kiljoy616
Mar 26, 01:43 AM
That just blows my mind!:)
That is one impressive tablet so much power and so thing. That would mean that the camera makes even less sense now considering the gpu and cpu capacity.
That is one impressive tablet so much power and so thing. That would mean that the camera makes even less sense now considering the gpu and cpu capacity.
chrono1081
Apr 12, 10:02 PM
No, but having features like face detection does suggest that it's a 'consumer' orientated product.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Not necessarily. They added this to Aperture and at first I was skeptical but its actually very useful and lets me enter metadata easily and search easily. Its not perfect obviously but it takes a lot of extra work out.
Personally, I don't mind. As long as all the old multitrack features are still available (and the price significantly drops, to say, $50-$300,) then I intend to buy it.
Not necessarily. They added this to Aperture and at first I was skeptical but its actually very useful and lets me enter metadata easily and search easily. Its not perfect obviously but it takes a lot of extra work out.
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 01:12 PM
I was simply suggesting that Apple used the term "App" as a familiar leaning to the way they call software "Applications" in Mac OS. Also, Apple have being refering to software that runs on their operating systems as "Applications" since 1980: -
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
AvSRoCkCO1067
Jul 19, 10:51 PM
Source? :rolleyes:
MacOSRumors.
Dude. They're Completely Reliable. Obviously. Psssh. ;)
MacOSRumors.
Dude. They're Completely Reliable. Obviously. Psssh. ;)
Chef Medeski
Jul 14, 10:46 AM
Faster processors, I'll take those of course. Blu-Ray? Hell no, I don't want that turd. Pretty much every format Sony has ever come up with is dead, just look at the UMD now, its a joke.
I'll pass on that MPAA sponsored DRM ladden expensive dog turd.
UMD wasn't supposed to be a new standard in anything. With the MD, they tried to create new audio players and even a new drive for hte computer, and it was a good format( unlike most sony formats) but since sony was the only one using it.... well.... it went the way of the dinosoars..
but UMD was never like MD in that they tried pushing it on many fronts, just for PSP. And I think its fairly sucessful for only pertainging to PSP owners.
I'll pass on that MPAA sponsored DRM ladden expensive dog turd.
UMD wasn't supposed to be a new standard in anything. With the MD, they tried to create new audio players and even a new drive for hte computer, and it was a good format( unlike most sony formats) but since sony was the only one using it.... well.... it went the way of the dinosoars..
but UMD was never like MD in that they tried pushing it on many fronts, just for PSP. And I think its fairly sucessful for only pertainging to PSP owners.
AlphaDogg
Feb 17, 11:52 PM
here's my current setup. I finally got a Intel Mac and it will become to main machine soon. In the Pic is everything in the sig but the IIc and Performa.
Nice setup! It has a little bit of everything in it!
Nice setup! It has a little bit of everything in it!
1984
Aug 29, 10:35 AM
Since they are pin compatible why not use a Core Duo in the entry-level model to get the price down to $499 and use Core 2 Duo in the remaining models? Let's keep in mind this is being reported by ThinkSecret which is about as reliable as MacOSRumors or O'Grady's PowerPage these days. When Appleinsider reports on it I'll start to worry.
PaperQueen
Sep 14, 01:46 PM
Incipio is now shipping DermaSHOT cases
http://www.gadgetmac.com/news/2010/9/9/incipio-dermashot-case-for-ipod-touch-4g-now-available.html
Got mine today. Definitely the low profile look I wanted; feels and looks like black suede. Very attactive.
All openings clear the space they need to—camera lens, speaker, earphone jack, etc. The power and volume switches are covered by the usual raised “buttons.” The power button takes a little extra oomph to make work since the case fits a little less snug than the Incase I’m accustomed to from my previous iPod Touch. Not loose enough to be a problem...actually, “loose” overstates it a bit...just not as tight a fit as what I’m used to.
Will work for the time being, until something irresistible comes out.
Here’s what I ordered (http://53zt.sl.pt) (Incipio Dermashot for iPod Touch 4G)
Definitely think the included stand is a stroke of genius in its simple design (would have loved to have this on a couple of overseas flights the past two years, pre-iPad). Am still pondering the “do I or don’t I” question on a screen protector. Now that it’s glass, simple logic tells me it shouldn’t be necessary unless someone wants to begin scraping diamonds down the face....right?
http://www.gadgetmac.com/news/2010/9/9/incipio-dermashot-case-for-ipod-touch-4g-now-available.html
Got mine today. Definitely the low profile look I wanted; feels and looks like black suede. Very attactive.
All openings clear the space they need to—camera lens, speaker, earphone jack, etc. The power and volume switches are covered by the usual raised “buttons.” The power button takes a little extra oomph to make work since the case fits a little less snug than the Incase I’m accustomed to from my previous iPod Touch. Not loose enough to be a problem...actually, “loose” overstates it a bit...just not as tight a fit as what I’m used to.
Will work for the time being, until something irresistible comes out.
Here’s what I ordered (http://53zt.sl.pt) (Incipio Dermashot for iPod Touch 4G)
Definitely think the included stand is a stroke of genius in its simple design (would have loved to have this on a couple of overseas flights the past two years, pre-iPad). Am still pondering the “do I or don’t I” question on a screen protector. Now that it’s glass, simple logic tells me it shouldn’t be necessary unless someone wants to begin scraping diamonds down the face....right?
sorepheet
Apr 11, 07:31 AM
Currently own a 2007 Toyota Yaris manual transmission and LOVE it! Average 33 MPG, best MPG to date: 46!!!
CIA
Apr 12, 08:56 PM
50 years ago there were no computers. If you want to go back to the moviola, nobody is stopping you. You seem to think that sticking with outdated metaphors is inherently somehow better.
You may have never used iMovie but it is foolish to assume that none of us have. That idea that you can't edit in iMovie is nonsense, and absurd on the face of it.
The basic process of "This is my source, this is my output" has been around as long as film editing. The overall look of video editing, be it tape to tape, or the current (FC7) editing layout is more or less the same. In points, out points, etc.
Anyway, you know what. Fine. You can have your new iMovie. All yours. I sure as hell can't use it. The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface. I want under the hood tweaks to make it faster. Cocoa?
You may have never used iMovie but it is foolish to assume that none of us have. That idea that you can't edit in iMovie is nonsense, and absurd on the face of it.
The basic process of "This is my source, this is my output" has been around as long as film editing. The overall look of video editing, be it tape to tape, or the current (FC7) editing layout is more or less the same. In points, out points, etc.
Anyway, you know what. Fine. You can have your new iMovie. All yours. I sure as hell can't use it. The trailers in '11 were cute, but beyond that, it's not nearly good enough for polished output. If you want am, there's your option.
All I'm asking is they leave final cut PRO to the pros who know how to use it and like the interface. I want under the hood tweaks to make it faster. Cocoa?
Tonsko
Jan 6, 10:14 AM
If properly maintained, mileage holds no bounds! BMW's will go to 250k easy.
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
The engines will, no problem. It's all the expensive bits around them that can't!
jxyama
Mar 21, 06:14 PM
sorry to say, bud, but it won't matter much even if 100,000 signs an online petition...
apple is one of the healthier computer hardware companies out there and probably needs no "saving"...
and people aren't signing it for a reason... perhaps they don't agree with the petition to begin with?
apple is one of the healthier computer hardware companies out there and probably needs no "saving"...
and people aren't signing it for a reason... perhaps they don't agree with the petition to begin with?
roadbloc
Apr 3, 03:03 AM
Miles better than them 'If you don't own an iPhone...' ones.
Lestdog
Apr 26, 01:59 PM
...Apple is turning into a company of douche bags.
MagnusVonMagnum
Sep 14, 04:16 PM
Consumer Reports says "we still think the same thing" for the third time and that's first page news? Sounds more like they're fishing for free publicity.
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
Anyway, when a reviewing organization "doesn't recommend" what I consider the best phone I've ever owned, it sounds more like I shouldn't bother paying attention to that reviewing organization. Their taste just isn't relevant to mine.
My personal opinion is that you and anyone else like you on here that thinks it's NOT a good idea for Consumer Reports to look out for the best interests of the CONSUMER instead of Apple's bottom line doesn't deserve the time of day, in my humble opinion. You seem to believe that Consumer Reports should simply be an automatic blessing to Apple's profits as if they were acting solely on advertising dollars (like a certain magazine called "Stereo Review" used to do all the time) and shouldn't inform their readers of potential problems. All I can say is THANK GOD that YOU don't work for them!!!! :p
Consumer reports gave a fair and HONEST report on the iPhone giving its highest score based on its merits but gave an honest reason WHY they could not recommend it and let the consumer decide for themselves if they want to take the risk. In short, they are doing their job properly.
So I'll reiterate AGAIN that I do not comprehend how someone like yourself could find fault with that line of reasoning other than to admit that you are a Steve Jobs drone. :rolleyes:
JFreak
Jul 14, 03:41 AM
Wireless "N"? psh, I'm still using "B".
It would be nice - in theory - to have a hyper-fast wireless connection; however, what does it matter if my outside line stays at 2M/512k speed? The B-spec is perfectly fine for quite some time.
It would be nice - in theory - to have a hyper-fast wireless connection; however, what does it matter if my outside line stays at 2M/512k speed? The B-spec is perfectly fine for quite some time.
BenRoethig
Nov 29, 09:50 PM
I question the validity of a 17" stand-alone widescreen. Doesn't make sense, IMO. A 20" is already fairly compact and provides little more area and takes up no more room than a 17" 4:3 display.
As for pricing, I agree on some of what you posted -- the prices definitely need to go DOWN. What I don't agree with are the prices you posted -- even if Apple keeps a 20% premium over brands like Samsung, the prices should look more like:
17" - $269
20" - $349
24" - $629
30" - $1,699
...Like I said, those would be premium prices and are a good 10 to 20% higher than the going rate for good monitors with current panels (Samsung/Dell). Also with the next monitor revision, you can expect Apple to dump the 23" in favor of a 24" panel.
Or since Apple likes prices sort of clean make it
17" $299
20" $499
24" $899
30" $1699
Apple would still be completely ripping everyone off, it would just be close enough to reality where people might be inclined to bite.
As for pricing, I agree on some of what you posted -- the prices definitely need to go DOWN. What I don't agree with are the prices you posted -- even if Apple keeps a 20% premium over brands like Samsung, the prices should look more like:
17" - $269
20" - $349
24" - $629
30" - $1,699
...Like I said, those would be premium prices and are a good 10 to 20% higher than the going rate for good monitors with current panels (Samsung/Dell). Also with the next monitor revision, you can expect Apple to dump the 23" in favor of a 24" panel.
Or since Apple likes prices sort of clean make it
17" $299
20" $499
24" $899
30" $1699
Apple would still be completely ripping everyone off, it would just be close enough to reality where people might be inclined to bite.
kntgsp
Sep 14, 10:46 AM
The way CR seems to approach it (and I might have to reread their article that they keep changing and updating and reaffirming and I lost interest a while ago) is as if they approached a computer review like this:
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
"The aluminum Macbook can survive a 3 foot fall and still function. The aluminum Macbook will not melt on the stove."
"The plastic Toshiba can survive a 2.8 foot fall and still function. The plastic Toshiba will melt on the stove."
They then give excess weight to the latter statements about each laptop despite it not really being a normal use scenario and declare the Toshiba not recommendable. So what's the point? Is "not melting on a stove" an advantage? Sure. Is there a reason you should have a computer on a stove? No.
It seems like it's more fair to stress the importance of the initial normal use results than the secondary observations that have nothing to do with everyday usage and are not representative of what people will be doing with the device.
Of course that kind of reasoning is often met with "you can't tell a user how they should use a device". I agree, you can't. However when you label something not recommendable based essentially entirely on the extra -3dB attenuation (compared to my Galaxy S) and the fact that if you place the device on a flat surface and bridge the antenna with your finger you get the same extra -3dB attenuation, I fail to see the credible argument.
/yes I realize the pinky finger attenuation while laying a phone on a table is not destructive like cooking a laptop is. They are both about as relevant to everyday usage in my opinion.
Plymouthbreezer
Jan 12, 12:07 PM
300C img...
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
Sweet ride + great "color." A 300C will be my next car, probably after I graduate college in a year-ish, unless I find one for a great price before / my current car poops out.
My 2001 LHS has over 155,000 miles, and it will be nice to upgrade to a Hemi with lower miles.
Still fantastic. :D And gorgeous!
Sweet ride + great "color." A 300C will be my next car, probably after I graduate college in a year-ish, unless I find one for a great price before / my current car poops out.
My 2001 LHS has over 155,000 miles, and it will be nice to upgrade to a Hemi with lower miles.
Lollypop
Aug 7, 01:46 AM
Maybe Xcode 3 or something will be heavily promoted.
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
I use to know my development talk, but not having done any coding in a few years my reaction to what you just said was: hu? :D
Obviously we will have the resolution independance in OS X 10.5. Probably some new security and new workgroup/networking enhancements. We probably can all agree one would be networked spotlight, if you are running 10.5 servers, the clients will ask the server to search its spotlight data for the same data the client is searching for, and give a combined response.....its the one thing of OS X Tiger I hated, the inability to search the network with the same ease.
I would love easier active directory integration, in windows is very easy, but doing it on a mac is a bit to much! Would like network spotlight without needing 10.5 server, in the home environment I can definately see the use for network search, but definately no 10.5 server!
We may also see a system wide Software Update now, which would really be nice. Letting 3rd party developers update their software with the same system.
Totally agreed, and with that rumored birrent support as well!
I'd also expect major updates to iChat.... probably MSN and Yahoo support, as well as VoIP.
iChat needs a upgrade, the only reason I ever use it is because Aduim doesnt do video!
edit: fixed spelling
I know I personally would love better SOAP integration with XCode. We use .NET at work all the time to write web services, and we end up using .NET clients running under parallels on our macs, because keeping the SOAP proxy stub code up-to-date is automatic with .NET....you have to go thru hell with Xcode. I think Apple will fill that gap with the new xcode (there were command line tools in the latest version).
I use to know my development talk, but not having done any coding in a few years my reaction to what you just said was: hu? :D
Obviously we will have the resolution independance in OS X 10.5. Probably some new security and new workgroup/networking enhancements. We probably can all agree one would be networked spotlight, if you are running 10.5 servers, the clients will ask the server to search its spotlight data for the same data the client is searching for, and give a combined response.....its the one thing of OS X Tiger I hated, the inability to search the network with the same ease.
I would love easier active directory integration, in windows is very easy, but doing it on a mac is a bit to much! Would like network spotlight without needing 10.5 server, in the home environment I can definately see the use for network search, but definately no 10.5 server!
We may also see a system wide Software Update now, which would really be nice. Letting 3rd party developers update their software with the same system.
Totally agreed, and with that rumored birrent support as well!
I'd also expect major updates to iChat.... probably MSN and Yahoo support, as well as VoIP.
iChat needs a upgrade, the only reason I ever use it is because Aduim doesnt do video!
edit: fixed spelling
GFLPraxis
Aug 25, 01:55 AM
In addition, Core 2 Duo vs Core Duo performance increase really isn't all that dramatic:
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808
Certainly not worth buying one to upgrade your current Yonah machine, assuming that really would be possible without some sort of EFI update.
While Merom isn't much faster than Yonah, Conroe in an iMac would be superb with the faster clock and bus speeds.
Actually, it's quite dramatic. From those benchmarks, Intel's claims are correct; at the SAME CLOCK SPEED, Merom is 20% faster than Yonah, however, Merom comes at a higher clock speed at the same price as Yonah, making the difference even more dramatic. A 2.33 Merom is the price of a 2.16 Yonah.
And it's 64-bit.
http://anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=2808
Certainly not worth buying one to upgrade your current Yonah machine, assuming that really would be possible without some sort of EFI update.
While Merom isn't much faster than Yonah, Conroe in an iMac would be superb with the faster clock and bus speeds.
Actually, it's quite dramatic. From those benchmarks, Intel's claims are correct; at the SAME CLOCK SPEED, Merom is 20% faster than Yonah, however, Merom comes at a higher clock speed at the same price as Yonah, making the difference even more dramatic. A 2.33 Merom is the price of a 2.16 Yonah.
And it's 64-bit.
BC2009
Mar 25, 04:11 PM
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
iPad 1 does support HDMI out, just not the video mirroring. This means that an app must support the standard "video out" mechanism to be used with the HDMI adapter with iPad 1.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
iPad 1 does support HDMI out, just not the video mirroring. This means that an app must support the standard "video out" mechanism to be used with the HDMI adapter with iPad 1.
What I would like to see is this same thing using AirPlay :)
Evangelion
Aug 25, 05:49 AM
At least another USB port would be nice. Two was pathetic, three's OK, but
four is more realistic number nowadays!
Um, the Mini does have four USB-ports, and a FireWire-port.
four is more realistic number nowadays!
Um, the Mini does have four USB-ports, and a FireWire-port.
dornoforpyros
Oct 23, 07:55 AM
oh don't worry kids, they WILL be released tomorrow because I just bought on saturday :P
No comments:
Post a Comment