valiar
Jul 27, 01:02 PM
Ouch.
And I have just bought a 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro.
I know what everybody would say - "buy the machine that is available now". That is what I am saying to myself.
Still - ouch :(
And I have just bought a 2.16 GHz MacBook Pro.
I know what everybody would say - "buy the machine that is available now". That is what I am saying to myself.
Still - ouch :(
rosalindavenue
Mar 31, 03:18 PM
Not a problem for me. HTC does a great job keeping phones updated.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
Spoken like someone who never owned an Eris.
triceretops
Apr 27, 09:13 AM
And assume you go to a place you have been a month ago, wouldn't having the database speed things up when you return to that location a month later?
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
How else are you going to check in on Facebook?:p
My layover at some airports is only 45 minutes.
(Though I agree the effect will be very minor, as soon as you land with a plane, the iPhone will start populating that database, thus having the data from a month ago will only be relevant if you need location data right away after landing.)
How else are you going to check in on Facebook?:p
My layover at some airports is only 45 minutes.
xPismo
Jul 14, 11:36 PM
s/apple/Intel/wh
s/mac community/all the Intel vendors/wh
You have been assimilated.
Apple == Dell == IBM == Gateway == Lenovo == ...
Apple existed pre RISC, and they will exist post IBM chips. Your fears are unfounded. Well engineered hardware with well engineered software, add a dash of the SJ RDF and things will stay groooooovy.
s/mac community/all the Intel vendors/wh
You have been assimilated.
Apple == Dell == IBM == Gateway == Lenovo == ...
Apple existed pre RISC, and they will exist post IBM chips. Your fears are unfounded. Well engineered hardware with well engineered software, add a dash of the SJ RDF and things will stay groooooovy.
Eduardo1971
Apr 6, 10:26 AM
Boy this is great (**deadpan voice**).
Grr.
Want. Refreshed. iMac. NOW!!
:D
Grr.
Want. Refreshed. iMac. NOW!!
:D
QCassidy352
Nov 28, 08:38 PM
"It would be a nice idea."
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
my thoughts exactly. I think it would be nice if apple should give ME a percentage of the proceeds from every ipod sale, but that doesn't mean I deserve it. :rolleyes: Greedy ****s.
What does that mean? I have lots of nice ideas for getting money when I didn't do anything.
my thoughts exactly. I think it would be nice if apple should give ME a percentage of the proceeds from every ipod sale, but that doesn't mean I deserve it. :rolleyes: Greedy ****s.
mactoday
Apr 6, 11:08 AM
eh, I don't see how it's significant for anything other than aesthetic purposes. If you're working in the dark the display itself is going to provide enough illumination as it is. Just seems like a waste.
Well, I work on my MacBook Pro now in bed and it's a pleasure to type on the back light keyboard. You reduce brightness of the display when you work in the dark conditions, I do. So, it's not enough to see the keys, but I don't much care about it, because I could type without looking on the keys, but most of the Apple customers who buys Air's can't type blind.
Well, I work on my MacBook Pro now in bed and it's a pleasure to type on the back light keyboard. You reduce brightness of the display when you work in the dark conditions, I do. So, it's not enough to see the keys, but I don't much care about it, because I could type without looking on the keys, but most of the Apple customers who buys Air's can't type blind.
Xenious
Jul 14, 05:27 PM
Dual drive slots are cool, but the design is boring. Don't get me wrong I love my G5 powermac I was just hoping for a new or different design for the next ones...Maybe the same but square or smaller or something. Oh well it doesn't matter I'm still buying. :)
ChazUK
Apr 6, 01:29 PM
It'll be 100,001 when it comes out in the UK when mine gets delivered..... Roll on Saturday!:D
grue
Apr 12, 01:26 AM
Oh, and here's one I just ran into that reminds me:
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
Is it so much to ask to have it go to and from the background cleanly? Christ in a cartoon, you'd think backgrounding the application is a huge exercise in resource allocation by how long it takes to bring back all the windows sometimes, if they reappear at all. FCP is bad enough about this sometimes, but Compressor is even worse.
Minor, sure, but annoying as hell.
myemosoul
Jun 22, 02:49 PM
I'm afraid i have more bad news to throw into the fire.
I live in New Jersey and I called my local Radio Shack (where i was the only person to get a PIN on pre-order day) and the manager told me his district is only getting 4 iPhones and there's 19 stores in the district so my chances of getting one on Thursday are very, very slim.
I have decided to camp out at the Apple store starting 10pm tomorrow night and i'm sure i will have a much better chance of getting one that way.
