ptysell
May 6, 12:49 AM
Unless they want to make you pay for something you don't need... not necessary. The new Intel Macs that are being released right now have so much power that they could run every iOS app in emulated mode and the processor would hardly even notice it. That's today. Imagine where Intel will be in a couple of years? An ARM chip sitting next to an Intel powerhouse is not needed. As far as being instant on... I'd say my iMac wakes up from a sleep just about as fast as my iPad.
Yes, but what kind of video playback could I get on my Macbook Pro on international flights if it booted iOS off an ARM CPU......
Yes, but what kind of video playback could I get on my Macbook Pro on international flights if it booted iOS off an ARM CPU......
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 2, 01:39 PM
you have got to be CRAZY to think that he's going to intro an ipod at WWDC, when MW Paris is right around the corner! MW Paris in september is pretty much ALWAYS when they intro ipods and consumer products this time of year.
I am still a bit curious why the last iPod-updater had text strings such as: "t_feature_app_PHONE_APP, kPhoneSignalStrength,
clPhoneCallModel,
clPhoneCallHistoryModel,
prPhoneSettingsMenu",
if an iPhone isn't around the corner. It doesn't make sense to include that unless the iPhone is very close to be released.
Besides, wouldn't it be beneficial, in terms of new apps, to let the developers know that the iPhone was about to be released very shortly?
I am still a bit curious why the last iPod-updater had text strings such as: "t_feature_app_PHONE_APP, kPhoneSignalStrength,
clPhoneCallModel,
clPhoneCallHistoryModel,
prPhoneSettingsMenu",
if an iPhone isn't around the corner. It doesn't make sense to include that unless the iPhone is very close to be released.
Besides, wouldn't it be beneficial, in terms of new apps, to let the developers know that the iPhone was about to be released very shortly?
aohus
Apr 18, 04:01 PM
Look's just like an iMac! :eek: almost... Stupid patents... Good for Xerox, too bad that playing fair is not helping these days...:mad:
you mean the iMac looks just like the Alto.. other way around :P
Alto was released in 1973. Macintosh in 1984.
you mean the iMac looks just like the Alto.. other way around :P
Alto was released in 1973. Macintosh in 1984.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 7, 08:48 PM
These sound sweet, I want one.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
But it's funny how the whole Mac Pro is a killer machine but they still neglect the video cards, seriously a nVidia Geforce 7300GT.
wordoflife
Apr 9, 06:29 PM
Official Google answer.
280546
You can do that?!??!
Damn, Google can do everything.
280546
You can do that?!??!
Damn, Google can do everything.
Rafterman
Mar 27, 09:56 AM
Yeah, cloud based video is going to work really well with those 2GB and 4GB data caps by the cell companies :rolleyes:
kiljoy616
Apr 20, 12:47 AM
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
Since it sounds like Apple is going to make us wait till September anything less than this rather reasonable list would be a major letdown while allowing the competition more time to get caught up.
Please site sources of when has Apple cared about staying ahead of an artificial market. I am trying to think of a time and they never really cared. They bring out what works when it works and that is why they do so well without having to have 100 products out all the time.
Nope Apple will take its time and do it right, as for a better camera really how big do you want to take your picture, I want sharper image and video not more gimmicky camera that don't hold their water. Faster response time on the UI would be welcome. The Snow Leopard of the phone business.
And for those that want 4G not sure if I care or want to see my battery go dead fast. I must admit 3G just does not seem slow to me and its more about location location location.
This article does not make me all warm inside about 4G for now.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19736_7-20046412-251.html
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
Since it sounds like Apple is going to make us wait till September anything less than this rather reasonable list would be a major letdown while allowing the competition more time to get caught up.
Please site sources of when has Apple cared about staying ahead of an artificial market. I am trying to think of a time and they never really cared. They bring out what works when it works and that is why they do so well without having to have 100 products out all the time.
Nope Apple will take its time and do it right, as for a better camera really how big do you want to take your picture, I want sharper image and video not more gimmicky camera that don't hold their water. Faster response time on the UI would be welcome. The Snow Leopard of the phone business.
