ciTiger
Apr 21, 12:21 PM
Apple has to get used to these kind of things now that it is growing more and more...
boncellis
Sep 6, 07:35 PM
There has to be something in the cards that Apple plans to implement that will trump Amazon. I just don't think it will be the iPod this time. What's in store, I wonder...
SciFrog
Dec 1, 12:49 PM
thanks! i hope so.
and congrats to you, whiterabbit, for hitting 3 million!
And congrats on the #7 spot, you crushed me... I should reclaim it in a month or so...
and congrats to you, whiterabbit, for hitting 3 million!
And congrats on the #7 spot, you crushed me... I should reclaim it in a month or so...
granex
Nov 28, 10:24 AM
The Xbox comparison is not totally valid because in that case Microsoft could provide software support to the games makers and provide other incentives for content (as well as supplying their own games content). With the Zune (and other mp3 players) things are pretty much content neutral for the most part, except for online store purchases, where Apple has a huge advantage.
The only way that Microsoft can use their $$ to greatly influence this market is by selling the Zune for a loss (as they did for the Xbox). They really can't influence the content market in the same way, unless they start paying bands to pull their stuff from iTunes, and even then that is a small piece of the music content market.
They will have to win on features and integration -- so they are pretty much doomed. They have essentially bet the whole farm on the wireless exchange. We'll see how that works, but it is a density dependent advantage (if there are not enough Zunes around then there is no advantage to being able to exchange with people). Some animal species go extinct even when they are at reasonably large numbers when their relative density falls so low that they can't effectively find mates. This is called the Allee effect. If the density of Zunes does not increase above a certain critical level, even assuming that people want to squirt songs (or whatever it's called), then they are really out of luck.
A cheap, powerful Xbox with lots of cool games has value right from the start. Microsoft could buy your love in this case.
The only way that Microsoft can use their $$ to greatly influence this market is by selling the Zune for a loss (as they did for the Xbox). They really can't influence the content market in the same way, unless they start paying bands to pull their stuff from iTunes, and even then that is a small piece of the music content market.
They will have to win on features and integration -- so they are pretty much doomed. They have essentially bet the whole farm on the wireless exchange. We'll see how that works, but it is a density dependent advantage (if there are not enough Zunes around then there is no advantage to being able to exchange with people). Some animal species go extinct even when they are at reasonably large numbers when their relative density falls so low that they can't effectively find mates. This is called the Allee effect. If the density of Zunes does not increase above a certain critical level, even assuming that people want to squirt songs (or whatever it's called), then they are really out of luck.
A cheap, powerful Xbox with lots of cool games has value right from the start. Microsoft could buy your love in this case.
benjayman2
Feb 28, 04:23 AM
My humble little corner. :o
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5093/5485238236_f43739028a_z.jpg
Are the flowers real? I'm trying to find some plant to go with our new room. Kind of break up all the inanimate objects in the room :p
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5093/5485238236_f43739028a_z.jpg
Are the flowers real? I'm trying to find some plant to go with our new room. Kind of break up all the inanimate objects in the room :p
JGowan
Jan 13, 01:02 AM
See my post below
Ell _ Nikki - Running Scared
Ell/Nikki - Running Scared
Ell/Nikki, quot;Running Scared
Azerbaijan 2011 || Ell amp; Niki
Ell amp; Nikki - Running Scared
zu running Scared von Ell
Azerbejdžan- Ell amp; Nikki-
Azerbejdžan- Ell amp; Nikki-
Song: Running Scared; Artist:
Song: Running Scared; Artist:
Ell amp; Nikki - Running Scared
Ell amp; Nikki - Running Scared
I#39;m running, I#39;m scared of
ezekielrage_99
Aug 16, 09:26 PM
Just wait and see. I bet the only new thing we'll see is iPod Nano's getting more storage. As for the replacment of the iPod Video. Just a bigger screen.
Sounds pretty likely to happen, like a large percentage of the people here I am waiting for the next updates of the iPods before I buy.
Sounds pretty likely to happen, like a large percentage of the people here I am waiting for the next updates of the iPods before I buy.
dime21
Apr 20, 09:26 PM
sorry no longer the case for most of that.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
Manuals now cost more to buy than autos due to fewer of them being built so supply is lower.
No really cheaper to maintain. Hell manuals can go 200+k with out the tranny or the engine needing to be pulled. Manuals sorry you have to pull one of those items ever 100k miles to replace the clutch. That eats up the saving so at best it is a break even in that department.