I will use my $184 gift card i got from trading in my 3GS to buy a vcr/dvd recorder and i will make it a point to never shop at a Radio Shack again, which from what i read the other day won't be long because they're rumored to be out of business by 2011.
I live in New Jersey and I called my local Radio Shack (where i was the only person to get a PIN on pre-order day) and the manager told me his district is only getting 4 iPhones and there's 19 stores in the district so my chances of getting one on Thursday are very, very slim.
I have decided to camp out at the Apple store starting 10pm tomorrow night and i'm sure i will have a much better chance of getting one that way.
I will use my $184 gift card i got from trading in my 3GS to buy a vcr/dvd recorder and i will make it a point to never shop at a Radio Shack again, which from what i read the other day won't be long because they're rumored to be out of business by 2011.
ChazUK
Apr 6, 03:12 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
Shame people are brainwashed by Apple with their crappy product, and the superior tablet is behind on sales. Im sure it will pick up soon.
WTF? Others are playing catch-up because Apple put out a fantastic product before everyone else. Now its catch-up time for the competition.
Shame people are brainwashed by Apple with their crappy product, and the superior tablet is behind on sales. Im sure it will pick up soon.
WTF? Others are playing catch-up because Apple put out a fantastic product before everyone else. Now its catch-up time for the competition.
shawnce
Jul 14, 06:45 PM
Agreed. I can make an argument for the consumer machines, where perhaps 512 MB is sufficient for basic users. Specifically, why force them to pay more for 1 GB if they don't need it. But when it comes to the Pro machines, as if anyone buying one of these beasts is not going to require at least 2 GB of RAM, let alone 1 GB. No one buys a quad Xeon Powermac to just surf the Internet and check their e-mail. :cool:
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
Personally I go the BTO route at Apple.com for my PowerMacs and downgrade all RAM to the minimum cost and buy my RAM from a trusted 3rd party vendor for a savings of at least 10% if not more so.
iSamurai
Apr 6, 10:20 AM
I would love to see a 15" laptop with no optical drive, with the specs and price somewhere between the MBA and MBP.
DStaal
Sep 13, 11:12 AM
Sun has released this as Open Source. so it will get ported around to other OSes. I hear Sun's Dtrace is already in Leopard
Great. Um... What's their patent licensing scheme on this? (Since they proudly announce they've patented parts of it...)
Great. Um... What's their patent licensing scheme on this? (Since they proudly announce they've patented parts of it...)
~Shard~
Aug 25, 04:29 PM
the vocal minority are always the ones who have problems :rolleyes:
So in other words, the squeaky wheel gets the grease? ;)
So in other words, the squeaky wheel gets the grease? ;)
jp102235
Apr 25, 03:06 PM
I could have sworn that the fed govt is barred from spying on us, but private citizens can do this all day long.
jmbear
Nov 29, 12:39 PM
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don�t I delete them. You don�t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn�t kill it. But its importance will diminish.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..
iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It�s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ�s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..
I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels� business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.
Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can�t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
I agree, they won�t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.
Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don�t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
padr�
Sep 19, 01:12 PM
then i will have to work just a little bit harder i'm afraid ;)
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
i'll start with the 1 gig ram, maybe 2, and later i will be upgrading,it can't stay expansive forever.
thx again for your reply
puuukeey
Nov 28, 10:39 PM
https://home.comcast.net/~puuukeey/evil2.gif
zacman
Apr 19, 03:04 PM
2. You never specified which marketshare you were talking about.
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
When someone speaks about "smartphone marketshare" he usually means world wide and not only for Botswana. But nice try. :rolleyes:
boncellis
Jul 20, 12:17 PM
I hate to burst everyone's bubble, but Kentsfield will not be appearing in any of the Pro machines for some time.
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I hadn't thought of it, but with a server class processor ostensibly powering the Mac Pro, it begs the question of what the servers will get as an upgrade.
The simple answer--next generation server chips, duh!
Apple will be using them exclusively in the Xserves, at for the most part of 2007. This will finally give Apple another way to distinguish their server line from their pro line.
That makes a lot of sense, actually. I hadn't thought of it, but with a server class processor ostensibly powering the Mac Pro, it begs the question of what the servers will get as an upgrade.
The simple answer--next generation server chips, duh!
aohus
Apr 19, 02:44 PM
Who said Apple created the first GUI.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
well, it looks as though a lot of users here still believe that Apple is the father of the GUI, when its clearly not.
Jobs himself credits Xerox for their GUI. :rolleyes:
well, it looks as though a lot of users here still believe that Apple is the father of the GUI, when its clearly not.
rdowns
Apr 27, 09:38 AM
I wish these people would just be honest and tell the American people their real motivation; we don't want a n***** in the White House.
No comments:
Post a Comment