And for those that want 4G not sure if I care or want to see my battery go dead fast. I must admit 3G just does not seem slow to me and its more about location location location.
This article does not make me all warm inside about 4G for now.
http://reviews.cnet.com/8301-19736_7-20046412-251.html
rhsgolfer33
Apr 20, 06:19 PM
Capital gains allows you to choose the timeline and the price to a point. If Capital Gains is special because of time-linked shifts in pricing, why isn't freelance income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
In my mind, income is income.
You certainly can't choose the price in a capital gains situation - that is definitely a market determination; sure, you could sell for less than market it, but that would be pretty stupid and of no benefit.
Capital gains isn't special because of price shifts over time, its special because the government is trying to spur investment - in addition to raising revenue, the tax code is largely a tool to get people to behave in a certain manner. The thought is that giving people a preferential rate on gains from investment encourages people to 1) invest in our economy 2) save for retirement. Whether it works or not is debated by economists and we could probably argue about it all day.
I feel like I'm just repeating myself. I've already addressed that capital gains is not necessarily income.
I'd love it if you could point out where you addressed this, because as a tax accountant, I'm having a hard time thinking of a time when a realized capital gain isn't income - if you have a realized net gain (ie amount realized is greater than your basis in the capital asset), you certainly have income. Certainly you could reinvest that net gain, but that doesn't mean you don't have income, that just means you realized a gain and reinvested the old basis and the gain (income). You're only taxed on realized gains that are recognized by the code (and you can net against realized losses) - sure, I could have an unrealized capital gain that isn't income, but I wouldn't be taxed on it either. Not that I don't agree with some of your points, but I'd really love the same clarification on this that most other posters have been asking for.
I suppose what you are getting at as a trader is that you buy a capital asset for $1000 and sell two days latter for $1100, then reinvest the $1100 into another capital asset. You'd be taxed on the $100 of capital gain even though you effectively have no cash in your hands to pay the tax. Unfortunately for traders, income doesn't mean cash. But a person who was in the trade or business of being a professional trader wouldn't qualify for capital gains treatment anyways, it would all be ordinary income.
cr2sh
Nov 22, 01:59 PM
Apple is partnering with an air-time provider so they will not get to keep much of the per-month fee, they will have to make money up front with hardware sales unless they can offer some non airtime monthly service like .mac
No. I don't see apple "partnering" with anyone. This will be an Apple phone... the carriers will line up to sell the next hot thing. If Apple "partners" with Cingular.. the phone loses part of its apple identity... I don't see it happening. Plus it invites someone else to the table.. I don't understand why Apple would do this.
Ah gotcha, with the max/min talk. NM.
No. I don't see apple "partnering" with anyone. This will be an Apple phone... the carriers will line up to sell the next hot thing. If Apple "partners" with Cingular.. the phone loses part of its apple identity... I don't see it happening. Plus it invites someone else to the table.. I don't understand why Apple would do this.
Ah gotcha, with the max/min talk. NM.
3N16MA
Mar 28, 12:06 PM
My 3GS is working just fine -- I'm more than content to wait for a real refresh to the iPhone (not some garbage update that keeps the same flawed form factor re: antenna and use of a shattering glass back).
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
Most people claiming they'll switch won't -- rebuying your Apps for the Android marketplace represents a non-insubstantial hidden cost to switching for many people.
The iPhone 4 was a real refresh considering it was the first redesign in 2 years. The 3Gs was a smaller refresh than the iPhone 4 yet you still own one.
toddybody
Mar 30, 11:13 AM
Kudos to Amazon for allowing non-amazon content to be saved. This is just plain cool. The revamped Mobile Me will be plagued by Apple's MO.
Hattig
Jul 30, 08:17 AM
so what CPU would power the phone ?
Something based off of the ARM architecture. Maybe a TI OMAP processor (a 150MHz TI OMAP 1510 powers my Motorola phone, that has an integrated ARM9 CPU, I could see an Apple phone using the newer 1710 for example). There's dozens of other mobile phone chipset providers of course, with their own ARM based solutions integrating varying types of functionality.
