zap2
Jul 24, 02:37 PM
Good new because after using my BT Apple mouse, no way i was going wired even for Mighty Mouse
SubaruNation555
Oct 31, 10:36 AM
24" HP ZR24w or 24" Dell UltraSharp U2410 to replace my 20" Cinema Display, still haven't decided. The HP is significantly cheaper but the Dell seems to have the edge in color accuracy. I guess you get what you pay for.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1230/5139586760_7d2fea3ddd_b.jpg
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1230/5139586760_7d2fea3ddd_b.jpg
lordonuthin
Nov 25, 04:30 PM
I think I have lost 7 -10k points from the 10th 11th and 12th instead of gaining ~60-70k pts. the 10th I had ~3420 the 11th was ~7200 and the 12th was ~3420. now it's ~3420, 0 and I think 0. Don't suppose it would do any good to complain since I don't have any "proof" of what happened.
Oh well it's just a "game" anyway :rolleyes: and as long as I'm doing something meaningfull that is what really counts anyway. I'm not smart enough to contribute to science myself so this is my way to add to our knowledge of the universe and life.
Anyway, happy Thanksgiving to everyone everywhere and may your points pile up.
Oh well it's just a "game" anyway :rolleyes: and as long as I'm doing something meaningfull that is what really counts anyway. I'm not smart enough to contribute to science myself so this is my way to add to our knowledge of the universe and life.
Anyway, happy Thanksgiving to everyone everywhere and may your points pile up.
(marc)
Apr 24, 12:20 PM
I understand from the news coverage that they attacked her after she used the woman's restroom.
Her transgender nature, and their reaction to that was absolutely central to this crime. If that isn't a hate crime, I don't know what is.
Doesn't look like a hate crime to me. Seems like the attackers just wanted to fight, for whatever reason.
Her transgender nature, and their reaction to that was absolutely central to this crime. If that isn't a hate crime, I don't know what is.
Doesn't look like a hate crime to me. Seems like the attackers just wanted to fight, for whatever reason.
eddyg
Aug 15, 06:17 PM
Hi,
It doesn't look as if Spaces can work this way - but if you have multiple
screens then it would be nice to assign one or more spaces to that screen.
Is that how it works?
Or does it treat the other screens as an extension of the current Space?
Cheers, Ed.
It doesn't look as if Spaces can work this way - but if you have multiple
screens then it would be nice to assign one or more spaces to that screen.
Is that how it works?
Or does it treat the other screens as an extension of the current Space?
Cheers, Ed.
avinash
Mar 16, 02:09 AM
Hi Avinash...I was there today at Brea and they handed out approximately 12-15 tickets. While I do not know numbers, the AT&T models were in less quantity than the Verizon and Wifi.
Seeing as I did not get the version I wanted, I will also be joining you at Brea around 6:00AM! 32GB Black Wifi here I come!!!!! :D
Ill be there by 6am too...im looking for a 64black wifi nd either a 32 or 64 black att 3g...hope i get em...ill be wearing a black ferrari tee so look out for me.
Seeing as I did not get the version I wanted, I will also be joining you at Brea around 6:00AM! 32GB Black Wifi here I come!!!!! :D
Ill be there by 6am too...im looking for a 64black wifi nd either a 32 or 64 black att 3g...hope i get em...ill be wearing a black ferrari tee so look out for me.
iSee
Apr 26, 12:09 PM
Of course they are.
This kind of thing has to be paid for somehow. Common options:
1. Pay subscription
2. Ad supported
3. Loss-leader to help sell something profitable.
This rumor is suggesting that Apple is going with a combination of 1 and 3.
This kind of thing has to be paid for somehow. Common options:
1. Pay subscription
2. Ad supported
3. Loss-leader to help sell something profitable.
This rumor is suggesting that Apple is going with a combination of 1 and 3.
*LTD*
Apr 21, 11:09 PM
Even more entertaining is the fact that Apple is so arrogant they fail to realize how stupid they look.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Do you honestly think Apple don't know what they're doing? They're the most successful company in tech today. And they got there by doing virtually the opposite of what everyone else is. Seems they've got the technology game (including the litigation game) all figured out.
Samsung doesn't have consumers on their side. Apple does. Samsung doesn't make the hottest products in tech. Apple does. Samsung make internals. That's a mater of logistics.
Whoever has the consumers attracts business. And consumers are tripping over each other to get Apple gear.
Besides, these phone patents have nothing to do with supply agreements, nor will they have any effect on supply agreements, so you can stop *wishing* that it will.
Even if you want to court insanity and assume one will affect the other, Apple has an insane amount of leverage, rendering Samsung as just another supplier among several. In terms of meeting Apple's capacity needs, Apple always has a plan B. It's safe to assume they've got one now. They're pretty untouchable when it comes to planning ahead. Sometimes they can't anticipate just how insane the demand is for their products, but a lot of companies would love to have that problem.
