kretzy
Sep 11, 08:04 AM
I told Rob about the event yesterday...
"Great, all we need is another iPod." :rolleyes:
Poor Rob. :D
If it is something impressive I may just have to get it - seeing as I've never had an iPod (shocking, I know).
"Great, all we need is another iPod." :rolleyes:
Poor Rob. :D
If it is something impressive I may just have to get it - seeing as I've never had an iPod (shocking, I know).
Grokgod
Aug 7, 09:16 PM
Yea the 4x512 does suck, there wasnt even an option to put 2x1 gigers.
Weird!
But I figure that I will get a 4 giger kit, slap that in and revel in my 6 gigs.
A personal best.
oh , how sad my life has become when the acquisition of ram beyond the past has replaced my once formidable tales of conquest and achievement.
I make myself sick,:D but why am i smiling?
Cause its 6 gigs man, that should scream!:p
Weird!
But I figure that I will get a 4 giger kit, slap that in and revel in my 6 gigs.
A personal best.
oh , how sad my life has become when the acquisition of ram beyond the past has replaced my once formidable tales of conquest and achievement.
I make myself sick,:D but why am i smiling?
Cause its 6 gigs man, that should scream!:p
ScoopOZ
Nov 27, 12:38 AM
I wrote the original story based on information from Taiwan.
Plutonius
May 4, 04:30 PM
I'm glad we finally started moving :).
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
We might as well keep moving forward through the door at the end of the hallway.
adbe
Apr 5, 02:17 PM
Companies have a right then to make money on it and Apple cannot actively try to cut off the ability of another company to make money off the Iphone legally, its called restraint of trade, a federal law.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
Yes they can. There is no protection under law for making money off the ineptitude of other companies. Apple is entitled, and expected to fix bugs. When those bugs get fixed, an avenue for jail breaking gets closed. Companies that see their revenue stream dry up are just screwed. That's life.
Jail breaking happens because Apple screwed the pooch on security. That's all.
M. Malone
Aug 11, 09:50 AM
Would I be able to drop a Conroe processor in my Core Duo iMac?
BRLawyer
Nov 26, 01:47 PM
Simple...it's NOT gonna happen anytime soon.
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
The Tablet market is a sad failure, as it represents a tech in search of a purpose...nobody needs or wants it.
Hint? Think Origami, one among too many MS failures...just like the Zune in the next months.
Apple will NOT enter the fabled Tablet market again, as the focus of demand is on notebooks, nothing else...yet another borndead rumor.
hyperpasta
Aug 2, 11:42 AM
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
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
GregA
Jul 31, 12:51 AM
Just wondering - what would happen if Apple allowed Airport Extreme/Express etc (AND every Mac which has Wireless) to become a hub that anyone with a .Mac account could log in to and use?
Basically, as a Mac owner with a wireless card, you could elect to share your bandwidth for $5/GB (or something appropriate depending on country). Any .Mac subscriber could use your connection, and it would credit your .Mac account (redeemable on .Mac fees, roaming onto other people's networks, iTMS, or Apple store).
How much coverage would you get through this? Would it be legal?
Basically, as a Mac owner with a wireless card, you could elect to share your bandwidth for $5/GB (or something appropriate depending on country). Any .Mac subscriber could use your connection, and it would credit your .Mac account (redeemable on .Mac fees, roaming onto other people's networks, iTMS, or Apple store).
How much coverage would you get through this? Would it be legal?
flopticalcube
May 4, 11:20 PM
You metric people ought to hook up with the military time people.
Odd you should say that as the US military is an early adopter of things metric, at least by US standards. (there's a pun in there)
Odd you should say that as the US military is an early adopter of things metric, at least by US standards. (there's a pun in there)
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
Erendiox
May 7, 10:26 AM
If this comes true, I just hope this doesn't water down the Mobileme service. I use Mobileme to keep my business life in order. I'd rather it remain $99 and stay quick and reliable than it become a free junk service.
Vegasman
Apr 26, 04:50 PM
And next week there will be a new survey that says the opposite. These reports are getting old. Must be a slow news day.
Unlikely...
Unlikely...
Clive At Five
Nov 22, 12:31 PM
Okay, I've heard here a lot, that people want simple integration/syncronization with iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, & Address Book. These are all, (minus iTunes) 100% Mac-Centric. PC users would only get integration/syncronization with iTunes. What good is that to them? At that point you only have iPod + Phone.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
bwillwall
Apr 24, 08:09 AM
That one hell of an icon lol
CalBoy
May 5, 05:49 PM
Talking about the cost of swtiching, I might just add� Stepping out onto the moon cost a pretty penny too. I guess beating the Soviets to bragging rights in space was more important than implementing common sense on the ground.
What does that have to do with anything? :confused:
Even if this was somehow relevant, yes, it probably was more important to achieve a scientific feat at that point in time. The Apollo missions created generations of people who became interested in science, raised educational standards nationwide, and brought forth thousands of advancements that we still use in our daily lives.
