mscriv
May 4, 12:22 AM
You foolhardy "heroes" are going to elect a leader who has barely made it past more than a couple of days in the WW infected village of MRville? You actually think such a decision will improve your chances of getting out of my mansion alive. MUHAHA HAHAHA!
Pay close attention to the scattered remains of those who have gone before you and failed. I will take great pleasure in seeing you join them. :evilgrinsmilie:
Pay close attention to the scattered remains of those who have gone before you and failed. I will take great pleasure in seeing you join them. :evilgrinsmilie:
Erwin-Br
Apr 23, 07:41 PM
Having extra resolution would probably look awesome on the GUI, but I'm afraid everything else is going to look like crap.
The graphics used on websites, for example, would become a pixel counting fest. Unless the entire web updates their graphics, of course. But that would mean slow loading times. Imagine all the smileys used on this forum would have a resolution of 512x512 pixels, or more. Yikes!
The graphics used on websites, for example, would become a pixel counting fest. Unless the entire web updates their graphics, of course. But that would mean slow loading times. Imagine all the smileys used on this forum would have a resolution of 512x512 pixels, or more. Yikes!
ChickenSwartz
Aug 11, 09:59 AM
Wait a second...if they release it in Paris, won't it no longer qualify for the free ipod?!? :(
If the Keynote is on the first day of the Expo that would be the 12th.
The iPod offere ends on the 16th, the end of the Paris Expo.
You might have to place your order online as I expect they wouldn't be in stores by then, but you [we] should be all set.
If the Keynote is on the first day of the Expo that would be the 12th.
The iPod offere ends on the 16th, the end of the Paris Expo.
You might have to place your order online as I expect they wouldn't be in stores by then, but you [we] should be all set.
Ca$hflow
May 4, 07:11 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
Actually 3 bags containing 4 liters.
Actually 3 bags containing 4 liters.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 12:05 PM
I've been a long time .mac/mobileme user - I would say I've been using their service for about 7 years. Only recently, I started using iDisk. I started using it for text documents, and it seems to work great. But recently, I have been hearing a lot about dropbox and its speed. Is dropbox that much better and what is this speed people are referring to? I played around with it a bit and its nice. It gives you a few more features, but these feature I wouldn't use. Is there any point to switch?
!
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.
!
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.
koobcamuk
Apr 25, 09:45 AM
I urge anyone who is a regular Macrumors reader to ignore anyone labeled as Newbie in threads/discussions on this tracking/location issue. Most are trolls.
I was one of the more vocal advocates on these threads way back when in the early days of the antennagate fiasco and the sheer number of trolls were mind-numbing. Of course they all went away into their trolldom caves, but some are showing their trollish faces again.
Another tip: best way to ignore trolls is to not feed them.
Rather ironic how your entire post is not constructive to the argument, and is merely troll-baiting.
You're a n00b to me; I have 2 years on you.
I was one of the more vocal advocates on these threads way back when in the early days of the antennagate fiasco and the sheer number of trolls were mind-numbing. Of course they all went away into their trolldom caves, but some are showing their trollish faces again.
Another tip: best way to ignore trolls is to not feed them.
Rather ironic how your entire post is not constructive to the argument, and is merely troll-baiting.
You're a n00b to me; I have 2 years on you.
MacBoobsPro
Aug 2, 11:23 AM
I can't see the Cinema Displays having built in iSight. I mean sure, it's useful - but what about people who work in environments where you can't have cameras (i.e. some pros) what about people who have dual monitors etc...I can't see it being feasible.
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
zim
Nov 22, 07:21 AM
I'm hoping for Apple to sell them. I think it is about time we break away form the buy into the plan get your phone deal. I would be willing to pay for a phone if it was of good quality and had usable features.. unlike the junk phones that I have had.. my current phone doesn't even have a working screen but since I was told it is my problem I decided why fix it? none of the options ever worked with my mac :mad:
benhollberg
Nov 5, 11:13 AM
So I just installed this and I ran it but I want a little more information about it. There is a feature called on-access scanning which I assume runs the application in the background (even after I quit it?) and so I am curious if t actually runs and if it does will it decrease my battery faster and slow down my computer then I am doing intense tasks? I really and just curious if it is worth it to have that feature on, I could be totally wrong. I currently have disabled it.
andiwm2003
Mar 28, 12:28 PM
Shifting the update cycle for the iPhone is generally a bad idea. A lot of people update yearly or every other year and they will percieve an additional wait time of three to six month as a loss because they keep paying their contract without getting a new subsidized phone. Also ATT is not going to like that because a lot of customers will be without long term commitment for several month and may use the time to consider a switch to Verizon. I'm sure ATT would prefer Apple to release predictably every June. I wish ATT would offer a unsubsidized contract.
But so far it's just a rumor. My plan is to upgrade my iPhone 3GS this June but wouldn't freak out if I hade to wait a few more month. Also this allows me to see if some Android phone with 4G network comes along that bests the iPhone.
