Trowaman
Aug 7, 01:22 AM
Ok, my predictions:
Leopard (iChat 4.0 ready to go for the iPhone)
Mac Pro
XServe (MacServe?)
new displays (iSights and probably IR. If I get my wish, S-Video and RCA in)
Paris: All about the iTunes and iPod ending with Steve saying available worldwide "except here." Possible iPhone here.
the other 4 Macs will be upgraded at some point going into Q1 with MBP and iMac getting Core 2 and MB and Minis getting the top Core Duos.
Leopard (iChat 4.0 ready to go for the iPhone)
Mac Pro
XServe (MacServe?)
new displays (iSights and probably IR. If I get my wish, S-Video and RCA in)
Paris: All about the iTunes and iPod ending with Steve saying available worldwide "except here." Possible iPhone here.
the other 4 Macs will be upgraded at some point going into Q1 with MBP and iMac getting Core 2 and MB and Minis getting the top Core Duos.
APPLENEWBIE
Aug 26, 05:18 PM
One year ago I was being driven nuts by my three office Windows machines (one custom built, two compaqs). Relatively new machines but it was one damned thing after another. A virus here (with Norton installed) a corrupt file there, a dead hard drive here, a spyware infestation there...and then the anti-idiot Windows warnings at every turn (Are you sure you want to do that? Really really sure. Can't I talk you out of that?) I was at wit's end. I was reinstalling the operating system about every 6 to 9 months. I was convinced by a rep at compusa to try a mac. Now I have no windows machines and four macs. No longer do I wonder what new horror is going to happen and cause me endless hours to fix.
I have had zero hardware problems, and of course, no problems with virus's etc. Life is good. I really think that my experience with windows machines is not all that uncommon. Apple stuff just seems better designed and built.
I think that it is easy to forget just how much better (not perfect) this Apple stuff really is than the Windows world.
I have had zero hardware problems, and of course, no problems with virus's etc. Life is good. I really think that my experience with windows machines is not all that uncommon. Apple stuff just seems better designed and built.
I think that it is easy to forget just how much better (not perfect) this Apple stuff really is than the Windows world.
vivithemage
Apr 27, 08:40 AM
They have some good wordsmiths :D
fastlane1588
Aug 5, 05:35 PM
iMac - No.
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
cute hairstyles for short hair
cute hairstyles for short hair
2011 Cute Short Hair Styles
cute hairstyles for short hair
Cute Short Hair Cuts
cute short hairstyles 2011
cute hairstyles for short hair
cute hairstyles for short hair
cute short haircuts 2011
Very Cute short hairstyle 2011
April 26, 2011 -- Stylish
Short Hair Styles 2011
cute hairstyles for long hair
Here some cute short haircuts
cute hairstyles for short hair
iPod - No.
MacBook - No.
MacBook Pro - No.
MacPro - Yes.
Xserve - Yes.
Displays - Yes.
Leopard Preview - Yes.
iPhone - Ha ha ha ha ha ha.
JGowan
Aug 6, 06:46 PM
I have satellite internet and have not been able to see keynote streams since getting it. Quicktime just opens up and says "Connecting" but never does.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.
Is there some other source that I can expect to show the keynote (in its entirety, please)... Living in the country is a love/hate thing these days.
Thanks.
heisetax
Jul 14, 08:24 PM
Doh! Well, again IMHO, it is my preference to have only one optical drive built in. I could always add an external later.
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Why do the rest of us have to settle for your preference?
I know people that have their systems running that could get by with a 5-10 GB hard drive. Does that mean that we should feel that all systems should only have a 5-10 GB hard drive, maybe a CD drive & since we all will have the same small needs a floppy drive. A DVD writer could make a complete backup in most ccases. Why would we need one of them. So why have more than one external 5 1/4" slot.
I may only run probrams that I can download on the internet, why then even one external drive slot?
Sounds a little far out. But what is really far out? Everybody has different needs & wants. Many Windows systems have the ability to have at least 4 internally mounted external 5 1/4" drives 2-4 or more 3.5" external drives, several internal 3.5" drives, 10-in-1 flash card reader/writers & many more things. My old Mac Clones had space for 4 5 1/4" external & 2 3 1/2" external drives, with either 2 or 4 internal 3.5" drives.
There are people that need to run many different drives at once. They don't all want to have more external drives with all of those many, many cords than they absolutely have to. Right now I have 3 external drives hooked to my 17" PowerBook. Then there is usually a flash drive or 2 hook up to this system.
Remember that everyone does their computing different. That means that only a certain group would be happy with what you think is all that needs to be in a system. Others will think that you have too much.
My wife & me each have MDD PowerMac G4's for our desktop units. They both have DVD burne & CD burner drives. I miss the other slots that I have on myy Clones. I may have up to 6 internal 3.5" drives mounted. Usually a couple of SCSI drives, a couple PATA drives, & a couple SATA drives.s I still have 3-6 drives attached externally plus a NAS drive. Most external drives are FW800, with a couple FW400 drives & a 3 CF drives tower by Lexar.