Something based off of the ARM architecture. Maybe a TI OMAP processor (a 150MHz TI OMAP 1510 powers my Motorola phone, that has an integrated ARM9 CPU, I could see an Apple phone using the newer 1710 for example). There's dozens of other mobile phone chipset providers of course, with their own ARM based solutions integrating varying types of functionality.
samiwas
Apr 19, 11:09 AM
I don't think anything will get done with the extreme left and extreme right fighting it out.
With America's bleak looking future (S&P put a warning out today), something definitely has to be done. These small $10bil cuts over 10 years is not nearly enough. Those cuts are the same as me using pennies from those "Give a penny, take a penny" trays. They are moot and mean nothing.
The US needs is a complete overall of its spending and tax code.
Spending: Post every single line item on the internet so the people can see where the money is going. Place mandatory cuts on everything. Each department should be given a % of the country's income and that's all they get. NO MORE ISSUING DEBT.
Taxes: Throw away the 1 million pages of tax codes and create something much more simple. Tax income (not necessarily rates) will have to go up in order for America to survive.
-However, if income taxes go up, then make sales tax illegal. Since we are having problems with sales tax on online purchases in individual states, then just get rid of the program all together. It doesn't make sense anymore unless we have a VAT, which Americans can't afford. Sales tax is a double tax anyway. I already paid taxes on the money used to buy the goods, so why pay again?
-EVERYONE needs to pay taxes. No more of this "45% of people don't pay anything." There should be a mandatory minimum rate that you cannot drop below no matter how many deductions you have. This could be as simple as your taxes cannot drop any more than 33% of your current tax bracket. So, If you are in a 10% bracket, your taxes will be no less than 7.66%.
-Capital gains tax should only affect people making more than 50% (or some other %) of their income from capital gains. This will allow the average family to invest their money and contribute to the marketplace without being taxed on money that they already paid taxes on. Sure, they may make money or lose money on their investment, but let's cut them a break since they are using hard earned money. As for people who make more than 50% of their income from capital gains, tax them at the regular income rates.
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort. I want to see a massive effort by both parties to fix our current deficit issue. Taxes are inevitable, but lets make a good effort to reduce spending before that happens. I want to see the government act responsibly before I give them more money.
I can't believe I'm almost agreeing with someone who has a picture of George Bush as their avatar. :D
I don't fully agree with "every item needs to be cut" in spending. We honestly do not need to be cutting education any more, as it's been the first on the chopping block for every cut thus far. The education system has its problems, that's for sure, but cutting its budget will only create more. Almost everything else could easily see some cuts, especially defense. I think the cuts should come from finding waste and fraud in the larger social programs, which I'm sure is rampant. But finding those would probably cost as much money as it saves.
Fully agree on simplifying tax code. The tax code is out of control and should be much, much simpler. There are things in there that must involve three people in the country. "Do you own land on which a blue house stands that was flooded on the second Tuesday of any month ending in an 'y'?" I think most deductions could be done away with, especially the really specialized ones.
Not sure how sales tax cutting would help the states, as they are the ones who are receiving that income. I wish STATE income tax returns would be simplified, especially for non residents. My non-resident California state return this year was larger than my federal return. That's BS. A non-resident tax return should be a post card: I made $xxx in your state, your rate is x%, I owe $xx.
Indeed, everyone should pay some sort of tax, even if it's only a few percent. If you get that back in social services, then great, you win. But everyone should put something in the pot.
I can go with your capital gains idea, but I might even go lower than 50% as the starting point. Our household income is just over six figures, and I have a bit over the six-figure mark in various investments currently. My Capital Gains last year? $35. A whopping .03%. Obviously, last year wasn't the best investment year, but I think the 50% mark could be high. Say anyone with over 30% in capital gains...it's not money they "worked hard" for, so they can't use that argument. It's basically free money.
