Apple OC
Mar 25, 01:10 PM
Looks like the Canadians will be commanding the "No Fly" operation in Lybia
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
interesting
http://www.cp24.com/servlet/an/local/CTVNews/20110325/110325_cda_libya_military/20110325/?hub=CP24Home
Hooksta
Oct 22, 06:47 AM
14 million devices sold in Q3 2010.
'Nuff said.
LOL...that's like Fox News touting their ratings as a testament that they are Fair and Balanced.
'Nuff said.
LOL...that's like Fox News touting their ratings as a testament that they are Fair and Balanced.
alec
Jul 18, 10:33 AM
I think everyone has touched on an important issue with this: it is not a good that is going to be embraced by the public, at least anytime soon. Who really wants to rent a movie for a few dollars so they can watch it on their iPod (and can iPods even last through a whole movie??). Anyway, I'm not impressed and this smells of a 'too soon' move.
czeluff
Oct 23, 12:03 PM
In my opinion, there is a VERY good possibility of the Macbook Pros being updated tomorrow. Here's Why:
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/
If you look at the Macbook Pro's "last updated" section, you'll notice that it was April 24, 2006. Tomorrow will be October 24, exactly 6 month's difference. Coincidence? perhaps, but in my opinion if it's not tomorrow, it's not until late November.
Chad Z
Multimedia
Sep 8, 09:52 PM
I wouldn't do the comparison like that, the Dual G5 does offer you drive bays and expansion capabilities that you do not get with the Mini. I will take the G5 over the Mini at that price you got it for.Thanks. But I am mainly with the Quad and need to know the actual performance difference between the D 2 G5 and one of the CD or C2D models. Thanks. Please?
I can't perform these tests in the stores because all the G5's are gone.
I can't perform these tests in the stores because all the G5's are gone.
islanders
Dec 27, 09:35 PM
I�m waiting on buying a HD DVD or BlueRay until the price comes down, so I could see iTV offering a HD alternative, and filling that niche.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
Two premium channels cost $20 a month so iTV would sell you the device to steam movies, some broadcast, download like Tivo, so you wouldn�t need a Blueray or HD DVD.
What else could be practical? Of course it will have a hard drive� a cable box DVR has a hard drive.
If it also has the ability to surf the web and run a word processor, handle video from DVR and digital camera, I�ll get one�
That is if the price is about $500.
Some unanswered questions are where are they going to get the bandwidth to do all this? You will have to have a cable subscription, perhaps just a basic subscription, but even then bandwidth is limited.
They will need their own satellite, if they really want to compete. But that would make them iDish? hmmm
This could be very interesting. I have often wondered why all the cable companies and satellite companies are within $5 pricing difference of each other? Is this the rock bottom competitive price so they can break even or are these prices fixed?
I would love to get rid of so many commercials. I�m paying $78 a month for basic digital subscription and have to use a DVR to record programs so I can zap though the commercials.
Obviously I don�t know what the limitiatoins are here for an iCast or iDish, and anticipate something like a TiVo that can surf the web, upload video, and download HD.
_01.jpg "Wedding")
NameUndecided
Apr 2, 07:49 PM
Leopard requires 9GB, Snow Leopard requires 5GB, and now Lion is under 4GB?
Oh my, no. That's just the size of the installer, which is compressed. Right now on the partition that I'm pretty sure that I only have the OS installed on and little to nothing else, I have 6.55gb taken up. The final version might take up even less than that.
Oh my, no. That's just the size of the installer, which is compressed. Right now on the partition that I'm pretty sure that I only have the OS installed on and little to nothing else, I have 6.55gb taken up. The final version might take up even less than that.
spiffyfitz
Aug 16, 12:30 PM
I sure hope they announce something about an Apple phone soon. Im sooooooo tempted to get the LG Chocolate.
It's a shame there's almost no way Verizon will carry an Apple branded phone. I just don't see it happening. Looks like I'll have to get an LG Chocolate for music on the go...
It's a shame there's almost no way Verizon will carry an Apple branded phone. I just don't see it happening. Looks like I'll have to get an LG Chocolate for music on the go...
nagromme
Sep 6, 04:55 PM
The bottom model is now a great deal, but I agree that bringing in a cheaper model would be nice. $499 Core Solo would be power to spare for a lot of people. I know it's more power than the G4 I'm typing on has :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
There's a good reason apple didn't go Core2 on the mini...it would make it too close to the new minitower they'll be announcing soon!
I like where your head is :)
Ktulu
Jan 1, 07:07 PM
Thanks for the insight on the image everyone....You'd thinnk I would have just checked there first.:rolleyes:
CalBoy
Mar 21, 12:32 AM
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
Then I think Apple might be exposed to the same potential liabilities for homeopathic remedies too. Mind you I don't think (or know definitely) anyone has successfully maintained that companies that knowingly permit the propagation of dangerous materials should be held liable. I do, however, think that it would be a fair standard to apply if the company is going to trumpet it's own "protective" prowess.
