noservice2001
Aug 4, 04:52 AM
please let it be in the mac mini...
GQB
Mar 28, 09:57 AM
The iPhone 4 is already dated relative to other phones on the market. To have a phone on the market for 18 months without an update is insane.
Not as far as 95% of users are concerned. Most users don't utilize half of what the current device can do.
But on a larger issue, exactly which is it? Apple updates too frequently or not frequently enough?
The big anti-Apple talking point since iPad2 has been that all of its features could have been available on iPad 1, but Apple held off in order to make people buy another one (nonsense, btw). So they get slammed either way.
As far as hardware announcements at WWDC, I think it makes sense to de-couple iPhone announcements from that event just as it made sense for Apple to de-couple its major announcements from MacWorld. Having an unrelated event drive announcements locks Apple in unnecessarily.
They'll just have a separate, more appropriate, announcement venue for iPhone 5.
Not as far as 95% of users are concerned. Most users don't utilize half of what the current device can do.
But on a larger issue, exactly which is it? Apple updates too frequently or not frequently enough?
The big anti-Apple talking point since iPad2 has been that all of its features could have been available on iPad 1, but Apple held off in order to make people buy another one (nonsense, btw). So they get slammed either way.
As far as hardware announcements at WWDC, I think it makes sense to de-couple iPhone announcements from that event just as it made sense for Apple to de-couple its major announcements from MacWorld. Having an unrelated event drive announcements locks Apple in unnecessarily.
They'll just have a separate, more appropriate, announcement venue for iPhone 5.
theappleguy
Jul 31, 04:27 AM
couldn't they just release it as an UNLOCKED phone, sell it on their site and allow us to use it with who ever?I'm sure they would. If they did choose to only make it available to Verizon/T-Mobile etc then they would either have to sell unlocked versions in other countries where those networks don't operate or loose a large amount of sales.
2IS
Apr 7, 11:42 AM
Too funny. :rolleyes:
I love all the posts that say, "competition is good, keep Apple on its toes." Problem is, the competition is just copying what Apple has done. Who else is really innovating anything new? Who else has any sort of long term vision of where technology can take us? RIM, MS, HP? Doubtful. Google? All they want is to know everything about you to improve their ability to sell marketing information.
Apple making smart business decisions will only force others to rethink, innovate and create their own demand. Or die. Sorry if you don't like how the free market works.
Copycat tactics or not, it's still competition which is good for us consumers. That includes the not-too-bright Apple fanboys who may think otherwise.
I love all the posts that say, "competition is good, keep Apple on its toes." Problem is, the competition is just copying what Apple has done. Who else is really innovating anything new? Who else has any sort of long term vision of where technology can take us? RIM, MS, HP? Doubtful. Google? All they want is to know everything about you to improve their ability to sell marketing information.
Apple making smart business decisions will only force others to rethink, innovate and create their own demand. Or die. Sorry if you don't like how the free market works.
Copycat tactics or not, it's still competition which is good for us consumers. That includes the not-too-bright Apple fanboys who may think otherwise.
iScott428
Mar 29, 04:28 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) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
You really don't know what you are talking about. Many American businesses are world class. That doesn't include 2/3rds of the American auto industry sadly but GM made a management decision to sell crap and Chrysler never did sell anything of quality. However just because one industry is less than stellar it doesn't mean all are.
I'm not sure where you are on this planet but where I'm at we export a great deal of stuff to the rest of the world. Some of it even consumer level.
A wise person shops with an open mind. You seem to have closed yours and thus send all your dollars over seas. Sad really.
I Kind of have to disagree, then I agree with you as well that many in fact most American Businesses are great companies. Both Chrysler and GM have made and will make great vehicles in the future. And yes we do export a crap ton of products over seas, some good others not. Also I shop with the most open mind available, looking for the best quality products, at the best prices, with the best function and then form and too many other variable to list off.
And yes this is so far off topic its amazing where tangents can go.