With America's bleak looking future (S&P put a warning out today), something definitely has to be done. These small $10bil cuts over 10 years is not nearly enough. Those cuts are the same as me using pennies from those "Give a penny, take a penny" trays. They are moot and mean nothing.
The US needs is a complete overall of its spending and tax code.
Spending: Post every single line item on the internet so the people can see where the money is going. Place mandatory cuts on everything. Each department should be given a % of the country's income and that's all they get. NO MORE ISSUING DEBT.
Taxes: Throw away the 1 million pages of tax codes and create something much more simple. Tax income (not necessarily rates) will have to go up in order for America to survive.
-However, if income taxes go up, then make sales tax illegal. Since we are having problems with sales tax on online purchases in individual states, then just get rid of the program all together. It doesn't make sense anymore unless we have a VAT, which Americans can't afford. Sales tax is a double tax anyway. I already paid taxes on the money used to buy the goods, so why pay again?
-EVERYONE needs to pay taxes. No more of this "45% of people don't pay anything." There should be a mandatory minimum rate that you cannot drop below no matter how many deductions you have. This could be as simple as your taxes cannot drop any more than 33% of your current tax bracket. So, If you are in a 10% bracket, your taxes will be no less than 7.66%.
-Capital gains tax should only affect people making more than 50% (or some other %) of their income from capital gains. This will allow the average family to invest their money and contribute to the marketplace without being taxed on money that they already paid taxes on. Sure, they may make money or lose money on their investment, but let's cut them a break since they are using hard earned money. As for people who make more than 50% of their income from capital gains, tax them at the regular income rates.
I'm not against tax increases as long as the country is using it as a last resort. I want to see a massive effort by both parties to fix our current deficit issue. Taxes are inevitable, but lets make a good effort to reduce spending before that happens. I want to see the government act responsibly before I give them more money.
I can't believe I'm almost agreeing with someone who has a picture of George Bush as their avatar. :D
I don't fully agree with "every item needs to be cut" in spending. We honestly do not need to be cutting education any more, as it's been the first on the chopping block for every cut thus far. The education system has its problems, that's for sure, but cutting its budget will only create more. Almost everything else could easily see some cuts, especially defense. I think the cuts should come from finding waste and fraud in the larger social programs, which I'm sure is rampant. But finding those would probably cost as much money as it saves.
Fully agree on simplifying tax code. The tax code is out of control and should be much, much simpler. There are things in there that must involve three people in the country. "Do you own land on which a blue house stands that was flooded on the second Tuesday of any month ending in an 'y'?" I think most deductions could be done away with, especially the really specialized ones.
Not sure how sales tax cutting would help the states, as they are the ones who are receiving that income. I wish STATE income tax returns would be simplified, especially for non residents. My non-resident California state return this year was larger than my federal return. That's BS. A non-resident tax return should be a post card: I made $xxx in your state, your rate is x%, I owe $xx.
Indeed, everyone should pay some sort of tax, even if it's only a few percent. If you get that back in social services, then great, you win. But everyone should put something in the pot.
I can go with your capital gains idea, but I might even go lower than 50% as the starting point. Our household income is just over six figures, and I have a bit over the six-figure mark in various investments currently. My Capital Gains last year? $35. A whopping .03%. Obviously, last year wasn't the best investment year, but I think the 50% mark could be high. Say anyone with over 30% in capital gains...it's not money they "worked hard" for, so they can't use that argument. It's basically free money.
Bengt77
Aug 4, 06:55 PM
Sounds like someone wants an iMac Ultra! (Really final Propaganda)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
All for under AU$4 Grand.
Yay! I'll take one the minute it comes out! How much is one AU$ in €? Let's see... AU$4000 is about €2400. Sounds reasonable to me. But I'm all for stretching it a bit. Let's say €2100/AU$3530. That's €400 more expensive than the current top model, which is €400 more expensive than the low-end iMac. Seems logical to me, maybe not so reasonable, but reason is soooo overrated these days! :D
Anyone else here interested in an iMac Ultra?
Anyone else have an extreme and probably unwarrented hatred of the Pentium moniker?
