hayesk
Apr 12, 10:10 PM
iLife has done this for years and now Aperture is doing the same thing. Frankly, I prefer it to the old way.
You realize that you'll be on Aperture 5 before you spend more money than just buying 3 outright. The upgrade from 2 to 3 cost more than just buying 3 on the app store.
Why do you want to spend more money?
You realize that you'll be on Aperture 5 before you spend more money than just buying 3 outright. The upgrade from 2 to 3 cost more than just buying 3 on the app store.
Why do you want to spend more money?
skunk
Mar 27, 08:59 AM
He even says that European Command is headed by a US Admiral.Really? How shocking! Imagine, the US European Command, headed by an American! Next you'll be telling us that the US President is an American, too.
imnotatfault
Aug 19, 06:49 AM
Anyway, would you mind sharing why you want it so bad as I asked above?
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
I don't think it's really all that necessary until we have a much more prominent wireless infrastructure that isn't T-Mobile trying to charge you 7.99/hr to log on. Until then, it's nearly pointless unless you live in NYC, Boston, Chicago, etc.
OwlsAndApples
Nov 27, 01:10 PM
Or get an iMac...:p
r.j.s
Apr 27, 10:00 AM
"App Store" is a trademarked name of a particular store. "appstore," or "app store" in generic terms and context is a description of a particular thing. How hard is it for these companies to understand that that's possible? Just the same as "Windows" vs. "windows." Actually, I think they do get it, but they don't want "App Store" associated only w/ Apple so they can jump on the bandwagon and (continue to try to) confuse consumers.
However, using the term app store to relate to any type of software market will lead to confusion between generic app stores and Apple's App Store - which makes it a trademark violation.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
However, using the term app store to relate to any type of software market will lead to confusion between generic app stores and Apple's App Store - which makes it a trademark violation.
No one is going to confuse MS Windows with the windows in your house.
wordoflife
Nov 23, 04:59 PM
http://www.rimarkable.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/sprint_blackberry_tour.jpg
Needed a secondary cheap phone to take with me overseas because the Evo only works in the USA (or where CDMA is available). $60 on Craigslist!
Judging from the pic, that's a CDMA blackberry
Needed a secondary cheap phone to take with me overseas because the Evo only works in the USA (or where CDMA is available). $60 on Craigslist!
Judging from the pic, that's a CDMA blackberry
Hairball
Apr 2, 07:45 PM
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) Mobile/8G4)
This is simply an amazing ad.
This is simply an amazing ad.
dukishdary
Jan 11, 05:15 PM
i highly highly doubt they are calling it the "macbook air." that's borderline laughable. i am willing to bet the phase "there's something in the air" is referring to the soon to be announced rental service, not a piece of hardware. apple is making an obvious attempt to eliminate physical mediums altogether, first cds with mp3s and now dvds with downloadable vids (both via the itunes music store). everything will be available "in the air" or "up in the cloud," if you will. i'll be damned if they name their next product the "macbook air." c'mon people...
zwida
Sep 6, 08:01 PM
I hope that one day the wealthiest working person could only make 2x to 3x of the poorest working person. God, would that change the world for ever. If the butcher makes 7 bucks and hour a doctor should make 12bucks a waitress 6bucks the president 15 bucks, no more no less... sick and tired of all this GREED!!!!
Huh?
What's greed have to do with it?
Huh?
What's greed have to do with it?
jcdavies
Sep 21, 04:44 PM
Got mine today. Definitely the low profile look I wanted; feels and looks like black suede. Very attactive.
All openings clear the space they need to�camera lens, speaker, earphone jack, etc. The power and volume switches are covered by the usual raised �buttons.� The power button takes a little extra oomph to make work since the case fits a little less snug than the Incase I�m accustomed to from my previous iPod Touch. Not loose enough to be a problem...actually, �loose� overstates it a bit...just not as tight a fit as what I�m used to.
Will work for the time being, until something irresistible comes out.
Here�s what I ordered (http://53zt.sl.pt) (Incipio Dermashot for iPod Touch 4G)
Definitely think the included stand is a stroke of genius in its simple design (would have loved to have this on a couple of overseas flights the past two years, pre-iPad). Am still pondering the �do I or don�t I� question on a screen protector. Now that it�s glass, simple logic tells me it shouldn�t be necessary unless someone wants to begin scraping diamonds down the face....right?
In the article does it not say it comes with a screen protector, are you telling us it doesnt?
All openings clear the space they need to�camera lens, speaker, earphone jack, etc. The power and volume switches are covered by the usual raised �buttons.� The power button takes a little extra oomph to make work since the case fits a little less snug than the Incase I�m accustomed to from my previous iPod Touch. Not loose enough to be a problem...actually, �loose� overstates it a bit...just not as tight a fit as what I�m used to.
Will work for the time being, until something irresistible comes out.