You really don't know what you are talking about. Many American businesses are world class. That doesn't include 2/3rds of the American auto industry sadly but GM made a management decision to sell crap and Chrysler never did sell anything of quality. However just because one industry is less than stellar it doesn't mean all are.
I'm not sure where you are on this planet but where I'm at we export a great deal of stuff to the rest of the world. Some of it even consumer level.
A wise person shops with an open mind. You seem to have closed yours and thus send all your dollars over seas. Sad really.
I Kind of have to disagree, then I agree with you as well that many in fact most American Businesses are great companies. Both Chrysler and GM have made and will make great vehicles in the future. And yes we do export a crap ton of products over seas, some good others not. Also I shop with the most open mind available, looking for the best quality products, at the best prices, with the best function and then form and too many other variable to list off.
And yes this is so far off topic its amazing where tangents can go.
NebulaClash
Apr 26, 03:35 PM
Oh, let's not get carried away. This will NEVER be PC vs Macs again. That was a unique historical situation that is not being repeated.
1. Apple has never led the phone market in market share. This is not a case of Apple "losing" to Android, since Apple has not lost anything. Both Apple and Android are growing gangbusters. Both are doing well, both will do well.
2. When the iPhone started, Steve Jobs wanted a small percentage of the market in the first year. He got more than that, and now has a percentage none of us would have believed possible back then. Apple is doing great.
3. The phone market is so vast, no one company will ever control it all. If that's your goal, forget it, Napolean, it won't happen. Not for Android, not for Apple, not for anyone.
4. If you are a developer, iOS is where it's at for getting compensation in a non-adware environment.
5. And yes, it is the iOS marketshare that matters to developers, because all those iPod touch owners buy apps too.
1. Apple has never led the phone market in market share. This is not a case of Apple "losing" to Android, since Apple has not lost anything. Both Apple and Android are growing gangbusters. Both are doing well, both will do well.
2. When the iPhone started, Steve Jobs wanted a small percentage of the market in the first year. He got more than that, and now has a percentage none of us would have believed possible back then. Apple is doing great.
3. The phone market is so vast, no one company will ever control it all. If that's your goal, forget it, Napolean, it won't happen. Not for Android, not for Apple, not for anyone.
4. If you are a developer, iOS is where it's at for getting compensation in a non-adware environment.
5. And yes, it is the iOS marketshare that matters to developers, because all those iPod touch owners buy apps too.
appleguy123
May 3, 06:36 PM
There's a few mis-stated rules in Don't panic's rules that I will address shortly.
But one is that a trap activates as soon as you attempt to leave the room. The only way to avoid a trap is to explore the room, which will discover, and disarm, the trap.
With that said, there are currently nothing placed on the map by the villain. He will make his first move after you slow-pokes are done ;)
I'm confused. Are you saying that the villain gets to listen to our conversations and then place the traps? Can he place a trap in the room we're in right now? If so, should this planning be done via PM?
But one is that a trap activates as soon as you attempt to leave the room. The only way to avoid a trap is to explore the room, which will discover, and disarm, the trap.
With that said, there are currently nothing placed on the map by the villain. He will make his first move after you slow-pokes are done ;)
I'm confused. Are you saying that the villain gets to listen to our conversations and then place the traps? Can he place a trap in the room we're in right now? If so, should this planning be done via PM?
celo48
Apr 6, 05:36 PM
They should call it Boom instead. It exploded and it is done.
onigami
May 6, 02:10 AM
Kind of like Apple. And you would welcome a switch to AMD? That would be three steps backwards.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
Actually, that wouldn't be so bad. If the point is to utilize a low cost processor, a switch to the Fusion APU platform would be pretty smart: Reduces costs significantly be removing the need for a discrete GPU, all the while maintaining quality performance in graphics. That's kind of AMD's aim at the moment with Fusion.
What's stopping Apple from putting 6, 8 of these little bastards on the motherboard? This way they can make up for any speed advantage Intel has right now.
...Which would mean eliminating any power or cost advantage that ARM had over x86.
