ImNoSuperMan
Aug 29, 09:02 AM
Mac mini not getting Meroms might also mean MB wont get Meroms any time soon too. Hopefully Apple will put Meroms in MBP only. So that I can sell my MB without much loss and buy a merom MBP:D
ShiftClick
Apr 12, 10:24 PM
Not true. If you buy a Mac-app or iOS app all the updates for that version are free. A new version is a whole new program that must be bought again on both platforms.
What confuses you is that most iOS developers have decided to just keep updating their first version forever and not come out with a whole new version because they've decided that makes more sense on a smart phone than it does on a desktop machine.
But that's a business decision, not a technical one. A developer could do it either way on either platform.
MLB AtBat comes to mind, its been a purchase each year.
What confuses you is that most iOS developers have decided to just keep updating their first version forever and not come out with a whole new version because they've decided that makes more sense on a smart phone than it does on a desktop machine.
But that's a business decision, not a technical one. A developer could do it either way on either platform.
MLB AtBat comes to mind, its been a purchase each year.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:28 AM
bmustaf
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
I agree with you on the points that Apple does need a reminder of where it stands in the consumer/producer relationship every now and then, just as any other company does. Consumer Reports generally does a good job with facilitating this. I'd much rather a major publication start taking Apple to task about not allowing sideloading/locking down the device though to be honest.
My issue, from a personal viewpoint as an iPhone and Android user, is the way the iPhone4 antenna issue was approached and in my opinion blown out of proportion in terms of the net effect.
Yes the phone suffers a -20dB attenuation when you hold the device and bridge that antenna. My HTC Desire gave me a -14dB attenuation when I held it in one hand and my Galaxy S gives me -18dB when holding it in one hand. The only difference is that the attenuation on the iPhone4 is possible by simply bridging that antenna with your pinky finger rather than needing to hold the device.
The point there is that how often does someone do that where they lay a device on a table and touch that particular spot with a pinky finger? Or why would someone do that? The issue is that the signal attenuates when the device is held. But every phone suffers that to some degree, with even phones that have internal antennas giving comparable attenuation when held in your hand.
They focused quite a bit on "if I touch the device just like this when it's laying down it gives me the attenuation" despite the fact no one does that. They should have looked at it from a net user experience, where "does a -20dB attenuation make a phone not recommendable compared to a phone with only a -15dB attenuation" being the more deciding factor.
To me personally, I can't see how someone can recommend a phone that gives you -15 to -18dB attenuation when held and then not recommend a phone that gives you -20dB simply because it can also be reproduced by touching a marked spot with your pinky if the device is laying on a table. That's not to say that Apple should be proud that their phone also attenuates (and usually more so by varying degrees), but where's the cutoff?
Is -19dB the maximum allowable attenuation before you say something isn't recommendable? I think that's a fair question to ask.
PowerFullMac
Jan 12, 04:16 PM
Perhaps AIR is an acronym?
Apple I______ R______ :)
Interesting... Very interesting... Apple InfaRed... Apple Internet Reader... Apple Instruction Ripper...
Apple I______ R______ :)
Interesting... Very interesting... Apple InfaRed... Apple Internet Reader... Apple Instruction Ripper...
timmyOtool
Apr 4, 04:04 PM
I think the cut throat P.C. market will implode on it's self sometime in the future and Apple should stay out of that market. With that said I do hope that Apple can improve the consumer line up. $800 for an emac would be good if it had better specs. All the ilife apps should run well on all macs period. A better adveritising stratigy wouldn't hurt either. Let people know about osx, after all that is their best product imho. Apple is not going to die, but there is always room for improvement.
twoodcc
Apr 21, 05:57 AM
7 mil; I remember those days, not so long ago... Grats!
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
thanks. hopefully this weekend i can get some things straightened out
wheezy
Nov 15, 06:37 PM
That really depends on the program, on how "parallelizable" the application is.