Suing their biggest vendor.
It doesn't get any more stupid than that.
Do you honestly think Apple don't know what they're doing? They're the most successful company in tech today. And they got there by doing virtually the opposite of what everyone else is. Seems they've got the technology game (including the litigation game) all figured out.
Samsung doesn't have consumers on their side. Apple does. Samsung doesn't make the hottest products in tech. Apple does. Samsung make internals. That's a mater of logistics.
Whoever has the consumers attracts business. And consumers are tripping over each other to get Apple gear.
Besides, these phone patents have nothing to do with supply agreements, nor will they have any effect on supply agreements, so you can stop *wishing* that it will.
Even if you want to court insanity and assume one will affect the other, Apple has an insane amount of leverage, rendering Samsung as just another supplier among several. In terms of meeting Apple's capacity needs, Apple always has a plan B. It's safe to assume they've got one now. They're pretty untouchable when it comes to planning ahead. Sometimes they can't anticipate just how insane the demand is for their products, but a lot of companies would love to have that problem.
InfinitiG
Apr 28, 04:46 PM
Does this mean the white iphone is 10% more durable?
josephfarran
Jun 6, 06:40 PM
Did they really tell you to use the Shopping Cart feature in iTunes? Because since iTunes 9 this feature is gone now! The documentation you/Apple quoted is depricated unless your still using a pre iTunes 9 version.
I miss shopping cart, but it is still around - called wish list now. Click on the drop down arrow next to the file you want to DL and click "add to wish list." Not sure if it works like this on the iPhone OS though...
I miss shopping cart, but it is still around - called wish list now. Click on the drop down arrow next to the file you want to DL and click "add to wish list." Not sure if it works like this on the iPhone OS though...
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
firestarter
Apr 24, 08:02 PM
Why do you assume that I'm violent natured?
You just told me that you'd beat hell out of someone (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12453464&postcount=56).
Non violent people don't tend to use assault to solve their problems.
You just told me that you'd beat hell out of someone (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=12453464&postcount=56).
Non violent people don't tend to use assault to solve their problems.
Surely
Jan 27, 05:40 PM
To add to my post-workout recovery drink:
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HQMqZSk3L._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpghttp://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41H0Rwu8BvL._AA300_PIbundle-1,TopRight,0,0AA300_SH20_.jpg
My post-workout recovery drink:
http://www.jonnyrash.com/img/sandbox/organic-valley-chocolate-milk.jpg
After researching, I discovered that chocolate milk has the same carb to protein ratio that expensive recovery drink mixes have (such as the P90X Recovery Drink). So, instead of spending around $60/month, I've elected to go with the chocolate milk, and to add a few supplements that are important for muscle recovery (which are found in those expensive drinks). Any excuse to drink chocolate milk is a good one.
SMRT
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 11:37 AM
You really don't need LTE until Uncle Steve decides you do.
KnightWRX
Apr 16, 06:42 AM
Apple didn't buy iOS/OS X. They created it from scratch using components from UNIX/NeXTSTEP. Simple.
First, OS X is very much like the last versions of NeXTSTEP was, aside from Quartz/Appkit frameworks and GUI layer. Foundation is basically what was shipping in the 90s, the kernel/BSD userland, etc...
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway. Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
First, OS X is very much like the last versions of NeXTSTEP was, aside from Quartz/Appkit frameworks and GUI layer. Foundation is basically what was shipping in the 90s, the kernel/BSD userland, etc...
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway. Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
It's great that Google bought Android but there's a very few things google have done on their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
Krevnik
Apr 22, 11:13 AM
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU see source link -> http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-106/
BTW - No part of MacOSX i distributed under GNU licensing...
Couple notes:
GNU is an organization that amongst other things, controls the GPL (GNU Public License).
Linux has it's background in Minix, using a GNU userland, hence the common term GNU/Linux to denote the two pieces. The Linux kernel is not controlled by GNU projects.
BTW - No part of MacOSX i distributed under GNU licensing...
Couple notes:
GNU is an organization that amongst other things, controls the GPL (GNU Public License).
Linux has it's background in Minix, using a GNU userland, hence the common term GNU/Linux to denote the two pieces. The Linux kernel is not controlled by GNU projects.
ucfgrad93
Feb 25, 09:47 AM
And the train wreck continues....
Best Birthday Wishes For A
funny irthday poems for est
nick004
Oct 24, 07:42 AM
anyone got benchmarks??? :)
steveh
Apr 12, 02:14 PM
Ah, so ultimately there will still be 7+ cables, just not connected to the computer itself.