0815
Apr 5, 01:19 PM
I can understand Apple's concern here it could give the impression to an uneducated user that it is OK to jailbreak their phone since they are being encouraged to by what would seem like a legitimate source. I don't think it's much of an issue for Scion owners though as they are probably used to sub-par performance.
From the legal point of view it is ok. There should be better education about the risks when jailbreaking and how to protect better against those. But you can legally jailbreak and protect against most risks (if you do it right)
From the legal point of view it is ok. There should be better education about the risks when jailbreaking and how to protect better against those. But you can legally jailbreak and protect against most risks (if you do it right)
Mike84
Mar 30, 07:15 PM
Anyone downloading and installing on an MBA?
Wondering about trim support.
Wondering about trim support.
G4-power
Nov 3, 11:01 AM
Now we need someone to test it on an iPod touch, I'd be thrilled to see it work on an iPod. On the other hand, at that price (car kit + app) you can get a very decent Tomtom dedicated GPS-navigator and use your iPod for something else...
kiljoy616
Apr 7, 03:24 PM
Shame - a bit of competition couldn't hurt iPad development.
How is the iPad going bad, the new one is incredible, the first gen still rocks for most things. Retina is coming we all can assume that the next jump will be even bigger and Retina as well as way better cameras are in the works. :cool:
Competition is good, but considering what I have seen there is no competition just companies throwing money behind half baked scheme hoping something will stick. :confused:
Sure I like a bit more control with the UI but you can't have it all. :rolleyes:
How is the iPad going bad, the new one is incredible, the first gen still rocks for most things. Retina is coming we all can assume that the next jump will be even bigger and Retina as well as way better cameras are in the works. :cool:
Competition is good, but considering what I have seen there is no competition just companies throwing money behind half baked scheme hoping something will stick. :confused:
Sure I like a bit more control with the UI but you can't have it all. :rolleyes:
mentaluproar
Nov 3, 07:10 PM
I used to have iantivirus, but got rid of it because it would grab onto 150% or some ridiculous number of the processor and never let go. Sophos, on the other hand, is lightweight and unobtrusive.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Core Trio
Jul 21, 02:04 PM
Noooo....must...resist urges to buy...new MBP's
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Squire
Nov 26, 04:43 PM
The likelihood of an Apple tablet increases with time because the technology gets better. Here are some of my rumblings from some similar threads started in 2005.
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
I think the tablet idea is plausible. Here's why:
-Many people wouldn't think twice about buying a new iPod. One problem is everyone already has one. Another problem is that you can't do any "computing" with an iPod.
Enter the tablet. It has a pod-ish name to keep people interested. It plays video, if that's your thing. It's cross-platform compatible (files and stuff) and the bundled software is amazing. Non-Mac users weren't afraid of buying an iPod. Non-Mac-using iPod owners will not be afraid to buy this. It will give them a little taste of what OS X is all about.
I think Apple needs a product like this, especially with Palm's new LifeDrive out (a PDA with a 4GB hard drive).
...And...
hmmm....maybe it's some sort of glorified remote control with a touch-screen interface to manage all your media via wi-fi and/or BT between yor mac, airport, stereo & tv?
Some random thoughts:
Good point. I seem to recall reports of Steve just grinning when asked about the problem of getting up and walking to your computer to change tracks (Walt Mossberg referring to the AirPort Express).
The thought of a video iPod doubling as an AE remote, although initially interesting, seems a bit out of whack. I wouldn't want a remote control any larger (width-wise, anyway) than a normal iPod. And I wouldn't want an iPod video any smaller than the current iPod.
Ever notice how Steve gives a reason for almost everything they do, especially if they were originally against doing it?
* entering the mp3 market: The devices had a limited capacity and/or terrible UI.
* iPod photo: Finally there was some content to display (while there was no content providers for portable video players) [Now, of course, there are music videos.]
* Flash-based mp3 players: They have crappy little screens and cumbersome controls. Solution= ditch the screen and make simple controls.
* Tablets: Who knows? They'll refine them or give us a good enough reason to want one. Same goes for video iPod, I guess.
Squire
ravenvii
May 3, 12:16 PM
I'm in.