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
The simplest way to think of it is like this: Let's say you have a program that first has to calculate A. Then, when it's done that, it uses the result of A to calculate B. Then, when it's done that, uses the result of B to calculate C, then C to D, and so on. That's a *serial* problem there. The calculation of B can't begin until A is done, so it doesn't matter how many processors you have running, all computation is held up on one spot.
On the other hand, let's say you have an application that needs to calculate A, B, C and D, but those four values are not dependent on each other at all. In that case, you can use four processors at the same time, to calculate all four values at the same time.
Think of it like baking a cake. You can't start putting on the icing until the cake is done baking. And you can't start baking the cake until the ingredients are all mixed together. But you can have people simultaneously getting out and measuring the ingredients.
So that problem is partially parallelizable, but the majority of its workload is a serial process.
Some software applications, just by their very nature, will never be able to do anything useful with multiple processors.
What a very lovely analogy. Thank you.
For me... 8 cores for the bragging rights only... so I guess I won't get one anytime soon. I'm sure 4 would suit me fine though, I need to upgrade my 1Ghz G4!!!
ChazUK
Apr 26, 01:36 PM
!remember the widgets on your macs they are where the idea for the Apps on Iphones came from, Windows came along and stole the Widgets idea and initially called them Gadgets but now every other copycat calls them Widgets too, the same is happening again man it's bull, apple sue these leeches all of them.
My first experience with widgets was with Konfabulator on OS X 10.3. There may have been other examples before konfabulator but from my memory, Apple didn't invent widgets.
My first experience with widgets was with Konfabulator on OS X 10.3. There may have been other examples before konfabulator but from my memory, Apple didn't invent widgets.
rxse7en
Nov 29, 03:48 PM
Its outputs are HDMI and component video. It is designed for HD content.
I learned to drive on a '79 RX-7. Brilliant automobile.
Would be cool if it could upscale streaming video to 1080i at least. I may forgo the iTV if there's ever a solution to stream vid from the Mac to the XBox 360 though. I must say, the 360 is a great piece of hardware at it's current price point. As others have pointed out, would be nice if the iTV supported 1080p over HDMI.
I loved my first car--'79 RX7 and have had several since. My current one is a heavily modified '91 Turbo II. Hopefully we'll see a 4th gen 7 some day.
B
I learned to drive on a '79 RX-7. Brilliant automobile.
Would be cool if it could upscale streaming video to 1080i at least. I may forgo the iTV if there's ever a solution to stream vid from the Mac to the XBox 360 though. I must say, the 360 is a great piece of hardware at it's current price point. As others have pointed out, would be nice if the iTV supported 1080p over HDMI.
I loved my first car--'79 RX7 and have had several since. My current one is a heavily modified '91 Turbo II. Hopefully we'll see a 4th gen 7 some day.
B
apb3
Aug 16, 10:06 AM
This would entail an entire re-think on the part of apple and how the iPod is used. Now they do not want you to be able to transfer both ways between your iPod and your iTunes lib (you can but they don't want you to...).
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
If they were to add the ability to download on the fly, you'd need to sync both ways and that would HAVE to be a supported Apple way of using the iPod and iTunes. I've a feeling this might also upset the music companies as I'm sure the one-way sync was one feel-good/selling point for anti-piracy concerns.
For that reason (and the fact that I cannot remember digitimes ever being correct), I just don't see this unless the wireless is just to sync with your computer which makes no sense from a cost/benefit analysis.
edit:
and making it basically an iPod w/ airtunes makes no sense as it would cannibalize the sales thereof.
GregA
Dec 28, 02:14 AM
the option to dock and iPod simply is so out of place that I do not know why it keeps getting brought up. iTV is focused on streaming content from your computer, not your iPod.I've been wondering about this. Assuming the iTV is just a streaming device which shows a movie stored on iTunes on your PC or Mac, it is probably reasonably simple for Apple to make the iTV also stream video from an iPod (including Nano or even Shuffle).
