iris_failsafe
Nov 22, 06:52 PM
Apple learned that with their old music player, you know the one before the iPod, oh wait there wasn't one...
DwightSchrute
Jul 22, 03:42 PM
More importantly, the MacBook Pro's hinge design limits how far the display can open.
Okay, that is one thing I will agree that they need to change. I'm pretty tall and I have noticed when I go to the Apple store that I could put the screen back a little futher than they allow me to. Well, I can only hope they make that change on August 7th.
Okay, that is one thing I will agree that they need to change. I'm pretty tall and I have noticed when I go to the Apple store that I could put the screen back a little futher than they allow me to. Well, I can only hope they make that change on August 7th.
a.phoenicis
May 4, 03:03 PM
Here's my problem with this distribution method for an OS:
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
I have 4 Macs in my house. Previously, I'd buy a Family License DVD and go from machine to machine installing it.
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times. :mad:
There had better be a physical-media option!
goodcow
Mar 29, 09:04 AM
Hilarious that companies are copying Apple rumors now.
Arn, we need an article that Apple is developing a space ship!
Jeff Bezos (Amazon CEO) already has a company devoted to space research.
http://www.blueorigin.com/
Arn, we need an article that Apple is developing a space ship!
Jeff Bezos (Amazon CEO) already has a company devoted to space research.
http://www.blueorigin.com/
freebooter
Sep 11, 12:24 AM
Clearly, new "iPod socks" will be released on Tueday. Aren't we overdue?
How about edible iPod underwear, crotchless so you can get at the usb slot?
How about edible iPod underwear, crotchless so you can get at the usb slot?
ThaDoggg
Mar 28, 09:47 AM
It's important that Apple starts to devote some serious time to it's operating systems as well. I don't see any major drawbacks to delaying any potential new hardware introductions.
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 07:25 PM
Mathematica 8. As far as I am concerned the most powerful math software available. People don't shell out thousands of dollars for a product that can't do basic math.
288.
288.
maflynn
May 4, 02:46 PM
That makes sense, while not incredibly expensive, the cost of manufacturing is still overhead if they can reduce it by providing a mechanism for the consumer to d/l it why not.
amateurmacfreak
Jul 22, 02:04 PM
I would really like to see Apple have a laptop cheaper than $1,100, and I think there would be a definite market for the, especially for teenagers looking into getting a Mac. I know that's unlikely, but...
Anyways I hope that the MBPs get the processor update (and a new enclosure) very soon and I really hope the MBs and Mac Minis follow soon after.
I don't get any reason for Apple not too, and I think with Intel it would be possible for Apple to get some cheaper computers out there. It would be nice, but seems unlikely.... *sighs*
Anyways I hope that the MBPs get the processor update (and a new enclosure) very soon and I really hope the MBs and Mac Minis follow soon after.
I don't get any reason for Apple not too, and I think with Intel it would be possible for Apple to get some cheaper computers out there. It would be nice, but seems unlikely.... *sighs*
bendejo
Aug 4, 01:49 PM
So have you purchased refurbed from Apple previously? I've never done that, but I was wondering what your experience was like.
My TiBook is actually a refurb. I've had no problems at all with it. I've probably had it for about 3 1/2 years now and it still works great. Battery's getting a little wonky but that may be because I use a Sonnet PC card for my Airport Express WLAN (no built in airport card) and I get the impression that this is sucking a lot of power.
I'm looking to update just because I figure with a push in the Intel direction, Leopard would probably be pretty slow on a 867 G4 machine :) Plus, being able to boot camp into windows will allow me some flexibility for doing some work-at-home stuff so I don't have to stay in the office until 10 p.m. So it's not that the refurb TiBook is failing or anything like that, just evolving needs.
My TiBook is actually a refurb. I've had no problems at all with it. I've probably had it for about 3 1/2 years now and it still works great. Battery's getting a little wonky but that may be because I use a Sonnet PC card for my Airport Express WLAN (no built in airport card) and I get the impression that this is sucking a lot of power.
I'm looking to update just because I figure with a push in the Intel direction, Leopard would probably be pretty slow on a 867 G4 machine :) Plus, being able to boot camp into windows will allow me some flexibility for doing some work-at-home stuff so I don't have to stay in the office until 10 p.m. So it's not that the refurb TiBook is failing or anything like that, just evolving needs.
superleccy
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MBP updates? About time too!
pmz
May 4, 03:24 PM
Not exactly. You can always choose to go back to another date in the past.