Tranny might last longer but that is about it. Still has to be pulled ever 100k to replace clutch. Hell an auto tranny will out last the car any how so a non issue.
Power wise yes auto is going to eat a little more of the power off the engine but really not much less than the manuals eat due to modern hydrolics and more physical locking together of the engine and tranny.
Fuel economy. Sorry no longer the case. High way the get the same due to the fact that the tranny of both are physically locked to with the engine so no gain there. City mileage Autos can and often times do get better MPG even more so with the modern CVT. CVT for the extra gear ratios and on top of that you have computer controlled shifting that can time it quicker and faster and at better points for MPG than any human can.
Even Autos now have 5-7 gears so that gain is even lost from the manuals. They have the same number of gears pretty much standard now.
Now control. I will give you that. but that is about it.
sorry, but wherever you got your information, it is not correct. fwiw, my last car, a vw passat, i sold with 312k miles on it. i bought it new at the dealer. still had the original clutch. your 100k replacement claim is bogus.
highway mileage is different due to gear ratios, not "physically locked". automatics use different ratios than manuals, even with same engine. shift speed is irrelevant for mileage.
and lastly, manuals do not cost more. every car i've ever owned, new or old, including my 2007 porsche 911, have come standard with a manual transmission. if you want automatic, that's an option you pay extra for, several $thousand in some cases. i've never owned an American car, so maybe the domestics are different, but your blanket statement is still wrong.
on my wife's mercedes, it needs automatic fluid change every 30k miles. dealer charges ~$300 for this. That's $1000 in service in 90k miles assuming nothing breaks. My manual transmission requires no service or fluid changes for 100k miles. $1000 in maintenance vs $0 in maintenance. automatic is far more expensive from a maintenance standpoint.
lordonuthin
Apr 17, 03:53 PM
congrats to SciFrog for 6 million points! (with MR team)
Grats to SciFrog for 6 mil!!
and congrats to rwh202 for 4 million points!
and to rwh202 for 4mil!!
Were not ignoring anyone else, it's just too hard to keep track of all 67 of you :p
Grats to SciFrog for 6 mil!!
and congrats to rwh202 for 4 million points!
and to rwh202 for 4mil!!
Were not ignoring anyone else, it's just too hard to keep track of all 67 of you :p
newagemac
May 3, 09:02 AM
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Uh, this comment is entirely wrong. With iOS, you can download something and move to another app and it will continue downloading in the background. The multitasking APIs have all the obvious backgrounding tasks covered and will likely include more if needed. Basically the goal is to allow background tasks when needed and when not needed let the app suspend and release resources to the apps you actually need. This method in iOS has proven to work far better than traditional operating systems like Mac OS X and Windows. That's why they are bringing it "Back to the Mac OS". The best parts of what they developed in iOS are being added in Lion.
I think most people's problem is that they mistakenly viewed iOS as inferior in every way to Mac OS X but in many ways it is cutting edge and far better than OS X and Windows have ever been. The way iOS multitasking works is the reason very powerful and memory hungry apps like iMove and GarageBand for iPad work so surprisingly well on such a limited memory device. The apps get to use a much larger percentage of the CPU, GPU, and RAM than they do on traditional OSes under normal usage where you have multiple apps open.
Right now I have a bunch of tabs open in Safari on my Mac and it's consuming a little over 1GB of RAM and lots of CPU. If I switch to Photoshop, Safari is still going to be using up all that RAM and CPU I really need for Photoshop when I don't plan on using Safari again until later today. And I don't want to shut it down because I have a bunch things in these tabs that I want to get back to later today including partially typed forum replies, halfway read articles, etc. On the iPad, Safari would suspend and release the RAM and CPU to my currently used RAM/CPU hungry app. That's what they need to bring to Lion.
Gurubarry
Apr 13, 02:42 AM
I second this.
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
alfagta
Apr 1, 01:04 PM
Don't know if anyone mentioned this, but System Profiler has been given a complete overhaul, including detailed-USB hdd details and a refined GUI
About this Mac or System Profiler? Refreshed About this Mac was already present in DP1. Post some screenshots.
About this Mac or System Profiler? Refreshed About this Mac was already present in DP1. Post some screenshots.
razzmatazz
Aug 6, 09:58 PM
how long is the keynote?
