? No cell phones, no watches, no nothing. Camera watching you all the time...
more...
DJRVDIO
Apr 29, 10:47 AM
Ah.... I cry foul. Not real at all.
I did not cry foul. I did not photoshop this picture. How would i even go about doing that. There was no keyboard or mouse. and you can obviously see that the virtual keyword is present on the screen in the picture. :apple:
I did not cry foul. I did not photoshop this picture. How would i even go about doing that. There was no keyboard or mouse. and you can obviously see that the virtual keyword is present on the screen in the picture. :apple:
mklos
Dec 3, 09:56 AM
Router, firewall I feel OK.
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
more...
IJ Reilly
Jan 30, 12:25 PM
sigh...Apple exports from China and imports to America. Just another reason not to buy AAPL.
Is this remark supposed to be taken seriously? I have no idea what you are driving at here.
Is this remark supposed to be taken seriously? I have no idea what you are driving at here.
mikeschmeee
Apr 7, 01:05 AM
A friend and I got together today and I got the chance to take some photos of his very quick EVO8!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5224/5596819061_d875843f11.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5596819061/)
:cool:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5224/5596819061_d875843f11.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5596819061/)
:cool:
more...
lordonuthin
Oct 29, 11:48 PM
right now its reformatting into a RAID, boss wanted to RAID it. lost 2 frames no biggie. here's what i got before that
[22:05:44] pleted 2500 out of 250000 steps (1%)
[22:54:37] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps (2%)
so thats about 50 mins per frame. i was thinking maybe that was due to the clock speed being 2.26 or the HT. the old 3ghz MP does a frame in the low to mid 40s
wont get to test until tomorrow
I run this:./fah6 -bigadv -smp 16 -localwhich works all 16 cores/threads, check activity monitor to see how many cores are running, there should be 16 total. The first time I started it there were only 4 running so I shut it down and restarted with the -smp 16 in it and that did the trick.
I don't want to be ignorant, but I thought that HT was all about utilising the unused portions of each core. But if you're running F@H shouldn't those cores be fully utilised anyway? 2.26 to 2.66 shouldn't make that big of a difference and I didn't know you could even turn HT off, even if you wanted to.
[22:05:44] pleted 2500 out of 250000 steps (1%)
[22:54:37] Completed 5000 out of 250000 steps (2%)
so thats about 50 mins per frame. i was thinking maybe that was due to the clock speed being 2.26 or the HT. the old 3ghz MP does a frame in the low to mid 40s
wont get to test until tomorrow
I run this:./fah6 -bigadv -smp 16 -localwhich works all 16 cores/threads, check activity monitor to see how many cores are running, there should be 16 total. The first time I started it there were only 4 running so I shut it down and restarted with the -smp 16 in it and that did the trick.
I don't want to be ignorant, but I thought that HT was all about utilising the unused portions of each core. But if you're running F@H shouldn't those cores be fully utilised anyway? 2.26 to 2.66 shouldn't make that big of a difference and I didn't know you could even turn HT off, even if you wanted to.
prostuff1
Oct 23, 09:31 AM
Boot Camp is not virtualization, by any definition. (And no, there's no way Microsoft or anyone else could argue that it is.)
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 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).
Stellarola
Mar 31, 11:23 PM
Heinous. Absolutely hideous.
And I'm a fan of eye candy.
The faux leather is almost as bad as this "Marble" OS X mockup, from back in the day:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3392/3333642840_d905e48e47_o.jpg
I'm calling B.S. on this photo. That image isn't from Apple. Prove me wrong, please.
-Stell
And I'm a fan of eye candy.
The faux leather is almost as bad as this "Marble" OS X mockup, from back in the day:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3392/3333642840_d905e48e47_o.jpg
I'm calling B.S. on this photo. That image isn't from Apple. Prove me wrong, please.
-Stell
lordonuthin
Oct 26, 09:50 PM
The 80k PPD is a 32 core AMD system...
That's what I meant.
That's what I meant.
hglk
Apr 28, 05:29 PM
http://cl.ly/1h0i421c03322L0p2E1E
Looks exactly the same to me...
Looks exactly the same to me...
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 04:51 PM
Still not sure where you're getting this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
lilo777
Apr 22, 02:54 PM
Apple has never used extreme edition processors. It's outside the scope of their market (aside from beyond their TDP).
However, that's immaterial to the overall point. You tried to claim that apple skimps on some products, therefore them skimping on LTE because they can makes sense. That's no longer the case, Apple does use mobile quad core processors, so your claim no longer has any basis.
Really? So the fact that they did not have laptops with mainstream mobile quad core CPUs before Sandy Bridge when every other computers manufacturer had them is "immaterial" now? With LTE it's the same story all over. After they finally get in a year or two you'll probably be able to say again that it's immaterial. I bet it's very material to those who want iPhone with LTE now. Another major problem here is that Apple sticks to having just one model of iPhone (CDMA vs GSM differences aside). As if all people wanted the same thing. They don't.
However, that's immaterial to the overall point. You tried to claim that apple skimps on some products, therefore them skimping on LTE because they can makes sense. That's no longer the case, Apple does use mobile quad core processors, so your claim no longer has any basis.
Really? So the fact that they did not have laptops with mainstream mobile quad core CPUs before Sandy Bridge when every other computers manufacturer had them is "immaterial" now? With LTE it's the same story all over. After they finally get in a year or two you'll probably be able to say again that it's immaterial. I bet it's very material to those who want iPhone with LTE now. Another major problem here is that Apple sticks to having just one model of iPhone (CDMA vs GSM differences aside). As if all people wanted the same thing. They don't.
gnasher729
Jul 24, 10:56 AM
By definition, having alternatives makes Apple NOT a monopoly.
It is not even necessary that there _are_ alternatives. It is enough if others _could_ enter the market if they wanted. In that situation, you cannot increase prices as you like, because at that point others _would_ enter the market.
It is not even necessary that there _are_ alternatives. It is enough if others _could_ enter the market if they wanted. In that situation, you cannot increase prices as you like, because at that point others _would_ enter the market.