Here�s what I ordered (http://53zt.sl.pt) (Incipio Dermashot for iPod Touch 4G)
Definitely think the included stand is a stroke of genius in its simple design (would have loved to have this on a couple of overseas flights the past two years, pre-iPad). Am still pondering the �do I or don�t I� question on a screen protector. Now that it�s glass, simple logic tells me it shouldn�t be necessary unless someone wants to begin scraping diamonds down the face....right?
In the article does it not say it comes with a screen protector, are you telling us it doesnt?
paradillon
Oct 23, 09:17 PM
I was helping a neighbor to order an iMac for his son tonight.
We logged into his apple account to look at the config on his previous order for his other son.
We got a notice saying the web and phone order system was down while being upgraded.
:eek:
We logged into his apple account to look at the config on his previous order for his other son.
We got a notice saying the web and phone order system was down while being upgraded.
:eek:
mdriftmeyer
Apr 2, 10:47 PM
Since so many of the units purchased in the last two weeks are destined for resale overseas (read the Asian scalper threads) have not even made it into the hands of the end-user, you have no idea how many will be returned.
No need to thank me for pointing out the obvious to you and your fellow apologists.
When Apple has their Quarterly press conference expect the iPad 2 to list 4+ million or more sales with back orders in the millions.
The return rate of all Apple products, across all of their hardware lines are lowest in the entire industry.
The iPhone 4 fiasco had a return rate half of that of the iPhone 3GS that everyone loved.
iPad return rate is at 2%: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20030211-37.html
Look to that being at or lower for the iPad 2.
No need to thank me for pointing out the obvious to you and your fellow apologists.
When Apple has their Quarterly press conference expect the iPad 2 to list 4+ million or more sales with back orders in the millions.
The return rate of all Apple products, across all of their hardware lines are lowest in the entire industry.
The iPhone 4 fiasco had a return rate half of that of the iPhone 3GS that everyone loved.
iPad return rate is at 2%: http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-20030211-37.html
Look to that being at or lower for the iPad 2.
steadysignal
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
Time to hide my iPhone file from the wife:rolleyes:
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
GregA
Dec 29, 07:10 PM
If it doesn�t have HD there wont be much demand for iTunes download.
I entirely DISagree :)
It's the cost and convenience that will determine how successful iTS downloads are. I would hope for DVD quality (including surround sound).
One day I'll have a HD screen and I'll be wanting to use a HD service.. so it'd be good for Apple to have a plan there for that :)
I entirely DISagree :)
It's the cost and convenience that will determine how successful iTS downloads are. I would hope for DVD quality (including surround sound).
One day I'll have a HD screen and I'll be wanting to use a HD service.. so it'd be good for Apple to have a plan there for that :)
LethalWolfe
Apr 12, 10:38 PM
You mean made easier to use?
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
No, I'll take easier to use in a heartbeat unless the way they made it easier to use was to dumb it down. Making something better and making something easier to use aren't necessarily the same thing. An automatic transmission is easier to use than a manual transmission but there are a host of reasons why manual transmission are the better choice.
Lots of the changes to FCP X look very promising. The 'enhanced' labeling/tagging feature for clips sounds great. As does their new stab at having an 'open timeline' (hopefully it works out much better than their current attempt at it). The easy color matching between shots could save me a ton of tedious work that I hate doing assuming it works properly.
I'm not against change itself I'm just against change for the worse or change for the sake of change.
Lethal
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 01:12 PM
I was simply suggesting that Apple used the term "App" as a familiar leaning to the way they call software "Applications" in Mac OS. Also, Apple have being refering to software that runs on their operating systems as "Applications" since 1980: -
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
dguisinger
Aug 7, 07:42 AM
There will never be NTFS write abilities in Mac OS X for a long time as Microsoft still keeps NTFS writing a propritary technology only licensed for use in Windows XP.
Oh, i wouldnt say that....
Microsoft and Apple did a 5-yr cross license of patents in 1997. Now, that doesnt mean you get access for only 5 years, that means anything that was patented up to 2002 is cross licensed perpetually between the two companies.
If NTFS is patented, it was around well before that date. If its not, then Apple just has to write the code to write NTFS.
Interesting question is; when did the first iPod patents arrive? Does MS have access to anything for Zune that creative & co didnt?
Oh, i wouldnt say that....
Microsoft and Apple did a 5-yr cross license of patents in 1997. Now, that doesnt mean you get access for only 5 years, that means anything that was patented up to 2002 is cross licensed perpetually between the two companies.
If NTFS is patented, it was around well before that date. If its not, then Apple just has to write the code to write NTFS.
Interesting question is; when did the first iPod patents arrive? Does MS have access to anything for Zune that creative & co didnt?
WeegieMac
Apr 2, 12:55 PM
THANK YOU!
---
safari got some fixes to it seems, scrolling works smoother and doesn't get stuck on pages with lots of pics or vids and the error with not being able to type anything unless u close safari seems to be fixed as well.
I find Safari 5.1 far better than Safari 5.0.4 on Snow Leopard.
---
safari got some fixes to it seems, scrolling works smoother and doesn't get stuck on pages with lots of pics or vids and the error with not being able to type anything unless u close safari seems to be fixed as well.