If it's connections to your laptop, that's a win right there. Once you've set up the other connected devices, you won't have to mess with them whenever you go somewhere with the laptop.
If it's connections to your laptop, that's a win right there. Once you've set up the other connected devices, you won't have to mess with them whenever you go somewhere with the laptop.
aristotle
Apr 28, 05:01 PM
Surely by now there is someone out there with a White iPhone, a messuring tape or calipers that can just tell us these photos are nonsense? Please? Pretty please? Xxx
Yes, everyone carries calipers or measuring tape with them everywhere. Get a grip already.
Yes, everyone carries calipers or measuring tape with them everywhere. Get a grip already.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 26, 05:16 PM
I have no idea what happened except Plutonius got lynched and isn't a WW. Are Chrmjenkins and Appleguy 321/123 okay? Are they Specials? I can't tell if I'm on the Detention Level of a Star Destroyer or on the bridge of the Enterprise D. :confused::confused:
MrChurchyard
Apr 14, 04:20 AM
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.
What's the need? You could simply compile for x86/x64 and make it universal. XCode already provides an iPhone/iPad simulator to test apps on the Mac.
Whether that would be desirable in any form or way is a different question, and I agree that the UI of iOS apps doesn't work all that well with the keyboard+mouse paradigm.
What would be easy to accomplish would be making universal apps that combine the iPhone, iPad and Mac version in one app bundle. Say, download "OmniFocus Universal", which starts the Mac version on the Mac, the iPad version on iPad, the iPhone version on iPhone/iPod touch. Would only make sense when combining Mac App Store and iOS App Store someway while keeping the syncing of the iOS devices in iTunes.
What's the need? You could simply compile for x86/x64 and make it universal. XCode already provides an iPhone/iPad simulator to test apps on the Mac.
Whether that would be desirable in any form or way is a different question, and I agree that the UI of iOS apps doesn't work all that well with the keyboard+mouse paradigm.
What would be easy to accomplish would be making universal apps that combine the iPhone, iPad and Mac version in one app bundle. Say, download "OmniFocus Universal", which starts the Mac version on the Mac, the iPad version on iPad, the iPhone version on iPhone/iPod touch. Would only make sense when combining Mac App Store and iOS App Store someway while keeping the syncing of the iOS devices in iTunes.
blissmonkey
Apr 12, 03:09 PM
Exactly in the same boat except my 3G has a shattered screen with bits of glass that has fallen off. It has gone through hell and back but, I decided to wait since June is only a short wait away. Now, supposedly its been pushed back to september and I am planning on getting a new phone in either june or july since I will have some extra cash and can move to verizon on a family plan. I dont want to get the 4 when the new one is right around the corner. So, this pushing back to september means I'll probably move to the Droid. Hopefully the announcement is still in june and these rumors are just to throw us off since the last iPhone announcement wasnt very exciting since we all knew what was coming.
bousozoku
Jul 11, 01:19 AM
Apple never intended for iWork to compete with MS Office. Apple merely wanted to fill a niche for those AppleWorks users who didn't need a full blown behemoth Office Suite like MS Office.
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
Photoshop Elements 4.0 is a capable replacement for Photoshop CS2 for a lot of people, even professionals. It depends on what you're doing with it.
I've used various word processors since writing my own in the early 1980s and MS Word 4.0 was quite nice but Microsoft kept adding so many features that it's become haphazard and troublesome. It is counter-productive for a lot of people, especially when you have to revise previous documents.
Pages 2 is a useful release but it's not final. To discount it or iWork totally is not reasonable.
It is only the die-hard Apple users that detest MS Office who are suggesting that iWork is a replacement for MS Office.
I have been using Pages and Keynote since Day One. Pages One was almost worthless in my book. Apple should have given away Pages v2 to those who suffered through version 1. Keynote was interesting and useful from version one but still lags significantly behind PowerPoint.
Both Pages 2 and Keynote now make a nice little package at $79.00 for those users who don't need to work in an MS Office environment and don't need all of the revision, collaboration, and integration tools of MS Office.
But come on, let's get real. iWork doesn't really come close to what is offered by a professional business suite like MS Office. It's like saying, Photshop Elements is a replacement for Creative Suite 2.:eek:
Photoshop Elements 4.0 is a capable replacement for Photoshop CS2 for a lot of people, even professionals. It depends on what you're doing with it.
I've used various word processors since writing my own in the early 1980s and MS Word 4.0 was quite nice but Microsoft kept adding so many features that it's become haphazard and troublesome. It is counter-productive for a lot of people, especially when you have to revise previous documents.
Pages 2 is a useful release but it's not final. To discount it or iWork totally is not reasonable.
No comments:
Post a Comment