Apple is being inconsistent with its policies on the App Store. Either any offensive or potentially dangerous app should be barred, or none of them should be. By trying to play the part of the micromanager, Apple is revealing its own limitations.
No-one could possibly be offended by homeopathy.
I disagree. The level of offense might be lower than this gay-be-gone app, but I'm sure many physicians, nurses, and skeptics are not too fond of junk science being spread.
Moreover, it isn't just about what offends; that is merely a measuring stick to figure out what Apple's priorities are. I'm sure there is an app to offend everyone in the app store (does the Auduban Society approve of Angry Birds?). The question is which of these apps represents a real problem for users? As much as I disagree with Jobs about porn in the app store, there is at least some minimal possibility of utility in leaving porn out of the app store in that parents will be better able to decide what their kids download (not that there aren't other means of doing so, or that the kids haven't already seen porn). Sure it isn't a fantastic reason, but at least there's plausibility.
I think something similar can be said for this gay-be-gone app or a homeopathic app. In these situations the dangers from app use are not only higher, but they also run contrary to what medical professionals the world over recommend. If Apple is so willing to ban something for its plausible dangers, why not ban something for its very real dangers?
I think that should be a more important metric over offense. An app that is offensive but which doesn't hurt anyone either directly on indirectly should be scrutinized much less than one that does. In this light, it becomes more clear that what Apple really wanted to do all along was keep porn out of the App Store. Not because it's offensive or dangerous, but because it would make their devices easier to sell even in the most conservative of markets.
milo
Aug 29, 09:02 AM
Incredibly underwhelming.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
If they're going to stay yonah, at least bump the clock speed more than that.
The only upside to this is that it leaves a HUGE gap between the mini and Pro, could mean that apple really is planning a conroe minitower/pizzabox/mediacenter.
That, and the fact that ThinkSecret is NEVER right. EVER.
iJohnHenry
Mar 12, 04:41 PM
Does not aerodynamics dictate form, to a large extent?
jettredmont
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
We need flat data rates on mobiles in the UK. It will happen (esp. if they want people to embrace 3g that they spent all the money on), it's just when.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
While it's nice to dream, when you are talking about a service (downloading music from your server to your device) that the vast majority of people are going to be using many hours in a day, I doubt you'll see that being "cheap" on the current setups any time soon. For one, there isn't that kind of capacity in the networks. For another, while it may be different in the UK, there are still many pockets of poor or nonexistent coverage. Finally, the cost of portable storage is decreasing significantly (by which I mean, several orders of magnitude) faster than the cost of network bandwidth.
Network capacity is where it all starts off. Why are ringtones so expensive? Well, for one, because people still buy them. But, offering $1 or $0.25 ringtones would yield a killing for both the record companies (getting $0.25 for 1/6th of a song? Seems about right relative to $1/song) and greatly expand the service in terms of total market size (ie, 1/3rd revenue per download, but much more than 3x increase in number of downloads). Why don't they do this? Because their networks, to a one, could not stand for this traffic to increase enough that the market would expand enough to make the change profitable. When you pay $3 for a ringtone download you are paying primarily to keep other people from doing the same. Sounds perverse, but that's the reality when you have a limited-availability resource, it is the foundation of supply vs demand.
Expanding on the second: I'd never, ever, buy something that I would want to use when driving, for instance, across the "boring states" of Nevada and south-eastern Oregon, that requires a constant connection to any type of service. Why? Because even cell phones are useless for about a three hour stretch of Highway 95 going up from Winnemucca. If cell phones aren't working now, how long will it be before some next-generation service comes in and "wires" the place up?
I might shoot myself without my iPod to listen to during that three hours of scrubgrass, migrating crickets, and mountains.
But, seriously, you guys are talking about a concept that would have garnered a lot of conversation fifteen years ago. The fact of the day is, though, that networking is not getting cheaper at a rate of doubling bandwidth per year, and small, portable hard drive storage (or non-hard drive Flash storage, even moreso) is. Wireless networking isn't winning on power consumption either (Flash storage wins there by a longshot as well).
Until people start having libraries that are infeasible to transport with them (which means, hard drive space can't keep up with library space, which certainly isn't the case today as library space isn't doubling per year either)and which can be trickle-downloaded to a low-profile wireless device in realtime, the idea here is dead. Sorry, that's just the facts.
MacMan86
Apr 23, 11:51 AM
It's a good feature because Apple has it, otherwise he would be in an uproar.
Why do you even bother trolling an Apple forum?