But so far it's just a rumor. My plan is to upgrade my iPhone 3GS this June but wouldn't freak out if I hade to wait a few more month. Also this allows me to see if some Android phone with 4G network comes along that bests the iPhone.
marvel2
Jan 14, 11:51 AM
So I solved my problem. Erased the TomTom kit from the iPhones BT memory and repaired the two devices. Now the iPhone automatically pairs when I dock it in the TomTom kit.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
cecildk9999
Nov 22, 07:45 AM
I wouldn't mind having Apple sell them (and I'm guessing they will to some degree), but we also have to think in terms of the market as is. If I can get a free phone through my provider every x years, I'm going to do that instead of buying outside the company (even if it is crap). If I can get an upgrade for between $50 and $300, I might consider it when I'm in the store renewing my plan. Apple can gain presence only by going through established channels; it's not to say that you won't be able to buy one in an Apple store, just that consumers who like to do comparison shopping when they get their phones might like to see an iPhone in a TMobile/Verizon/3rd party carrier store.
frankie
Sep 15, 10:00 PM
I'd be happy if it was the same enclosure with a Merom CPU and an upgraded GPU - ATI X1800 or nVidia 7700 would be nice.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
If you really want longer battery life, then you should be hoping to keep the X1600. It's regarded as having the best "performance per watt" of recent mobile GPUs.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
A longer-life battery would be nice but I can't see it happening due to weight.
If you really want longer battery life, then you should be hoping to keep the X1600. It's regarded as having the best "performance per watt" of recent mobile GPUs.
Personally, I hope (well, pipe dream actually) they'll make MBP build-to-order like Mac Pro. I'd downgrade the CPU to the 2.0GHz version. It wholesales for $130 less than the 2.16, and $340 less than the 2.33. That's way too much to pay for a fractional speed increase.
OTOH, the 2.0 Xeon is $370 less than the 2.66 and Apple only cuts the price $75 for two of them. That's robbery. So I guess MBP BTO probably wouldn't help me even if they did it.
badcrumble
Mar 30, 08:10 PM
The new iCal is hideous. This "metaphor" crap is awful, and reeks of Mac OS 9. Make things look sleek and modern like the new Mail app, please.
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:53 AM
Who'd get a mobile phone on an ESPN or Disney network anyway? Free sport clips or Mickey Mouse backgrounds?
http://disneymobile.go.com/disneymobile/home.do
http://mobile.espn.go.com/
Google is your friend.
http://disneymobile.go.com/disneymobile/home.do
http://mobile.espn.go.com/
Google is your friend.
Sweetfeld28
Dec 5, 12:14 AM
i think this would make a good revision of the newly rumored 12" MacBook Pro.
heisetax
Nov 22, 07:47 AM
The problem with Palm is they are on their way out. They got what? Treo? How long can that last? PDAs are over. So it's all about the phones now.
They have to be worried. Apple has the midas touch. Whatever Apple get's into they change. Apple has a way of innovation that changes all of the dynamics. They weren't the first with the iPod, but their entrance into digital music has changed the whole music industry, not just digital music players.
Apple could very well do the same thing with an Apple branded phone. Integrating it into the whole computer experiance in ways we can't even predict. To claim it takes years to make a phone "right" is just proof that Palm has very little to offer.
The future of phone technology is going to change rapidly and dramically over the next few years. Apple can make billions of dollars in this market. They are going to go for it, and they will leverage their existing products to make it happen and to offer something new. Everyone is fixated on the iPod, but it's the integration with OS X that has the most interesting potential.
Video iChat on your phone? Internet services? Email? Address? Calendar? Have you used a Palm or Blackberry? They are OK for what they do, but they could be so much better...a lot better. What they are missing is exactly what Apple has to offer -- and it isn't music.
I know that many Blue Tooth features of my Motorola cell phone is disabled by Verizon. Even if Apple would make the best cell phone possible, how many of those great featues do you think the cell phone companies would actually allow the use of.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
They have to be worried. Apple has the midas touch. Whatever Apple get's into they change. Apple has a way of innovation that changes all of the dynamics. They weren't the first with the iPod, but their entrance into digital music has changed the whole music industry, not just digital music players.
Apple could very well do the same thing with an Apple branded phone. Integrating it into the whole computer experiance in ways we can't even predict. To claim it takes years to make a phone "right" is just proof that Palm has very little to offer.
The future of phone technology is going to change rapidly and dramically over the next few years. Apple can make billions of dollars in this market. They are going to go for it, and they will leverage their existing products to make it happen and to offer something new. Everyone is fixated on the iPod, but it's the integration with OS X that has the most interesting potential.
Video iChat on your phone? Internet services? Email? Address? Calendar? Have you used a Palm or Blackberry? They are OK for what they do, but they could be so much better...a lot better. What they are missing is exactly what Apple has to offer -- and it isn't music.
I know that many Blue Tooth features of my Motorola cell phone is disabled by Verizon. Even if Apple would make the best cell phone possible, how many of those great featues do you think the cell phone companies would actually allow the use of.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
MrSmith
Mar 28, 10:50 AM
And the 'antenna problems' were a media and hater frenzy, nothing more.
Doesn't matter. I'm an 'ignorant' consumer.
Doesn't matter. I'm an 'ignorant' consumer.
