techweenie
Apr 25, 10:48 AM
We're not.
Though we could.
Now look at this shiny new thing over here.
- Steve
Though we could.
Now look at this shiny new thing over here.
- Steve
moobookpro
Sep 16, 04:04 PM
Aye, and I have noticed that Apple was very smart to market their line as notebooks rather than laptops. A notebook you put on a table and have less of a chance of getting another "McDonald's hot coffee burns lap" suit. :eek:
***Waiting for the "Caution: This notebook may burn you lap" warning sticker***
I would just like to note (yes, pun intended) that all computer manufacturers refer to their portable computers as notebooks. The only people that still call them laptops are consumers.
***Waiting for the "Caution: This notebook may burn you lap" warning sticker***
I would just like to note (yes, pun intended) that all computer manufacturers refer to their portable computers as notebooks. The only people that still call them laptops are consumers.
macaddict06
Jul 21, 03:00 PM
Noo...! My MacBook is out of date before its even arrived :eek:!!!!!!
Well, no it's not.
1) it is just as fast now as it will be when you get it (read: speed won't decline)
2) As a computer owner, you know something better is coming. It's just like buying a car - buy for what you need now, worry about upgrading when the time comes
3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
Well, no it's not.
1) it is just as fast now as it will be when you get it (read: speed won't decline)
2) As a computer owner, you know something better is coming. It's just like buying a car - buy for what you need now, worry about upgrading when the time comes
3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
D4F
Apr 20, 07:13 AM
The nice thing this time around is that everyone seems to have such low expectations that Apple can only meet or exceed them :D
Yet they will stay in line for two days to pay premium for it.
Apple has one great thing.... a lot of quarter-brain organisms that pump $$ to their pocket.
Yet they will stay in line for two days to pay premium for it.
Apple has one great thing.... a lot of quarter-brain organisms that pump $$ to their pocket.
Full of Win
May 8, 02:45 AM
If apple is looking for a way to fend off android then this may be part of the strategy. Mac.com is what makes my iThings work. If it was not for the sync OTA, then I very well may have been on another phone by now. Can't tell you how many times that it has saved me ass.
siderealxxx
May 6, 05:11 AM
Any chance of a PPC to ARM bridge for OS9?!
:D
:D
Consultant
Mar 28, 10:31 AM
No iPhone 5, but there will be iPhone invisio!
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.
ROTF. Dated. That must be why the recent mobile industry event that Apple didn't sponsor nor attend voted iPhone the best phone on the market.
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.
ROTF. Dated. That must be why the recent mobile industry event that Apple didn't sponsor nor attend voted iPhone the best phone on the market.
kirk26
Apr 20, 06:07 AM
Not a summer update? Surprising.
Not sure if serious. We pretty much knew it wouldn't be a summer update.
Not sure if serious. We pretty much knew it wouldn't be a summer update.
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 05:55 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They already redid the ENTIRE interface. It looks really awesome. I've used it in the first DP build. It doesn't need to be changed anymore.
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
They already redid the ENTIRE interface. It looks really awesome. I've used it in the first DP build. It doesn't need to be changed anymore.
iMikeT
Aug 2, 05:21 PM
What isn't new?
This is what I think:
-Financial report
-Update report of Macs using Intel processors
-Update report of universal applications
-Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) preview
One more thing......
-Mac Pro (Intel powered PowerMac) announced. Will ship with Woodcrest. Will ship early-mid September.
-(Very slim chance of announcement) Intel powered Xserve
This is what I think:
-Financial report
-Update report of Macs using Intel processors
-Update report of universal applications
-Mac OS 10.5 (Leopard) preview
One more thing......
-Mac Pro (Intel powered PowerMac) announced. Will ship with Woodcrest. Will ship early-mid September.
-(Very slim chance of announcement) Intel powered Xserve
iBug2
Mar 30, 08:24 PM
That's why they are, little by little, switching into the iOS experience... I'm quite inclined towards Lion being the last OS X version where the user will still be able to install applications on its own. The next one... I'm afraid... will be fully AppStore oriented... and that's when we will see the first jailbroken computers in history :D
No, there's some more time for that one. But trust me, in our lifetime, we will witness a true closed PC marketspace, for all OS's, not just Mac OS. But those devices won't be called PC's anymore. The entire industry will go there, not just Apple. In 15 years or so, our whole computing will be done on the cloud and we will only have consoles at home, not CPU's. Many things will change. So being afraid of it is in vain.