Why do you even bother trolling an Apple forum?
corywoolf
Nov 27, 01:30 PM
This may pave the way to larger wide-screens.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
I know you originally said 30" and then edited it before I could post. I doubt there will be a 40" any time soon. It is more likely that Apple introduces a 32" LCD TV and probably a 42" Plasma.
I would love to see a 40" widescreen.
I know you originally said 30" and then edited it before I could post. I doubt there will be a 40" any time soon. It is more likely that Apple introduces a 32" LCD TV and probably a 42" Plasma.
twoodcc
Sep 6, 12:01 PM
Remind me to never ask you for computer advice.
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
kiljoy616
Mar 24, 09:54 PM
i also prefer intel over amd but i think the cheaper models may run on amd in some time
Also considering that they have built in video for the laptops I can't see Apple going of Intel any time. :)
Also considering that they have built in video for the laptops I can't see Apple going of Intel any time. :)
rdowns
Mar 22, 01:03 PM
At my base they picket outside of the entrance gates every thursday. And all military members are to take a different entrance to avoid getting hurt. They have signs saying horrible comments and they attack you and your vehicle. Yes they get arrested if they attack anything, but at least 1 gets hurt a week. As for funerals somehow they find out where they are and play music, throw a party, cause a nascence basically to ruin the moment of memory and putting someone to rest.
How about a link?
Busted. The IT company owner who happens to serve in the military at the same time. Busy life.
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
So two questions (I will try to write out as best as I can, hopefully it's understandable).
1: Is it possible that while I am on a business trip with my laptop that if I needed to access my network at work that I can remotely access it to view computers on the network with abilities to grab files from a computer, check things / alter things, and maintain. If so how?
2: If someone is on my network is it possible to see what traffic they are bringing in or out of my network without installing a file on their pc / mac to know the site they entered, file download, etc.
Thanks team.
How about a link?
Busted. The IT company owner who happens to serve in the military at the same time. Busy life.
His profile says he's the Director of IT. Who am I to question that?
So two questions (I will try to write out as best as I can, hopefully it's understandable).
1: Is it possible that while I am on a business trip with my laptop that if I needed to access my network at work that I can remotely access it to view computers on the network with abilities to grab files from a computer, check things / alter things, and maintain. If so how?
2: If someone is on my network is it possible to see what traffic they are bringing in or out of my network without installing a file on their pc / mac to know the site they entered, file download, etc.
Thanks team.
twoodcc
Oct 15, 09:32 AM
well guys, i might be cutting back even more for right now. heat is becoming an issue. i made a thread about it here (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=8645334#post8645334). at my current rate, i think i'll have the air on in my apartment in the dead of winter!
iEvolution
Mar 23, 02:29 PM
The chance that the iPod Classic is updated to 220GB is zero. Apple has no plans to ever update a hard drive based non-touch portable device (they would not waste their time), and they've shown even less interest in increasing the capacity of any device beyond even 64GB flash.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
Tony
Yeah man, because it would be just so much effort to swap the 160GB for the 220GB..it would just cost WAYY too much money and too much time.
What a ignorant post.:rolleyes:
The COST is the issue with beyond 64GB flash at this point.
Eidorian
Aug 25, 10:26 AM
I can.Only thing holding back better GPU in mini and MacBooks is Intel. Apple needs to stick with IG for cost reasons. Just wating for Intel to start shipping better GPU so they can improve that ASAP. I'm with you guys. Waiting for that to improve as well. But may happen with this refresh. Don't know the IG roadmap so well. Read here the 965 set is delayed until early 2007.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
Can anyone here confirm where we're at and going how soon on the Intel Integrated GPU front?We're still going with the GMA950 on the mobile front. The X3000 (965) has made its debut on the desktop platform with Conroe. Still, driver issues and low chipset supply keep it from the mass market. We're not going to see a MOBILE X3000 (965) until Santa Rosa next year. Hopefully Apple can make some good drivers for OS X and the X3000. I don't know anything beyond the 965 in the integrated graphics front.
Panther71
Oct 29, 09:02 PM
If you want to protect the glass, I suggest you check out a leather case that has an aluminum lining, like the one from Proporta. I am confident this case will protect the glass as good as any case will. The only problem is that this case is more than the $25 max limit.
Erwin-Br
Mar 24, 03:07 PM
Can anyone explain the nVidia hate?
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
I, for one, miss my old GeForce 8800.
I have a Radeon HD 5770 now, and there are these little annoyances. For instance, when I run my bootcamp partition inside VMWare, the AMD driver software starts complaining. The GeForce didn't give a damn. Speaking of which, I had to install the .Net framework to install the AMD drivers. Kinda cheap. And every now and then I get a slight flicker in the screen. To be honest, I'm not sure if that's the Radeon, but I've never had it before.
Don't get me wrong, the card is performing superbly overall. But the driver side still needs some polish. (And that's a complaint I've been hearing for ages!)
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário