AidenShaw
Aug 22, 09:08 AM
Gonna get a ton of switchers - even if they only ever run Windows XP on it.
One big problem with running XP, though, is that you need the Boot Camp drivers from Apple.
If the MacIntel Pro were able to use any available device (any graphics, any PCIe card which has a Woodie driver, ...), then buying one to run Vista or Windows 2003 would make more sense.
As long as you're tied to proprietary drivers, though, it isn't nearly as attractive. There shouldn't be any Apple software needed to run Linux, Solaris or Windows, outside of a bog-standard BIOS implementation.
Hopefully, however, the Apple pricing will push down the prices on other Xeon workstations. It doesn't make a lot of sense for a comparable Dell to be $600 more than an Apple.
One big problem with running XP, though, is that you need the Boot Camp drivers from Apple.
If the MacIntel Pro were able to use any available device (any graphics, any PCIe card which has a Woodie driver, ...), then buying one to run Vista or Windows 2003 would make more sense.
As long as you're tied to proprietary drivers, though, it isn't nearly as attractive. There shouldn't be any Apple software needed to run Linux, Solaris or Windows, outside of a bog-standard BIOS implementation.
Hopefully, however, the Apple pricing will push down the prices on other Xeon workstations. It doesn't make a lot of sense for a comparable Dell to be $600 more than an Apple.
Northgrove
Mar 26, 11:21 AM
Damn, this was confusing. I can barely decide between the 24 versions you mentioned. Add Windows 7 Starter, a version meant only for Notebooks. Still only 4 versions.
Windows 7 is available in six editions, and three of those (bolded) are available through normal retail channels.
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
Windows 7 is available in six editions, and three of those (bolded) are available through normal retail channels.
- Windows 7 Starter
- Windows 7 Home Basic
- Windows 7 Home Premium
- Windows 7 Professional
- Windows 7 Enterprise
- Windows 7 Ultimate
You also need to decide on the architecture before purchase, unlike OS X.
If you count those (they are packaged in different boxes after all), this brings the number up to 11. Starter doesn't come in a 64-bit edition.
Finally, this of course doesn't include the server editions of the Windows 7 kernel.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 08:51 AM
The point is that I save on my computer what I consider the computer to be safe enough for, which includes, eg, my e-mails. I simply would like to be given the choice to decide whether I want to save certain things on my computer or not. With that database, Apple did not give me the choice because it did not inform me about this database (if it had told me, I might have run a cron job to delete it, excluded it from my TM backups, encrypted my iPhone backups, etc.).
I did delete it last year when this story first came up, and it's been gone ever since. So when I tried to use that mapping site to track my whereabouts, it couldn't run (file not found).
I did delete it last year when this story first came up, and it's been gone ever since. So when I tried to use that mapping site to track my whereabouts, it couldn't run (file not found).
rovex
Apr 12, 06:28 PM
Please explain this. You'd buy an iPhone 5 with HSPA+, but not one with LTE ? Why ? Makes no sense at all.
The coverage and cost obviously.
The coverage and cost obviously.
VanNess
Aug 7, 09:24 PM
Alright, I'll take these one by one...
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
Blaze3555
Apr 10, 02:16 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8G4)
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
Did any One catch the quote about the puck. For a split second I got exited because I thought it was Kevin Smith. I love his podcasts. Execp he talk about only using Avid because Fcp docent have a big enough time line. But Let's all go inside! Lol
chatin
Aug 20, 02:21 PM
Mac Pros will need 64bit Leopard to achieve their full multi-core potential. Expect all Core 2 based Macs to hold value well through the next release cycle of OSX Leopard.
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
Apple is still selling G5's on the website for $3299! Until
Adobe gets out - and optimizes - universal binaries, Quad G5 will sell for more than Quad Xeon Mac Pros!
:rolleyes:
princealfie
Nov 29, 09:16 AM
They aren't. The entire music business revenues are down 40% since 2001. Sales are down hugely. I can tell you from representing these artists that all the money is down too.
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
Are you spending as much on music as you did years ago?
Of course not. Most of the music sucks to be honest nowadays. I prefer the underground stuff from emusic, not big label stuff.
For example, Jay-Z's new album sucks compared to Reasonable Doubt.
The same with Nas nowadays compared to Illmatic.
The same with Mobb Deep.
etc. etc.