Assuming you know when the problem began.
The further back you go, the better off you are just restoring to stock.
Assuming you know when the problem began.
The further back you go, the better off you are just restoring to stock.
Tilpots
May 8, 02:14 PM
Best link i've found is
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
Exciting stuff!
Exciting indeed! Appreciate the linkage.:)
http://digitaldaily.allthingsd.com/20100222/that�s-apple�s-new-data-center-where�s-the-giant-glass-cube/
&
http://www.cultofmac.com/interview-apples-gigantic-new-data-center-hints-at-cloud-computing/14680
salient quote from Rich Miller of Data Center Knowledge
Exciting stuff!
Exciting indeed! Appreciate the linkage.:)
GulGnu
Mar 30, 06:08 AM
Secondly, the term "3rd world" and "1st world" is offensive.
Why? It�s just a reference to the battleground / spectator status of the decolonized countries during the cold war. (The "second world" being the now-defunct Soviet Bloc.)
From the almighty Wikipedia:
"French demographer, anthropologist and historian Alfred Sauvy, in an article published in the French magazine L'Observateur, August 14, 1952, coined the term Third World, referring to countries that were unaligned with either the Communist Soviet bloc or the Capitalist NATO bloc during the Cold War. His usage was a reference to the Third Estate, the commoners of France who, before and during the French Revolution, opposed priests and nobles, who composed the First Estate and Second Estate, respectively. "
Why? It�s just a reference to the battleground / spectator status of the decolonized countries during the cold war. (The "second world" being the now-defunct Soviet Bloc.)
From the almighty Wikipedia:
"French demographer, anthropologist and historian Alfred Sauvy, in an article published in the French magazine L'Observateur, August 14, 1952, coined the term Third World, referring to countries that were unaligned with either the Communist Soviet bloc or the Capitalist NATO bloc during the Cold War. His usage was a reference to the Third Estate, the commoners of France who, before and during the French Revolution, opposed priests and nobles, who composed the First Estate and Second Estate, respectively. "
boss.king
Mar 27, 03:57 AM
If theres no announced release date it can't be delayed. It would just be later than usual. Thats not the same thing. I'm all for waiting. The longer I hang on to my 3GS the more reason I have to upgrade. Just hope It doesnt break so I can sell it to help cover the cost.
AidenShaw
Sep 10, 11:09 PM
It'll take me over 4 days.
But due to the International Date Line, isn't really only 2 days?
But due to the International Date Line, isn't really only 2 days?
alfonsog
Mar 28, 10:00 AM
I think the iPhone 4 is still the easiest to use and best phone. My friend has an evo and I think it is too big and his is always crashing. Even if they release an iPhone 5 I might just keep the 4 until the 4g/lte/wimax whatever it is comes out unless mine is lost/stolen/broken.
I really can't think of anything they can do to it other than that; a faster processor or memory doesn't matter to me because I don't really play many games, better camera doesn't matter because I don't take many pics, 3D screen on small display seems like a gimmick, when I have a 3dtv. Maybe there will be something surprising but if my phone was lost/stolen/broken today I would go get an iPhone 4 again.
I really can't think of anything they can do to it other than that; a faster processor or memory doesn't matter to me because I don't really play many games, better camera doesn't matter because I don't take many pics, 3D screen on small display seems like a gimmick, when I have a 3dtv. Maybe there will be something surprising but if my phone was lost/stolen/broken today I would go get an iPhone 4 again.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
snberk103
May 5, 03:30 PM
.... Most other countries enacted policy through a quiet parliamentary action that was later carried out by agencies or at a time when most people weren't active in politics. ...
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. ... why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
...
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
This, I believe, captures the situation really well. Inertia, coupled with a fairly de-centralized government (at least as far as this issue is concerned). And a population that is fairly resistant to change, in many areas.
Another example is the move to a $1 coin. How many times and for how long has the US been trying to introduce this coin? Every study done shows it will save taxpayers money. Still no-go. In Canada we had no choice. The $1 coin was introduced, then the banks were told to hand out only the coins, and to start sending back to Ottawa any $1 bills that their customers were depositing. Within a few years we were a $1 bill free country. Then they removed the $2 bills. These bills are still legal, there just isn't any of them circulating. And if a bank gets one, they don't put it back into circulation. Done.