They last about an hour to 2 hours
They last about an hour to 2 hours
rezenclowd3
Jan 9, 08:50 PM
It was/ is very clean and well cared for. Right now its a 5ft paint job, which is all orig :o I have all 22 years of records which is damn nice. How much did I pay? I'd rather not say, but as a reference, I think one looking for such a clean car in good mechanical condition pay $4-5k for a car with no mods. Blue book for these cars with the mileage they typically have is $2k. I completely overpaid for a stock car, however I wanted a clean/ mechanically excellent car that's ready for competition, so I was willing to pay quite a premium to find EXACTLY what I was looking for.
After owning this for a week and 1 day, I want to now purchase a 325i convertible. I missed a few steals last month :( However all would probably have needed just $3-4k in work to make it another DD.
BTW when quoting, at the max only include 1 pic. It's a pita to scroll through the same pics 2x. Thanks for the compliment though.
After owning this for a week and 1 day, I want to now purchase a 325i convertible. I missed a few steals last month :( However all would probably have needed just $3-4k in work to make it another DD.
BTW when quoting, at the max only include 1 pic. It's a pita to scroll through the same pics 2x. Thanks for the compliment though.
Multimedia
Sep 6, 10:32 AM
I am a little bit disappointed that it still does not have any built-in TV tuner.No problem. Just add an EyeTV hybrid (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) for $150 to one ofthe 4 USB ports and you are good to go. Hang a FW400 external 400GB HD for about $150 total - case and HD - and you have your TV server. Why would Apple do it when Elgato already has the perfect ultimate solution? :confused:
Santa Rosa
Jan 12, 12:08 PM
Interesting name, corroborates with the poster that came out earlier.
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
Exactly why I dont think its going to be called the Macbook Air. Sounds like some sort of computer flatulence problem. "Yea got Macbook Air at the moment, hopefully the AppleCare will fix it"
It also, obviously, fits with what's sure to be a very light product. Get it? Something in the air? Hah, I bet we can all tell who was the brainchild behind this...
Exactly why I dont think its going to be called the Macbook Air. Sounds like some sort of computer flatulence problem. "Yea got Macbook Air at the moment, hopefully the AppleCare will fix it"
BlizzardBomb
Sep 1, 12:23 PM
Hmph...I don't really trust masOSXrumors at all...
You can trust AppleInsider though and they too have said 23" and Merom iMacs. Looks like pretty solid evidence now but we'll have to wait and see.
I wonder if it'll use the same poor quality 23" panel that the ACD does.
Well, if you like everything rose-tinted it's OK :p
New 23" displays do not have the pink tint.
You can trust AppleInsider though and they too have said 23" and Merom iMacs. Looks like pretty solid evidence now but we'll have to wait and see.
I wonder if it'll use the same poor quality 23" panel that the ACD does.
Well, if you like everything rose-tinted it's OK :p
New 23" displays do not have the pink tint.
fr4c
Nov 23, 11:22 PM
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
No need to rub it in.
Sent from the neighbors down south.
;)
No need to rub it in.
Sent from the neighbors down south.
;)
skinniezinho
Nov 27, 11:59 AM
first pair of decent headphones.
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
grado sr60i
http://www.opticaudio.co.uk/images/Grado%20SR60I-2.jpg
Good choice!I have the Alessandro MS1i (http://www.alessandro-products.com/headphones.html) wich are +- a mix of grado models and love them!
autrefois
Sep 6, 10:37 AM
If Apple is concerned with showing potential switchers that Macs are more affordable than PCs, why not keep on the old Mac mini low-end model and price it at $499 (like the low-end Mac mini used to cost a while ago) or eventually even a little lower?
It's all fine and dandy that Apple can show during the keynote that the Mac Pros are significantly cheaper than comparable Dell machines, but why not try to show they can be competitve (or at least exist) at the under-$500 end of the spectrum as well?
It's all fine and dandy that Apple can show during the keynote that the Mac Pros are significantly cheaper than comparable Dell machines, but why not try to show they can be competitve (or at least exist) at the under-$500 end of the spectrum as well?
Shannighan
Nov 27, 07:19 AM
=] bought it on Tuesday, of course it had to rain on Wednesday so that's why it's all dirty >.>
More pictures when it's clean :P
I just bought a mazda 3 to on Monday, I love it, its fun to drive to.
I too have a Mazda 3 (2010), it is a lot of fun to drive, except the pickup can be weird some times. I drove it down to Pittsburgh once and it was a lot of fun on the thruway.
More pictures when it's clean :P
I just bought a mazda 3 to on Monday, I love it, its fun to drive to.
I too have a Mazda 3 (2010), it is a lot of fun to drive, except the pickup can be weird some times. I drove it down to Pittsburgh once and it was a lot of fun on the thruway.