Get the picture? Artists who are hungry in the beginning put out a good album. Then they fall off the earth.
It's only the music industry that is losing quality. The only album this year that's from a major label that's any good this year is DJ Primo's production on Christina Aguilera's album and that's it period.
Sad, isn't it?
4God
Jul 14, 03:56 PM
This means that the 2.7 GHz G5 of a year ago or more would still be a high for CPU speeds for the PowerMac/MacPro line. We already have dual dual 2.5 GHz G5 a year ago. An increase to 2.66 GHz means that either 2008 or 2009 we will see the promised 3 GHz PowerMac/MacPro.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
Any bets on which year it will be?
Bill the TaxMan
I think we'll see more cores per cpu before we see 3GHz. IMHO, 4,8 or more cores at 2.66 is far better than 1 or 2 cores at 3GHz.
MrXiro
Apr 8, 12:22 AM
I wouldn't be surprised. The quota explanation was given already, but they might also be holding back stock of the cheaper models in order to drive more sales of the higher end ones. "Oh, you wanted the 16 gig wifi model? Sorry, all sold out. But we do have this lovely 64 gig 3G version. If you really want the iPad 2, this is your big chance... it's only a little bit more..."
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
That happened to me, almost, when I bought the original iPad from Best Buy here in Canada on our launch day last year. The guy almost smirked when he said, sorry, the 16 gig ones were all sold out, but they had plenty of the 64 gig models. Luckily I persisted and he managed to find one more 16 gig, the last one! How lucky was that! :rolleyes:
Hmm... I think they did that to me! I went in just a few hours after the iPad 2 went on sale... they said all they had left was the 64gb Verizon model. :-/
I have an iPad already... I was just asking to see how they were selling.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:07 PM
Well you can see that with the Mac. About 3% worldwide marketshare but Apple makes tons of money with it.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
Beaverman3001
Apr 6, 01:17 PM
Won't purchase any Mac with intel graphics.
skunk
Feb 28, 07:12 PM
2) okay, they can pretend to get marriedNo, you are absolutely wrong., They can get married like any other couple where the laws allow. Marriage is not a special preserve of any religion. You cannot just commandeer it.
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
No, I'm not kidding. To the Catholic Church sex outside of a valid sacramental marriage is fornicationWho cares what Catholic dogma claims? It's an irrelevance.
Last time I checked when the vast majority of people did such behavior it was with the opposite gender not the same.So what is the problem? Are you against variation?
Do you have proof that Plato was a repressed homosexual?No, not proof
"Homosexuality," Plato wrote, "is regarded as shameful by barbarians and by those who live under despotic governments just as philosophy is regarded as shameful by them, because it is apparently not in the interest of such rulers to have great ideas engendered in their subjects, or powerful friendships or passionate love-all of which homosexuality is particularly apt to produce." This attitude of Plato's was characteristic of the ancient world, and I want to begin my discussion of the attitudes of the Church and of Western Christianity toward homosexuality by commenting on comparable attitudes among the ancients.
To a very large extent, Western attitudes toward law, religion, literature and government are dependent upon Roman attitudes. This makes it particularly striking that our attitudes toward homosexuality in particular and sexual tolerance in general are so remarkably different from those of the Romans. It is very difficult to convey to modern audiences the indifference of the Romans to questions of gender and gender orientation. The difficulty is due both to the fact that the evidence has been largely consciously obliterated by historians prior to very recent decades, and to the diffusion of the relevant material.
Romans did not consider sexuality or sexual preference a matter of much interest, nor did they treat either in an analytical way. An historian has to gather together thousands of little bits and pieces to demonstrate the general acceptance of homosexuality among the Romans.
One of the few imperial writers who does appear to make some sort of comment on the subject in a general way wrote, "Zeus came as an eagle to god like Ganymede and as a swan to the fair haired mother of Helen. One person prefers one gender, another the other, I like both." Plutarch wrote at about the same time, "No sensible person can imagine that the sexes differ in matters of love as they do in matters of clothing. The intelligent lover of beauty will be attracted to beauty in whichever gender he finds it." Roman law and social strictures made absolutely no restrictions on the basis of gender. It has sometimes been claimed that there were laws against homosexual relations in Rome, but it is easy to prove that this was not the case. On the other hand, it is a mistake to imagine that anarchic hedonism ruled at Rome. In fact, Romans did have a complex set of moral strictures designed to protect children from abuse or any citizen from force or duress in sexual relations. Romans were, like other people, sensitive to issues of love and caring, but individual sexual (i.e. gender) choice was completely unlimited. Male prostitution (directed toward other males), for instance, was so common that the taxes on it constituted a major source of revenue for the imperial treasury. It was so profitable that even in later periods when a certain intolerance crept in, the emperors could not bring themselves to end the practice and its attendant revenue.