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
Of course, why not just plug your iPod directly into the TV? And if there's a movie on your iPod, it came via your iTunes anyway so you can stream from there right...?
I'm not sure what the answer to that is. I do think there's scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and uploading to your iTunes (assuming that you have a low bandwidth net connection).
Is there scope for buying a movie in a store, downloading to iPod, and watching on TV? Or buying a movie in a store, downloading to a 1GB ram drive, and watching on your iTV? I think if I was going to the store anyway, I'd probably buy the HD-DVD instead. But for rental it might work.
MistaBungle
Jan 11, 05:16 PM
There's something in the air...
planes shipping iPhones to Canada?
planes shipping iPhones to Canada?
rockstarjoe
Jul 18, 02:31 PM
Why not offer both a subscription and an a-la-carte system? The rental movies could be cheaper, lesser quality and last for only a certain amount of plays/days while the ones you buy to own can be of higher quality, more expensive and you get to keep it.
I think you are on to something here. I believe it will work like this:
!) Rent a movie from the ITMS and it will download (not stream) to your computer. It will be in a less than DVD quality format, most likely in whatever format plays on 6G ipod. Let's face it, the 6G ipod and the iTunes Movie service will both be announced at the same time, and that time is not WWDC. The movie sales will drive 6G ipod sales, therefore they must play on 6G ipods, therefore they will not be DVD quality.
2) Movies will have a limited number of plays, rather than a limited number of time to view. Or, alternately, you will pay-per-view (literally).
3) The movie rentals will be cheap (under $5). If you like the movie you will have the option to buy the DVD. Buying the DVD through iTMS will "unlock" the rented copy of the movie on your hardrive, allowing you to own it forever and also to burn it to DVD if you choose (although, again, it will be in less than DVD quality). The real copy of the DVD will be full price plus shipping and the hard copy of the DVD will arrive in the mail a few days later. It will be the same as the retail copy.
This means money for Apple from movie rentals, plus money for Apple from 6G ipod sales (and perhaps Mac Minis if Frontrow gets added in to this), plus money for the BIG STUDIOS for the rentals AND the DVD sales.
It is a win-win-win for the consumer, Apple, and the movie studios... thus I think this is the only way it will happen. What do you guys think? :)
I think you are on to something here. I believe it will work like this:
!) Rent a movie from the ITMS and it will download (not stream) to your computer. It will be in a less than DVD quality format, most likely in whatever format plays on 6G ipod. Let's face it, the 6G ipod and the iTunes Movie service will both be announced at the same time, and that time is not WWDC. The movie sales will drive 6G ipod sales, therefore they must play on 6G ipods, therefore they will not be DVD quality.
2) Movies will have a limited number of plays, rather than a limited number of time to view. Or, alternately, you will pay-per-view (literally).
3) The movie rentals will be cheap (under $5). If you like the movie you will have the option to buy the DVD. Buying the DVD through iTMS will "unlock" the rented copy of the movie on your hardrive, allowing you to own it forever and also to burn it to DVD if you choose (although, again, it will be in less than DVD quality). The real copy of the DVD will be full price plus shipping and the hard copy of the DVD will arrive in the mail a few days later. It will be the same as the retail copy.
This means money for Apple from movie rentals, plus money for Apple from 6G ipod sales (and perhaps Mac Minis if Frontrow gets added in to this), plus money for the BIG STUDIOS for the rentals AND the DVD sales.
It is a win-win-win for the consumer, Apple, and the movie studios... thus I think this is the only way it will happen. What do you guys think? :)
sandro21
Nov 5, 04:05 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
jdbr
Apr 3, 09:58 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)
Just wish they had stock
Just wish they had stock
danielwsmithee
Nov 27, 02:57 PM
Ding-Ding-Ding! You answered all of your above complaints and whining about Apple's prices. You aren't the target audience for their displays.While I agree with your thought process behind your post that Apple is targeting a different audience. That target audience is dwindling very quickly as Apple's prices increase in comparison to the rest of the market.