In the US there are a lot of veto points in the legislative process, making any significant change hard to do. ... why should they care about a measurement system when the one they are using right now is working for them?
...
Any realistic transition for the US would take decades.
This, I believe, captures the situation really well. Inertia, coupled with a fairly de-centralized government (at least as far as this issue is concerned). And a population that is fairly resistant to change, in many areas.
Another example is the move to a $1 coin. How many times and for how long has the US been trying to introduce this coin? Every study done shows it will save taxpayers money. Still no-go. In Canada we had no choice. The $1 coin was introduced, then the banks were told to hand out only the coins, and to start sending back to Ottawa any $1 bills that their customers were depositing. Within a few years we were a $1 bill free country. Then they removed the $2 bills. These bills are still legal, there just isn't any of them circulating. And if a bank gets one, they don't put it back into circulation. Done.
ovrlrd
Mar 30, 07:23 PM
So nobody has answered yet whether this requires you to reinstall Lion or if you just install an "update" through the Mac App Store somehow. I am not at home so I can't test it out myself yet.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 04:11 PM
The samsung devices look like rebranded apple products.
The GUI looks very similar.
This is really bad.
The GUI looks very similar.
This is really bad.
LagunaSol
Apr 18, 05:02 PM
WRONG.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Odd, the link you included in your argument states the Prada was "announced" on December 12, 2006.
The iPhone was announced on January 9, less than one month later.
And the Prada looks more like a BlackBerry than an iPhone to me. The Prada and iPhone are almost nothing alike, aside from the size and shape of the earhole.
The LG Prada was announced in September 6 months ahead of iPhone1 announcement (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_%28KE850%29).
Odd, the link you included in your argument states the Prada was "announced" on December 12, 2006.
The iPhone was announced on January 9, less than one month later.
And the Prada looks more like a BlackBerry than an iPhone to me. The Prada and iPhone are almost nothing alike, aside from the size and shape of the earhole.
Popeye206
Mar 28, 11:44 AM
My problem isn't necessarily with Apple, my grief is with carriers who have tied most of us in to 2 year fixed contracts. Whether this is due to Apple's insistence, or whether carriers have signed up to the 'yearly cycle' idea, there are thousands of us stuck in the middle here.
Any 3GS user who bought new and has a 2 year contract (usually because it was the most economical) now has a huge dilemma. Do we switch phones and get new contracts on different phones, or do we go Pay As You Go to cover those 3/4 (potentially more) months?
Ultimately, if happens, I'll end up going for the new BlackBerry Bold Touch (Dakota), just because I don't want to be strung along for a few months, racking up minutes/text/data costs. It'll be sad, but ultimately, its just a phone I guess...
NB: ALL OF THE ABOVE IS PREFACED BY AN 'IF THE RUMOUR HAPPENS'!
Dude... your contract is only there to cover the subsidized cost of your phone. You don't have to sign a new contract to keep your pricing. Just let it go and all will be the same until you upgrade. There is no price changes because your contract is up.
Any 3GS user who bought new and has a 2 year contract (usually because it was the most economical) now has a huge dilemma. Do we switch phones and get new contracts on different phones, or do we go Pay As You Go to cover those 3/4 (potentially more) months?
Ultimately, if happens, I'll end up going for the new BlackBerry Bold Touch (Dakota), just because I don't want to be strung along for a few months, racking up minutes/text/data costs. It'll be sad, but ultimately, its just a phone I guess...
NB: ALL OF THE ABOVE IS PREFACED BY AN 'IF THE RUMOUR HAPPENS'!
Dude... your contract is only there to cover the subsidized cost of your phone. You don't have to sign a new contract to keep your pricing. Just let it go and all will be the same until you upgrade. There is no price changes because your contract is up.
portishead
Apr 21, 06:29 PM
Just what I want. iMac is nice, but I'd rather have the power of a tower. It's just too bulky. Cut the size in half, and throw a couple thunderbolt ports on it. Add a couple SSD slots, and lose the superdrive & PCIe slots. If you want something nice without wires, get an iMac. Ideally, I'd want something between an iMac and Mac Pro, but I don't see it happening anytime soon.
No comments:
Post a Comment