I find Safari 5.1 far better than Safari 5.0.4 on Snow Leopard.
DeSnousa
Apr 14, 02:26 AM
:eek: That much, what are modern computers pumping out these days! What would be producing the most points per day? I'm thinking about buying a graphics card just to fold on if that is the case :D
Also how do you find the GPU I have had to limit mine down to 70% as I find it interferes with the effects that Windows 7 does.
Also how do you find the GPU I have had to limit mine down to 70% as I find it interferes with the effects that Windows 7 does.
Nameci
Feb 27, 07:04 PM
now not to start a ppc vs intel flame war. but if it serves his purposes just fine why would he switch? for example my MDD works amazingly well and if it had a better graphics card it would be my main machine; why? because when you run software that is optimized for ppc (and most pro apps still are) they are blazing fast. as far as i can recall i could run fcp at a speed that rivaled my 13 mbp (before its gfx card died). anyway don't take this personally :P just pointing out a fact.
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
No offense taken anyway... I am more mature, I am not into Intel Mac stuff yet. Still find the challenge to keep this old machines working. And they worked fine with minimum upkeep.
If ever apple will decide to switch to another processor I might find the interest to take on Intel Macs and collect... :D
And it is not the only PPC machine that I have...
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
No offense taken anyway... I am more mature, I am not into Intel Mac stuff yet. Still find the challenge to keep this old machines working. And they worked fine with minimum upkeep.
If ever apple will decide to switch to another processor I might find the interest to take on Intel Macs and collect... :D
And it is not the only PPC machine that I have...
iGav
Feb 25, 07:51 AM
looking at the very current and very genius Fiat Twin Air engines i have to say that very refined turbocharged small displacement/ few cylinder engines are actually the next step over the overly complicated hybrid systems
The Twin Air is conceptually brilliant... but its real world numbers haven't anywhere near matched up to Fiat's official figures (68.9mpg official - 35.7mpg real world, neither of which are particularly brilliant to begin with) and there lies one of the problems with small capacity engines, in anything other than ideal test conditions (i.e. rolling road), it is extraordinarily difficult to even approach the officials figures in everyday conditions, because put simply, they have to be razzed.
Like what you've said though, there's a compelling argument to be made that a diesel-electric hybrid (like VW's XL1 Concept), with energy recovery would probably be the best arrangement (particularly for an urban car), in this instance the diesel engine is isolated from the actually drivetrain (reducing NVH etc) and the electric motors counter the age old argument of petrol>diesel refinement.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
The Twin Air is conceptually brilliant... but its real world numbers haven't anywhere near matched up to Fiat's official figures (68.9mpg official - 35.7mpg real world, neither of which are particularly brilliant to begin with) and there lies one of the problems with small capacity engines, in anything other than ideal test conditions (i.e. rolling road), it is extraordinarily difficult to even approach the officials figures in everyday conditions, because put simply, they have to be razzed.
Like what you've said though, there's a compelling argument to be made that a diesel-electric hybrid (like VW's XL1 Concept), with energy recovery would probably be the best arrangement (particularly for an urban car), in this instance the diesel engine is isolated from the actually drivetrain (reducing NVH etc) and the electric motors counter the age old argument of petrol>diesel refinement.
I do think that smaller capacity, fewer cylinder engines are the way to go, but only if the absolutely most important factor is addressed first, and that is one of weight, until then...
Evangelion
Jul 20, 05:11 AM
And, by the way, purchasing stocks based on price isn't very smart. I don't understand why you're singleling out Google just because it has a high stock price. It actually works against your point because it's a great stock-arguably better than Apple.
Stock-price is irrelevant, what matter is the market-capitalization. Quite often I see people comparing two companies and saying stuff like "Company A has a shareprice of $50, whereas Company B has a shareprice of $60. Therefore Company B is better".
I guess Berkshire Hathaway is the Capo di Tutti Capi of companies, since their shareprice is over 90.000 dollars!
Stock-price is irrelevant, what matter is the market-capitalization. Quite often I see people comparing two companies and saying stuff like "Company A has a shareprice of $50, whereas Company B has a shareprice of $60. Therefore Company B is better".
I guess Berkshire Hathaway is the Capo di Tutti Capi of companies, since their shareprice is over 90.000 dollars!
boncellis
Sep 6, 09:34 AM
My first instinct was that Apple stuck with Yonah in the Mini because of something they're about to introduce next week. The "streaming video" device could very well fill the set-top box niche that the Mini does, only at a lower price for the same remote media functions.
I was wondering which way it would go--I guess it's still up in the air. Basically I just see this as a $200 price drop, which is always welcome.
I was wondering which way it would go--I guess it's still up in the air. Basically I just see this as a $200 price drop, which is always welcome.
tablo13
Sep 19, 12:28 AM
He got it from Hong Kong.
He's being sarcastic. :rolleyes:
EDIT: nvm, he bought two :p
He's being sarcastic. :rolleyes:
EDIT: nvm, he bought two :p
No comments:
Post a Comment