Dave K
Aug 27, 08:51 PM
Could the deciding factor be the noise?
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.I know Maximum PC was playing around with the Core 2 Duo Extreme and, with an aftermarket heatsink + fan, were able to keep it at ~50 degrees C running at 100% U. on both cores. For fun, they unplugged the fan, made it recode an entire DVD to DivX and couldn't get it to a) go over 75 C, b) report a cut in processor speed, or c) shut off in protest.
So, with a well designed cooling system, i suspect they shouldn't have any problem fitting that in a iMac and keeping it quiet.
Not arguing about whether a Conroe would fit in the iMacIntel case - but wondering whether the extra heat would result in extra noise from the cooling fans.
The iMacIntel doesn't have to as fast as it possibly can, especially since the New Form-Factor Conroe Mini-Tower/Home-Theatre Mac® will be there for people who want a bit more power without the size and cost of the maxi-tower ProMacIntel.I know Maximum PC was playing around with the Core 2 Duo Extreme and, with an aftermarket heatsink + fan, were able to keep it at ~50 degrees C running at 100% U. on both cores. For fun, they unplugged the fan, made it recode an entire DVD to DivX and couldn't get it to a) go over 75 C, b) report a cut in processor speed, or c) shut off in protest.
So, with a well designed cooling system, i suspect they shouldn't have any problem fitting that in a iMac and keeping it quiet.
SchneiderMan
Nov 27, 01:23 AM
BS
Do you have friends? Because if one of my friends walked in with that thing and told us it was his new sunglasses case, we'd be all over him. Yes: in person. It's all in good fun...... at least it is from me. Lighten up, Francis.
That being said, if you need a case for your bitterness, I'm sure Benguitar can PM you the name of a place to buy one. :D
/lose faith
Exactly.. Well said.
Do you have friends? Because if one of my friends walked in with that thing and told us it was his new sunglasses case, we'd be all over him. Yes: in person. It's all in good fun...... at least it is from me. Lighten up, Francis.
That being said, if you need a case for your bitterness, I'm sure Benguitar can PM you the name of a place to buy one. :D
/lose faith
Exactly.. Well said.
Deathlok2001
Mar 25, 07:40 PM
Jesus! :eek: As Mac Addict use to say, freaking awesome! (does that mag still exist?) This just SOLD me on an iPad 2! :D
mrgreen4242
Aug 30, 12:59 PM
Do you remember what the price was for the 1.66GHz CD 1GB RAM 100GB HD?
I think it was $849. I can't recall for sure, but I'm 90% sure it listed as 11% off original price, which is $849. Well, that had a SD in it not a CD.
I think it was $849. I can't recall for sure, but I'm 90% sure it listed as 11% off original price, which is $849. Well, that had a SD in it not a CD.
gugy
Nov 27, 02:37 PM
Because a 30" cinema display is too small? Because you want to consolidate your TV and computer displays? :confused:
bring the 40" plus size.
I'll buy one.
For a designer large screens are great. The 30" now seems small!:eek:
bring the 40" plus size.
I'll buy one.
For a designer large screens are great. The 30" now seems small!:eek:
base08
Jan 12, 08:24 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
Goldfinger
Aug 31, 12:12 PM
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869
What about this ? :)
What about this ? :)
gorgeousninja
Apr 2, 07:58 PM
I'll "believe" when they fix the currently unresolved and widespread quality control issues...light bleed on virtually every unit and blemishes, dents and scratches on units straight out of the box.
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean you need to show that ignorance to everyone else...
Fix those issues, Apple, and then I will "believe" enough to get an iPad 2.
just because you have no idea what you're talking about doesn't mean you need to show that ignorance to everyone else...
No comments:
Post a Comment