Gay marriages were also legal and frequent in Rome for both males and females. Even emperors often married other males. There was total acceptance on the part of the populace, as far as it can be determined, of this sort of homosexual attitude and behavior. This total acceptance was not limited to the ruling elite; there is also much popular Roman literature containing gay love stories. The real point I want to make is that there is absolutely no conscious effort on anyone's part in the Roman world, the world in which Christianity was born, to claim that homosexuality was abnormal or undesirable. There is in fact no word for "homosexual" in Latin. "Homosexual" sounds like Latin, but was coined by a German psychologist in the late 1 9th century. No one in the early Roman world seemed to feel that the fact that someone preferred his or her own gender was any more significant than the fact that someone preferred blue eyes or short people. Neither gay nor straight people seemed to associate certain characteristics with sexual preference. Gay men were not thought to be less masculine than straight men and lesbian women were not thought of as less feminine than straight women. Gay people were not thought to be any better or worse than straight people-an attitude which differed both from that of the society that preceded it, since many Greeks thought gay people were inherently better than straight people, and from that of the society which followed it, in which gay people were often thought to be inferior to others.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/1979boswell.html
The most celebrated account of homosexual love comes in Plato's Symposium, in which homosexual love is discussed as a more ideal, more perfect kind of relationship than the more prosaic heterosexual variety. This is a highly biased account, because Plato himself was homosexual and wrote very beautiful epigrams to boys expressing his devotion. Platonic homosexuality had very little to do with sex; Plato believed ideally that love and reason should be fused together, while concern over the body and the material world of particulars should be annihilated. Even today, "Platonic love" refers to non-sexual love between two adults.
Behind Plato's contempt for heterosexual desire lay an aesthetic, highly intellectual aversion to the female body. Plato would have agreed with Schopenhauer's opinion that "only a male intellect clouded by the sexual drive could call the stunted, narrow-shouldered, broad-hipped and short-legged sex the fair sex".
http://www.newstatesman.com/199908230009
spazzcat
Mar 22, 01:36 PM
Sorry, completely forgot about that.
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Apples multitasking is way better they anything out there. On these devices battery rules all...
iOS rocks in apps, but it does suck *** in terms of notifications and true multitasking.
Apple should've been the ones to buy Palm.
Apples multitasking is way better they anything out there. On these devices battery rules all...
DesmoPilot
Sep 7, 02:09 AM
Seems like best buy is getting Playable Demos of the game I played it at mine I'm not a big racing sim fan but wow day 1 purchase for me awesome demo.
Prologue?
Prologue?
rovex
Mar 22, 12:54 PM
Well, minus the screen size too. Equal to isn't going to cut it against an Apple product. Just look at how the Zune fared.
Yes the small screen isn't going to cut it but honestly carrying the iPad around is a hastle. People will be tempted with the size for portability.
Yes the small screen isn't going to cut it but honestly carrying the iPad around is a hastle. People will be tempted with the size for portability.
rovex
Apr 11, 02:30 PM
Does Arn write every single article on this forum?
treblah
Sep 18, 11:44 PM
1. It's Merom. Not Memrom, Menron, Memron or even L. Ron.
2. It won't be any cooler and it won't have greater battery life, period. Unless Apple has an amazing new design in store.
3. If you really, really, need a Merom, you should wait until the Santa Rosa platform so you don't complain that you got the inferior Merom. :rolleyes:
That is all.
2. It won't be any cooler and it won't have greater battery life, period. Unless Apple has an amazing new design in store.
3. If you really, really, need a Merom, you should wait until the Santa Rosa platform so you don't complain that you got the inferior Merom. :rolleyes:
That is all.
lsvtecjohn3
Apr 19, 03:07 PM
Well you can see that with the Mac. About 3% worldwide marketshare but Apple makes tons of money with it.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
And eveybody crys tears here when some 5 year old Windows games finally get ported to MacOS. You want that to happen with the iPhone and iOS compared to Android? Fine. But I'm sure 99% of iPhone buyers don't want that scenario.