What is the correct amount of drives? To me it is whatever it takes to properly get your computer job down. So to you, it will always be, why more than 1 internal 5 1/4" drive.
Bill the TaxMan
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 06:49 PM
Confused.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
Can somebody explain me the differences between the cellphone market between the US and Europe.
Will a 'iPhone' just be marketed to the US or worldwide (as the iPod does)?
C.:confused:
The biggest difference would be that in europe we use GSM-system (900 Mhz and 1800Mhz) whereas US use both CDMA and GSM (850MHz and 1900Mhz)
A typical triband GSM phone enables you to call more or less all over the world whereas a CDMA is more or less restricted to use it in US and some countries in Asia. CDMA and GSM are two incompatible system like windows and OSX, i.e they dont "speak" with each other. One difference you notice as a user is that GSM phones has a SIM card which more or less is your identity. That is, if you have an unlocked cellphone you can change operators whenever you feel like it. This is not possible with CDMA cellphones.
Celphones are also much more common in europe and the "typical" cellphone user is not that tied up to an operator as a "typical" US user. Carriers in europe don't cripple the phones like some do in US.
I am sure there are man more differences, but these were the only that came to my mind right now.
ergle2
Sep 19, 10:43 PM
why shouldnt it?
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
Ah, a mature, intelligent, well reasoned reply.
balamw
Apr 8, 06:26 AM
I wonder if this has more to do with reward zone coupons and 18 month no interest financing.
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
Have you ever seen an RZ coupon that didn't say "excludes Apple products" along with Bose and a number of other carveouts. Financing may be a different issue.
B
ten-oak-druid
Apr 19, 03:12 PM
Apple better not win this case and anyone who thinks that they should are a fool.
lame
lame
bbeagle
Apr 11, 11:43 AM
Big mistake if true.
I don't think so.
Apple will announce iOS 5 at WWDC. It will have a lot of new features people whose contracts are ending will drool over.
They will announce that iOS 5 will be available with the new iPhone 5 in September/October. This will give enough time for developers to make new apps and people to not jump to new contracts, because of what is promised coming soon.
Of course, hackers will get beta versions of iOS 5 installed on their iPhone 3s and 4s to keep them happy, for the summer.
I don't think so.
Apple will announce iOS 5 at WWDC. It will have a lot of new features people whose contracts are ending will drool over.
They will announce that iOS 5 will be available with the new iPhone 5 in September/October. This will give enough time for developers to make new apps and people to not jump to new contracts, because of what is promised coming soon.
Of course, hackers will get beta versions of iOS 5 installed on their iPhone 3s and 4s to keep them happy, for the summer.
parapup
Apr 11, 12:13 PM
Apple really needs to make some significant changes to iOS5 to bring me back this time.
For me those changes would be -
a) Check box that says "Allow app installs from unknown sources"
b) Mind blowing notification system - never before seen preferably, but something that even remotely competes with webOS would do
c) Widgets
d) Bigger screen - although this is not iOS specific, a iOS5 that does some magic with bigger screen is what I am looking for.
Tough gig Apple - doesn't hurt to try :)
For me those changes would be -
a) Check box that says "Allow app installs from unknown sources"
b) Mind blowing notification system - never before seen preferably, but something that even remotely competes with webOS would do
c) Widgets
d) Bigger screen - although this is not iOS specific, a iOS5 that does some magic with bigger screen is what I am looking for.
Tough gig Apple - doesn't hurt to try :)
iliketyla
Apr 6, 02:03 PM
Motorola not selling any units of a crappy product? Huh... who'd have thought.
I wish they'd start banning people who makes baseless comments like this.
I wish they'd start banning people who makes baseless comments like this.
Gakusei
Apr 6, 03:42 PM
Personally I'm waiting for either the HTC 10.1" tablet or the rumored official Google version being made by LG. Or...if Apple makes some much needed improvements in iOS 5, like not needing to connect the iPad to a computer to update the OS.
shawnce
Aug 6, 10:15 PM
Woot on site ... look at all the geeks :)
First shirt says "Veni. Vidi. Codi." on the front and "WWDC06" on the back.
...and yes those banners making fun of Vista are real.
First shirt says "Veni. Vidi. Codi." on the front and "WWDC06" on the back.
...and yes those banners making fun of Vista are real.
eMagius
Aug 8, 07:31 AM
hmmm, most of the features are already in windows? what version of windows do you have?
2003.
2003.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 01:39 PM
The trade dress claims do not list specific models.
Which tells me somebody botched it. Does it impact damage claims if Samsung decides to present one model that doesn't bear any ressemblance to the iPhone like the ones depicted above ?
Or can Apple amend to add specifity to the claim ?
Or is it moot in the eyes of the court and would only apply when calculating damages if a decision is done in favor of Apple ?
Which tells me somebody botched it. Does it impact damage claims if Samsung decides to present one model that doesn't bear any ressemblance to the iPhone like the ones depicted above ?
Or can Apple amend to add specifity to the claim ?