No, there's some more time for that one. But trust me, in our lifetime, we will witness a true closed PC marketspace, for all OS's, not just Mac OS. But those devices won't be called PC's anymore. The entire industry will go there, not just Apple. In 15 years or so, our whole computing will be done on the cloud and we will only have consoles at home, not CPU's. Many things will change. So being afraid of it is in vain.
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
Prom1
Mar 30, 10:23 PM
Can't say I've been excited by new OSes since Panther/Tiger. Yay it's more iOS-like and we get an app store.
*yawn*
I gotta agree. Something about going with IOS as a touchy-feely just doesn't rub me right. There are improvements that I really welcome - but I don't think using an Mac App Store for application deployment is required. The Restore feature is just Time Machine augmented in my narrow mind.
So what part of 'iOS' fluff do Versions, Air Drop, Mission Control, Auto Save and Lion Server fit under?
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
I'd like for you to explain how iOS implementations as a UI are actually useful to the desktop OS?
- Keep in mind that drawing characters on the Trackpad is already in Snow Leopard; Auto Save/Restore like I said is just Time Machine in a different direction, Mission Control is a Task Manager for Expose (I feel its the WRONG direction really; this is not a classic smartphone), and Lion Server seems to be more a "home server" with features stripped or missing.
Many things are STILL not known and until we all try them out in full production use means we ALL have a mindset that is not up to par of what Apple believes can benefit us all.
Either way we have another 10 more years with OS X; or the technologies it offers - Steve Jobs OS X Introduction.
*yawn*
I gotta agree. Something about going with IOS as a touchy-feely just doesn't rub me right. There are improvements that I really welcome - but I don't think using an Mac App Store for application deployment is required. The Restore feature is just Time Machine augmented in my narrow mind.
So what part of 'iOS' fluff do Versions, Air Drop, Mission Control, Auto Save and Lion Server fit under?
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
I'd like for you to explain how iOS implementations as a UI are actually useful to the desktop OS?
- Keep in mind that drawing characters on the Trackpad is already in Snow Leopard; Auto Save/Restore like I said is just Time Machine in a different direction, Mission Control is a Task Manager for Expose (I feel its the WRONG direction really; this is not a classic smartphone), and Lion Server seems to be more a "home server" with features stripped or missing.
Many things are STILL not known and until we all try them out in full production use means we ALL have a mindset that is not up to par of what Apple believes can benefit us all.
Either way we have another 10 more years with OS X; or the technologies it offers - Steve Jobs OS X Introduction.
Rocketman
Aug 7, 01:58 PM
Suppose it'd be a bit heretic to buy one of these solely for Windows, right?
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I do believe that is the entire point of this WWDC06 keynote presentation. Note if you get the chaeaper, faster, nicer MacPro computer you get OSX and bundled apps "for free".
Rocketman
I'd not get a quad Xeon Woodcrest anywhere else for less, and my Athlon 64 just doesn't cut it...
I do believe that is the entire point of this WWDC06 keynote presentation. Note if you get the chaeaper, faster, nicer MacPro computer you get OSX and bundled apps "for free".
Rocketman
MikeTheC
Nov 26, 11:29 AM
I've always been of the impression, since the time of the pre-release discussions of tablet PCs, that they were a solution looking for a problem.
I would never, ever want to spend my money on an electronic equivalent to a notepad. And I happen to use notepads, BTW. However, if I was taking notes with it (which is NOT at all what I do with the notepads I own), there's no way in the world I'd be writing on it; that would be far too slow.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
The TPC market is so highly specialized and so incredibly vertical that I believe it would be nothing more than a distraction for Apple away from their core business and development strengths.
I would never, ever want to spend my money on an electronic equivalent to a notepad. And I happen to use notepads, BTW. However, if I was taking notes with it (which is NOT at all what I do with the notepads I own), there's no way in the world I'd be writing on it; that would be far too slow.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
The TPC market is so highly specialized and so incredibly vertical that I believe it would be nothing more than a distraction for Apple away from their core business and development strengths.