Synchromesh
Apr 20, 10:50 AM
The hondas I've driven from 02-06 (including mine) have all have very good engaging transmissions.
I beg to differ. Aside from S2000 whose transmission really is orgasmic, everything else from 2002 on I've driven by Honda was average at best. I drove an '07 Civic Si which was ok but nothing spectacular as well as '06 Accord V6 with manual. That one had a vague shifter that looked like an afterthought. Didn't like it. My daily driver is another Honda (Integra GS-R) and that car has an excellent shifter. But it was designed back in early 90s.
Another crappy shifter award: Subaru. Most Imprezas/WRXs I testdrove recently sucked with a passion. Only exception was one with the short shifter kit.
I beg to differ. Aside from S2000 whose transmission really is orgasmic, everything else from 2002 on I've driven by Honda was average at best. I drove an '07 Civic Si which was ok but nothing spectacular as well as '06 Accord V6 with manual. That one had a vague shifter that looked like an afterthought. Didn't like it. My daily driver is another Honda (Integra GS-R) and that car has an excellent shifter. But it was designed back in early 90s.
Another crappy shifter award: Subaru. Most Imprezas/WRXs I testdrove recently sucked with a passion. Only exception was one with the short shifter kit.
jfr001
Nov 29, 05:51 PM
D) Change the remote- no offense, but this remote needs a few more buttons, considering it may drive a media hub.
Well, then you don't understand Apple's magic. That's precisely where
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
Well, then you don't understand Apple's magic. That's precisely where
they are good at: make complicated things simple.
It's like a Sony TV remote control compared to others : when you use it, you find everything else too much complicated...
Demoman
Jul 20, 01:09 AM
When the "real" machines are out, Vista will be out as well. Unless Leopard has revolutionary improvements, the difference between Windows and OSX+iLife would be much less than that it is today. I would still appreciate the UNIX under the hood, but I doubt most consumers care. If Mac sales or market share starts to come down a bit due to fewer switchers, the share price could easily crash.
You are probably nursing those MS shares you bought at $90, hoping for a better day. It is not coming anytime soon sorry to say. Buying is about momentum. Apple has it and MS does not. Vista already has a great deal of bad press and it has not even hit the street. eWeek and other journals are already writing about Vista security vulnerabilities. That is not a good sign. Vista features and functionality has been scaled back numerous times. That too is not a good sign.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Apple has been the sleeping giant. They have made their mistakes, taken their lumps and paid their dues. After 20 years, I finally bought a Mac. That was mainly because my boss gave me ~ $15K to buy any personal technology I wanted (bonus type of deal). I was learning video production/editing and using the cheap PC stuff. To make a long story short, I can now boast the purchase of:
You are probably nursing those MS shares you bought at $90, hoping for a better day. It is not coming anytime soon sorry to say. Buying is about momentum. Apple has it and MS does not. Vista already has a great deal of bad press and it has not even hit the street. eWeek and other journals are already writing about Vista security vulnerabilities. That is not a good sign. Vista features and functionality has been scaled back numerous times. That too is not a good sign.
Who would have imagined that the common view. amongst the informed computer community, was MS was trying desperately to draw close to even-up with Apple? About the time MS established Windows 2000, they were at the top of the computer world in just about every SW market there was.
They finally had a very stable desktop, server platform, mail server, yellow pages, browser, office suite, SQL engine, and so on. But once they reached this pinnacle, two things happened (or at least two I want to talk about). One, they became way too greedy with their predatory licensing. It just went through the roof. If you have never purchased SW at the enterprise level, you do not understand how expensive this has become. SW can cost (at least) as much HW at the enterprise level.
The second thing that happened at MS is best described in a quote "When Alexander looked at his empire, he wept for there was nothing more to conquer." Instead of continuing on the path of R&D, they tried to find "new worlds to conquer", secure in the knowledge they had indeed subdued all competitors who could challenge them. Sun had tried to mount a charge in the early-mid 90's. Fortunately for MS, Sun's CEO lacked the wherewithal to do more than file lawsuits. Linux suffers from the exact problems that have plagued the Unix community; they cannot unify because they have no leadership.
Apple has been the sleeping giant. They have made their mistakes, taken their lumps and paid their dues. After 20 years, I finally bought a Mac. That was mainly because my boss gave me ~ $15K to buy any personal technology I wanted (bonus type of deal). I was learning video production/editing and using the cheap PC stuff. To make a long story short, I can now boast the purchase of:
No comments:
Post a Comment