Or is it moot in the eyes of the court and would only apply when calculating damages if a decision is done in favor of Apple ?
cloudnine
Jul 14, 04:08 PM
To charge $1800 for a system that only has 512MB is a real disappoitment. 1GB RAM oughta be standard, especially with Leopard being on the horizon.
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
Unless the Xeon is that expensive (which I can't see how it would be), I don't see that as anything except creating some seperation between the configurations.
I agree... my buddy got a macbook pro and it came standard with 512mb of ram. For the first 3 or 4 days, he thought he purchased a defective notebook, it ran so badly. Opening MS Office applications literally took minutes, and that was with nothing else open. He took it back into the Apple store and the rep told him that his problem was his ram, so he purchased another 1gb (1.5gb total), and now it runs perfectly. You'd think that with all of these intel machines being released and a huge selection of software not being Universal yet, that 1 gig of ram would be standard...
kinda a$$h0lish if you ask me. :mad:
ChrisA
Aug 7, 06:43 PM
Probably the same way it is in scalable transactional databases that use multi-versioning concurrency protocols (e.g. PostgreSQL and Oracle). No data is over-written, and every "update" actually creates a new record version.
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
But on the other hand you _want_ the data to be physically copied if it is to be backed up to an external drive.
Some time ago Apple was talking with Sun about using ZFS in OSX but I don't think anything came out of it. I suspect Apple wrote this themselves
The problem is not that I can't figure out how Apple did this but that I can think of about a half dozen ways they could have done this.
Lots of ways it COULD be implemented. Looks at Suns new file system ZFS. It is basically "Copy on Write". With a file system you can do things even fancier then with a DBMS. For example a "block" (i-node) exists physicaly on the disk only once but it could be maped into any numbr of files. If a file in only an orderd set of block numbers then to copy a copy all you need to copy is the set of numbers which is on the order of 1000 times shorter then the data itself.
But on the other hand you _want_ the data to be physically copied if it is to be backed up to an external drive.
Some time ago Apple was talking with Sun about using ZFS in OSX but I don't think anything came out of it. I suspect Apple wrote this themselves
The problem is not that I can't figure out how Apple did this but that I can think of about a half dozen ways they could have done this.
SevenInchScrew
Dec 8, 12:54 PM
^^^ Again, from Sony and referenced in my post 152 (http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=11513752&postcount=152)
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
I'm not arguing, just pointing out what Sony themselves have to say on the subject. Of course, as you progress further into the game, you are going to use more Premium racing models.
I understand that Sony are saying damage is not "unlocked" at some point in the game. And that is correct. When you start the game, there is damage. You can head on crash at 120 into a wall, and your bumper will crumple a little, in a Premium car. But, do this same thing, in the same Premium car, at level 20 and 40 and you will see increasing levels of damage.
So yea, Sony is right that damage itself isn't "unlocked" at some point, but the higher degrees of damage ARE. And not just from using race cars, Premium cars as well. Just like how as you progress, the AI gets slightly less brain-dead, the cars will start to somehow damage more.
pmz
Apr 6, 10:30 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
I have a 13" ultimate of the current generation. The limiting factor for me is the graphics, not the processor. so going to sandy bridge with the intel 3000 would be a less appealing machine for my uses than the current model. It's really too bad the sandy bridge macs are tied to those garbage integrated graphics.
Since you have no clue how the sandy bridge airs will perform, I'll take your statement as FUD.
tripjammer
Mar 22, 12:51 PM
The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Nope...its rim...so the hardware is going to be crap. The Samsung will be closer to the ipad 2 killer....what am I saying there will never be an ipad 2 killer.
adamfilip
Sep 13, 12:57 PM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
No software such as, Cinema 4D, Motion, Aperture, Final Cut Pro etc
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
No software such as, Cinema 4D, Motion, Aperture, Final Cut Pro etc
milo
Jul 20, 04:34 PM
I think Logic can only use two cores/processors with a cludge to use the other two on a quad (by pretending it's a remote machine). Someone told me this though so I'm not 100% on that.
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?
This is true. Logic will use up to about half the available processing power. Using the kludge (which is pretty simple but has some limitations) you can get close to all of it. Which allows for a ton more power than any of the dual G5s.
Still, apple needs to update Logic ASAP to use the full power without a hack. I can't believe it's taken them this long, they BETTER make the fix for all quad machines and not just intel boxes.
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
I don't buy that. Apple needs a workstation machine with the fastest available chips. PC's will use them in workstations, it would make no sense to cripple the top of the line desktop machine! Servers are distinguished from the pro line because they have a completely different form factor and feature set, no need to add artificial distincions.
Neither Apple or Dell operate in bubbles. They both realize that these chips belong in real servers and also requires an OS that can support such chips.
You don't think ANY pc makers will ship workstations with kentsfield? Why not? This is a chip that would be perfect for a workstation, you think nobody will take the opportunity to use it? The chips are fast as hell, what makes you think they only belong in servers? Are there features that can only be taken advantage of in a server and not in a workstation?