HA I knew you were going to say that. developer prefer to develop for iOS. iOS user spend more money on Apps than Android user. Plus iPod Touch user can use the same apps as the iPhone. There won't be a Windows for the smartphones theres already too many players in the game.
Gugulino
Apr 6, 04:17 AM
Looking for some controversy are we?!!! :rolleyes:
No, I really think that iMovie is a good example of video-editing software. Did Apple changed FCP's look and feel in the last few years? No! It is outdated, that you have to admit for sure. iMovie has a far more modern UI, which should be adopted by FCP somehow. I didn't mean FCP should lose all its Pro-features. FCP could also adopt the easy way of handling your footage: In iMovie I see what I shot and can quickly add clips to the project without setting in and out points manually. And what about the precision-editor? For one project I abandoned FCP just because it has no precision editor.
I think FCP could learn a lot from iMovie. And if the same man, who created iMovie, is also the chief of the Final Cut Studio Developer Team, it will happen!
No, I really think that iMovie is a good example of video-editing software. Did Apple changed FCP's look and feel in the last few years? No! It is outdated, that you have to admit for sure. iMovie has a far more modern UI, which should be adopted by FCP somehow. I didn't mean FCP should lose all its Pro-features. FCP could also adopt the easy way of handling your footage: In iMovie I see what I shot and can quickly add clips to the project without setting in and out points manually. And what about the precision-editor? For one project I abandoned FCP just because it has no precision editor.
I think FCP could learn a lot from iMovie. And if the same man, who created iMovie, is also the chief of the Final Cut Studio Developer Team, it will happen!
Lord Blackadder
Mar 22, 08:11 PM
Probably, but it was certainly orchestrated to look anything but. Sarkozy was very obliging in shooting his mouth off, as was Cameron. It may have just been luck, but if so it was a remarkable piece of luck to have 4 submarines, a flagship-capable surface ship and all necessary support in the right place at the right time. These things don't travel very fast.
I agree, it is quite possible. However, the US didn't orchestrate the uprising itself, if anyone is responsible it's the heavy-handed Gadaffi and the Egyptians with their successful revolt.
As for the presence of the naval squadron, the other middle Eastern revolts and the Somali piracy task force meant that we already had units in the area or en-route. It may very well be a case of forward planning rather than a stage-managed "coincidence". Still, we certainly can't know which is the truth.
I agree, it is quite possible. However, the US didn't orchestrate the uprising itself, if anyone is responsible it's the heavy-handed Gadaffi and the Egyptians with their successful revolt.
As for the presence of the naval squadron, the other middle Eastern revolts and the Somali piracy task force meant that we already had units in the area or en-route. It may very well be a case of forward planning rather than a stage-managed "coincidence". Still, we certainly can't know which is the truth.
Erasmus
Aug 27, 01:18 AM
Damn PowerPC fans.
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
Apple is INTEL now. We Love Intel Because Stevie Tells Us So.
We hate AMD and IBM. Should Apple ever move to another CPU provider, we will seamlessly transition to hating Intel again. This is the Way of the Mac.
What's so good about G5's anyway? They are slow, too hot, and skull juice.
Why do we love Intel? Because Steve says to, and Core 2 Duo is powerful, cool, not permanently drunk, allows us to run Windows and helps Apple increase its market share.
We love ATi because just like Intel, their products are the best at the moment. We still love nVIDIA because their GPUs are in the Mac Pro.
We love Israel because they make our Core 2 Duos and we love China because they make our Macs. We love California because that's where Our Lord Stevie J is (Don't particularly care about the rest of the US, sorry guys).
We love our Big Cats because they run so fast and look so clean and powerful (Hmmm... Mystery of OS codenames revealed?) and of course because they are not Windows, which are susceptible to breaking...
People who live in Windows shouldn't throw Viruses?
Off track...
Anyway, Rawr to all you PowerPC fanboys (And girls)
Intel 4EVER!
bibbz
Jun 15, 02:54 PM
We ran out of pins within an hour. Ridiculous.
VanNess
Aug 7, 09:24 PM
Alright, I'll take these one by one...
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.