Hang on� You're not distancing yourself from the illiterate masses now? I thought you agreed with them? ;)
Not with their reasoning. My scientific literacy is pretty good, and I don't have an inherent mistrust of science which many Americans do. This makes them resist things that are advocated by the scientific community, whether it's evolution, vaccination, or evidence-based medicine. So when scientists clamor about changing to the metric system, it raises two questions in the minds of people; 1) Why should I trust this person? and 2) Is the change really necessary?
I don't doubt scientists when they advocate for the metric system, in science. Howeve, since most of the advantages of the metric system are really reserved to the sciences, the question of whether or not everything in life should be metric really isn't a scientific one; it's an economic and convenience one. In my daily life I do not need to easily convert between the mass of water and its volume or take temperatures relative to the boiling point of water.
Well, I assume the US population ain't getting any smaller the longer you put it off.
No, but that doesn't mean that we should transition now either. It all depends on the ease of transition. This is why I think long term transitioning is the only real option available. Do things piecemeal in order of greatest economic return, and if there is no economic return on a particular item, forget it. There's no point in switching to something that is going only cost money; at some point there needs to be a positive return for it to make sense.
What does that have to do with anything? :confused:
Even if this was somehow relevant, yes, it probably was more important to achieve a scientific feat at that point in time. The Apollo missions created generations of people who became interested in science, raised educational standards nationwide, and brought forth thousands of advancements that we still use in our daily lives.
Hang on� You're not distancing yourself from the illiterate masses now? I thought you agreed with them? ;)
Not with their reasoning. My scientific literacy is pretty good, and I don't have an inherent mistrust of science which many Americans do. This makes them resist things that are advocated by the scientific community, whether it's evolution, vaccination, or evidence-based medicine. So when scientists clamor about changing to the metric system, it raises two questions in the minds of people; 1) Why should I trust this person? and 2) Is the change really necessary?
I don't doubt scientists when they advocate for the metric system, in science. Howeve, since most of the advantages of the metric system are really reserved to the sciences, the question of whether or not everything in life should be metric really isn't a scientific one; it's an economic and convenience one. In my daily life I do not need to easily convert between the mass of water and its volume or take temperatures relative to the boiling point of water.
Well, I assume the US population ain't getting any smaller the longer you put it off.
No, but that doesn't mean that we should transition now either. It all depends on the ease of transition. This is why I think long term transitioning is the only real option available. Do things piecemeal in order of greatest economic return, and if there is no economic return on a particular item, forget it. There's no point in switching to something that is going only cost money; at some point there needs to be a positive return for it to make sense.
islanders
Jul 23, 11:50 PM
Also, I have been inconsistent in my post. On page 5 or so, I was crying for a roll out, then did a 180 after a little research.
Some call it speculation. It's also more fun if you don't research.
I�m going to cut my losses and leave it up to the pros.
I enjoyed the ride. Thanks for the responses!
Some call it speculation. It's also more fun if you don't research.
I�m going to cut my losses and leave it up to the pros.
I enjoyed the ride. Thanks for the responses!
ikir
Nov 4, 03:17 AM
Imho a stupid way to slow down your system. Enjoy your Mac without a antivirus, just be smart installing software.
appleguy123
May 3, 08:46 PM
Could I just explore the first room and save a turn for later(I'm not necessarily wanting to do this, just asking if it's possible)?
Eidorian
Aug 7, 02:44 PM
The baseline is actually somewhere around $2100, you can lower some of the options when configuring.$1962 for US Education. w/2 GHz and 160 GB hard drive.
MorphingDragon
May 6, 04:21 AM
Apple needs to replace the optical drive with another AMD GPU, and Crossfire them sexy beasts up. Gone will be the days of Macs that can't run every game in existence at max settings.
A beefier CPU and High end GPU would be more beneficial than a second GPU. Even modern game engines still don't properly utilize two graphics cards unless the individual developers do custom optimisation.
A beefier CPU and High end GPU would be more beneficial than a second GPU. Even modern game engines still don't properly utilize two graphics cards unless the individual developers do custom optimisation.
danr_97070
Jul 21, 04:25 PM
You don't know much about this topic do ya :p
This is the thing I was referring to; if I knew more about it, I'd be working for
Intel or Apple... I guess...
http://www.macosrumors.com/20060402B.php
This is the thing I was referring to; if I knew more about it, I'd be working for
Intel or Apple... I guess...
http://www.macosrumors.com/20060402B.php
*LTD*
Apr 24, 10:38 AM
Ps: Happy Easter everyone:)
Same to you. Happy Easter. :)
Same to you. Happy Easter. :)
wclyffe
Dec 5, 07:50 AM
It really appears as if TomTom didn't create any real inventory, and waited to see how popular the device would be. Now they are creating inventory based on orders. Not great, but I just don't think the car kit is worth $130 (w/tax) so I'll wait. The longer they wait to deliver it may be a plus for us because maybe we'll get a chance to see and hear reactions to the Magellan car kit.