Cougarcat
Mar 30, 08:48 PM
I still can't remove Launchpad on mine >.< Did you update via Software Update or reinstall the new build? I updated via Software Update to build 2.
Software Update doesn't install the new build, you have to install the SU patch and then get the update from the App Store.
Software Update doesn't install the new build, you have to install the SU patch and then get the update from the App Store.
AppleKrate
Sep 16, 01:04 PM
[ Josias] you seem to imply in your previous post that res independence is a feature of Leopard. If so, how do you know this? Link please?
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=15531
http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?home&NewsID=15531
Frobozz
Aug 7, 04:33 PM
Core 2 Duo (Merom/Conroe) was conspicuosly absent from this Keynote.
I too hope when the consumer lineup gets Core 2 Duo that they'll fill this gap with either a high end consumer machine or a low end pro.
B
It's pretty obvious what they'll be doing now. Core 2 Duo iMacs, Merom MacBook Pro's, MacBook and Mac mini stay the same.
I too hope when the consumer lineup gets Core 2 Duo that they'll fill this gap with either a high end consumer machine or a low end pro.
B
It's pretty obvious what they'll be doing now. Core 2 Duo iMacs, Merom MacBook Pro's, MacBook and Mac mini stay the same.
LxHunter
Nov 14, 01:14 PM
Should I continue to use the free Sophos or switch to the ESET paid AV?
On a iMac for business and home use.
Thanks for any insight.
On a iMac for business and home use.
Thanks for any insight.
bep207
Aug 3, 10:45 AM
do you think the macbook pro could get easy to switch hard drives like the macbook has? what are the odds of fitting two hard drives in say a 17" model and allowing people to carry multiple hard drives that can be easily switched via a port. like a bigger expresscard port but for hdd
navguy
Jan 6, 06:10 PM
after a week of experimenting ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
no rattle
good bluetooth connection
landscape position is delicate, but holding fine - no movement on bumps (i've tested center position on back and shifted toward bottom in landscape; both work well)
GPS lock is interesting ... 1. definitely takes mount GPS 20-30 seconds from cold start; 2. fast lock is no doubt iPhone assisted GPS initially; 3. there is a moment 30 seconds from cold start when it switches over to mount GPS once lock is achieved (a noticable lag moment - but gotta be watching close)
while i don't have complete facts, i do think the satnavs use the mount most of the time, except from cold start when GPS lock is a bit slower then phone's assisted GPS
speaker works fine - although i'd like to be able to change the inital volume (too loud) w/in the free app
no use of AUX
one add'l thing i've found is that phone boots the mount bluetooth for ear piece - no multi connect option as far as i can tell (iPhone 'feature'?)
otherwise, enjoying the integrated features of the mount so far ...
HecubusPro
Sep 15, 06:29 PM
Reliable or not, I guess this is a good news for many of us waiting for the C2D MBP. If it proved reliable, I think MacRumors should pay more attention to check their updates in the future. ;)
I was about to think of that as "another crappy site?" but then I thought, hey, everyone have their own sources that you could never imagine, like one of the posts right before Sept 12th event claiming to know the entire agenda, and he's pretty accurate, no?
As originally posted by Longfresh...
see for yourself
http://www.macrumors.com/site.php?mode=search&term=MacShrine
Seems somewhat reliable to me.
I was about to think of that as "another crappy site?" but then I thought, hey, everyone have their own sources that you could never imagine, like one of the posts right before Sept 12th event claiming to know the entire agenda, and he's pretty accurate, no?
As originally posted by Longfresh...
see for yourself
http://www.macrumors.com/site.php?mode=search&term=MacShrine
Seems somewhat reliable to me.
Object-X
Aug 7, 02:03 PM
They updated the specs of the displays too along with lowering the price.
kjs862
May 7, 12:10 PM
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
Wow great information. I'm sure Apple will change MM's tech in such a way to give better speeds. I mean, this sever farm has be used for this sort of thing... I hope.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
Wow great information. I'm sure Apple will change MM's tech in such a way to give better speeds. I mean, this sever farm has be used for this sort of thing... I hope.