Yes! (And yes to c.q. about that Pentium name, too, by the way.)
thegreatunknown
Sep 11, 11:52 AM
this is probably old news but meh, what the hell:
http://iphone.org
http://iphone.org
vampyren
Nov 12, 01:30 AM
I use Eset NOD32 on my pc and i must say it's the best AV software in my opinion after testing many others. Once they make their AV available on mac i will get it. Or if a AV get's its way to the new mac appstore. This way i know i can simply remove it by deleting it (i hope). I just hate installers that spread stuff on my mac. It's so ...windows :)
newcronos
Apr 8, 09:07 AM
Stay classy, Steve :p
tivoboy
May 9, 09:31 AM
I'd be so pissed/happy if it were to become free... 1 year of .Mac and 2 years of MobileMe.
Pissed, I spent $99 for 3 years
Happy, more people will have access to MobileMe's benefits.
If one paid for MM, and it went free, apple would most certainly push this money towards either itunes or whatever addtional premium services a FREE MM would offer, which of course they would
Pissed, I spent $99 for 3 years
Happy, more people will have access to MobileMe's benefits.
If one paid for MM, and it went free, apple would most certainly push this money towards either itunes or whatever addtional premium services a FREE MM would offer, which of course they would
ivladster
Apr 23, 04:27 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
asleep
Mar 28, 11:33 AM
I've always expected Apple to switch to a pre-Christmas release -- like October/November -- to dominate the "Christmas present chatter" every year.
This appears to be the best chance for that to happen.
This appears to be the best chance for that to happen.
Tomtomnovice
Jan 23, 12:06 PM
I am new to this forum, and a true novice with tomtom and car kits. I just downloaded the application onto my iPhone, and then setup the car kit. It works fine. What I have is probably what sounds like the dumbest of questions:
What is the car kit's resistance to cold temperatures? I live in Cleveland, OH and if I live the mount in the car for a whole day during winter, will the chips or anything be damaged?
Do you advice dismounting the kit every time I park for a few hours, and/or for the night? My garage is not heated.
Thanks!
What is the car kit's resistance to cold temperatures? I live in Cleveland, OH and if I live the mount in the car for a whole day during winter, will the chips or anything be damaged?
Do you advice dismounting the kit every time I park for a few hours, and/or for the night? My garage is not heated.
Thanks!
bedifferent
Apr 22, 04:29 PM
Steve: "Introducing, the new iRack!" :D
Madtv - Apple iRack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE)
Best. Skit. Ever.
Madtv - Apple iRack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE)
Best. Skit. Ever.
Sedrick
Mar 27, 07:00 AM
cloud-based hosting for music, videos, and photos
Great, now I can pay data charges to access all my stuff. **** that.
Great, now I can pay data charges to access all my stuff. **** that.
ctdonath
Mar 29, 10:53 AM
not really true. it depends on what kind of storage options they are currently running, there are many devices and programs out there that eliminate this kind of redundancy and odds are amazon is using them right now.
Technically, yes.
Legally, no.
There have been assorted lawsuits which ruled if you're going to "buffer" data for a consumer, you have to keep a copy for each customer - no "well, these people are storing the same thing so let's just store one copy". Stupid, but true. Amazon's way around this was obviously to make arrangements with publishers (or to have some creative lawyers leveraging a particular position) allowing the seller to keep one copy and give customers access to that one.
Upshot: buy it from Amazon, they use one copy and tout "free storage"; upload it to Amazon's storage, they have to store that copy independent of any other duplicates.
Technically, yes.
Legally, no.
There have been assorted lawsuits which ruled if you're going to "buffer" data for a consumer, you have to keep a copy for each customer - no "well, these people are storing the same thing so let's just store one copy". Stupid, but true. Amazon's way around this was obviously to make arrangements with publishers (or to have some creative lawyers leveraging a particular position) allowing the seller to keep one copy and give customers access to that one.
Upshot: buy it from Amazon, they use one copy and tout "free storage"; upload it to Amazon's storage, they have to store that copy independent of any other duplicates.