FX120
May 2, 09:08 PM
We need to switch to the metric system, what we have now is ****ing crazy when looking at the rest of the world...this is coming from a bio major who has to deal with SI units daily
At least we're not as bad as the UK...
At least we're not as bad as the UK...
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*
ten-oak-druid
Apr 7, 01:21 PM
Apple is anticompetitive and should be shut down. By producing products customers want when others in the industry can't, they are forcing the competition out of business.
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
LMAO
http://www.babynewsnow.com/images/baby_crying.jpg
If Apple is not shut down, they should be forced to only sell the products designed by RIM and Google, while Google and Rim can build any Apple product they want. Apple also needs to be forced to fire their QC department. While they are at it, they might want to replace their marketing department with a bunch of rabid chimps. They might also be forced to purchase advertising for RIM.
Apples cash reserves also give them an unfair advantage. Perhaps they should give half their money to RIM. Perhaps Apple should design and build the products and sell them, however, RIM and Google would get the money.
LMAO
http://www.babynewsnow.com/images/baby_crying.jpg
toneloco2881
Jul 21, 03:40 PM
I agree, 64 bit would be developer worthy, but why wait to introduce a new chip until then? Picture this - release new MBP and iMacs with the new chip before WWDC. At WWDC you annouce and showcase the OS, not the hardware, and at the end introduce a new desktop model and then say "all our pro line of computers and even the top consumer line support 64 bit NOW". Far more impact IMHO.
I don't think Apple would do a quiet release of a new MBP on their website, only to say "oh yeah......shipping in about a month". They'd rather just intro it at an event, and tell people your not going to be able to get their hands on it for a while.
Sort of like what they did at Macworld. Intel announcing a chip shipping, and actually being able to purchase a product with said chip inside, are two entirely different things. I seriously doubt anyone is going to be able to get their hands on a Merom-equipped notebook for at least a couple weeks, which happens to coincide with WWDC. Just imho....:)
I don't think Apple would do a quiet release of a new MBP on their website, only to say "oh yeah......shipping in about a month". They'd rather just intro it at an event, and tell people your not going to be able to get their hands on it for a while.
Sort of like what they did at Macworld. Intel announcing a chip shipping, and actually being able to purchase a product with said chip inside, are two entirely different things. I seriously doubt anyone is going to be able to get their hands on a Merom-equipped notebook for at least a couple weeks, which happens to coincide with WWDC. Just imho....:)
CalBoy
May 3, 09:14 PM
Semantics. Your argument boils down to the pain of change.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know. If you were to put that aside and judge between the two systems objectively, I can't see how anyone would actually choose imperial over metric. Metric is the future. No, check that � it's actually the present. You're living in the past Tomorrow.
This reminds me of the Dvorack keyboard layout vs the familiar QWERTY.
The Dvorack is objectively superior because it allows for higher wpm speeds than QWERTY. At the time of keyboard construction, however, Dvorack was prone to a lot more jamming by typists who were too fast for the physical limitations of the machine. Obviously that isn't a problem in the digital era, so logically we should switch to Dvorack if were had the option of starting from the beginning.
But, we're not starting from the beginning, are we? At this point switching to a new keyboard layout would be a huge undertaking for perhaps minimal gain.
The same applies to the metric system. At best it can offer minimal gains for the average person (something which, as I have pointed out above, may not be true in all cases) while costing a great deal. Even in the best of times, I think it would foolish to squander billions over such a petty thing when companies are free to shift production to be maximally efficient for themselves. If a company will make more money (or save it) using metric, then it will. There's no need to mandate it across every facet of life.
I mean, it's not as if we prevent companies from selling goods in metric quantities; if that was the case, then you'd have a good point.
Again, the real crux of your argument is that people are 'comfortable' with what they already know. If you were to put that aside and judge between the two systems objectively, I can't see how anyone would actually choose imperial over metric. Metric is the future. No, check that � it's actually the present. You're living in the past Tomorrow.
This reminds me of the Dvorack keyboard layout vs the familiar QWERTY.
The Dvorack is objectively superior because it allows for higher wpm speeds than QWERTY. At the time of keyboard construction, however, Dvorack was prone to a lot more jamming by typists who were too fast for the physical limitations of the machine. Obviously that isn't a problem in the digital era, so logically we should switch to Dvorack if were had the option of starting from the beginning.
But, we're not starting from the beginning, are we? At this point switching to a new keyboard layout would be a huge undertaking for perhaps minimal gain.
The same applies to the metric system. At best it can offer minimal gains for the average person (something which, as I have pointed out above, may not be true in all cases) while costing a great deal. Even in the best of times, I think it would foolish to squander billions over such a petty thing when companies are free to shift production to be maximally efficient for themselves. If a company will make more money (or save it) using metric, then it will. There's no need to mandate it across every facet of life.
I mean, it's not as if we prevent companies from selling goods in metric quantities; if that was the case, then you'd have a good point.
Finallyfamous
Apr 10, 12:11 PM
I agree with I student UK using the constraints of / makes it rather ambiguos (did I spell that right) as I originally read it. I believed the 2(9+3) to be in the denominator in which case the answer is clearly 2