Please move all the relevant responses to DP's questions to the OP. If it's not in the OP, I don't consider it to be a rule. Maybe I'm a minority, but I'm not going to read through pages of this thread trying to figure things out.
Wish granted.
so, counting plutonius, mscriv and aggie we are 8!
Awaiting confirmation from mscriv. In the meanwhile, one slot is still open.
Please move all the relevant responses to DP's questions to the OP. If it's not in the OP, I don't consider it to be a rule. Maybe I'm a minority, but I'm not going to read through pages of this thread trying to figure things out.
Wish granted.
so, counting plutonius, mscriv and aggie we are 8!
Awaiting confirmation from mscriv. In the meanwhile, one slot is still open.
NebulaClash
Mar 28, 11:09 AM
The Antenna issue goes away if you use a case, or you hold the phone so that the bottom left black line isnt covered by skin.
I'm not even using a case on my iPhone 4, and yet I'm not having antenna issues. I feel sorry for people who get sucked into anti-Apple propaganda articles. They miss out while being fearful of FUD.
I'm not even using a case on my iPhone 4, and yet I'm not having antenna issues. I feel sorry for people who get sucked into anti-Apple propaganda articles. They miss out while being fearful of FUD.
MSUSpartan
Apr 23, 04:30 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
Wasn't that a big thing from the Leopard announcement?
Wasn't that a big thing from the Leopard announcement?
Piggie
Apr 23, 05:45 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Indeed they are, and still being sold today.
They are called iPad's ;)
drummondi
Sep 15, 11:10 PM
I've just been wanting one for so long, and all I've been waiting for is a processor trade-out, that I'll be happy with just that. Of course I'll be quite please if they implement the easy access HD bay. Better still, a better gfx card would make me pee my pants a little.
I think you should go get your prostate checked.
I think you should go get your prostate checked.
mrelwood
Mar 29, 04:21 PM
while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
I think that's only good. It's ridiculous how much we have everything. Wouldn't mind sharing my job and paycheck. And lifestyle for that matter. The only problem is the greedy ones that will try to hold on to things they really don't need.
Maybe Japan was a stretch, but the part about China is absolutely not an overstatement.
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Well, the percentage of suicides is a lot smaller in Foxconn employees than in the US population. So, basically Foxconn employees are happier than US citizen.
I think that's only good. It's ridiculous how much we have everything. Wouldn't mind sharing my job and paycheck. And lifestyle for that matter. The only problem is the greedy ones that will try to hold on to things they really don't need.
Maybe Japan was a stretch, but the part about China is absolutely not an overstatement.
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Well, the percentage of suicides is a lot smaller in Foxconn employees than in the US population. So, basically Foxconn employees are happier than US citizen.
Elijahg
Apr 23, 08:02 PM
Again, KDE 2.0, 10 years ago. My Pentium 2 333 mhz didn't break a sweat doing SVG icons then (the Krystal SVG icon theme). ;)
I seriously doubt this is even an issue.
I doubt it had to process translucency or resize 50 times per second for 30+ images though :P If it were as efficient as bitmaps, it'd be used for game textures for sure... A texture would scale to any size with no pixellation at all, and the details wouldn't get blurred out when scaling down.
But I don't understand the resistance to SVG support, which would be a decade late. Sure it's not a shortcoming, but in light of these stories, it would be a "nicer to have".
I do agree SVG support is a good thing, just I don't see it getting used much. Even with resolution independence, standard pixel images are much easier to handle.
I seriously doubt this is even an issue.
I doubt it had to process translucency or resize 50 times per second for 30+ images though :P If it were as efficient as bitmaps, it'd be used for game textures for sure... A texture would scale to any size with no pixellation at all, and the details wouldn't get blurred out when scaling down.
But I don't understand the resistance to SVG support, which would be a decade late. Sure it's not a shortcoming, but in light of these stories, it would be a "nicer to have".
I do agree SVG support is a good thing, just I don't see it getting used much. Even with resolution independence, standard pixel images are much easier to handle.
No comments:
Post a Comment