southernpaws
Apr 23, 11:35 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Unfortunately, you don't see everything from your so called consumer perspective. Millions of people own iPhones, and it's not like they had no choice. Apple does a fine job of listening to the majority of consumers. Just not you
more...
benhollberg
May 1, 10:32 PM
CNN says the Pakistan government had a part in the killing of Bin Laden.
more...
.jpg "Sky Wallpapers - Nature")
IJ Reilly
Jul 10, 12:33 PM
Not for what I'm doing. Pages strikes me as something for newsletters, not writing well-researched articles and novels.
Maybe that's the way it strikes you, but this isn't the way it strikes those of us who've been using Pages since it came out.
But all of my work is poorly-researched, so maybe that's why I like it.
:rolleyes:
Maybe that's the way it strikes you, but this isn't the way it strikes those of us who've been using Pages since it came out.
But all of my work is poorly-researched, so maybe that's why I like it.
:rolleyes:
more...
DJRVDIO
Apr 29, 04:50 PM
I saw and got my hands on a possible prototype IMac that had a touchable screen and a smug free screen. It also had the earlier uncoded virtual keyboard in the Lion OS. though it was only a prototype but a very realistic one for production. I believe it to be the IMac I and my father both got our hands on earlier this year.:apple:
The rumor that was release about lion and possible indications of buttons on applications giving my claim more truth.:D two points!:apple:
The rumor that was release about lion and possible indications of buttons on applications giving my claim more truth.:D two points!:apple:
more...
xUKHCx
Apr 14, 06:08 AM
at a chinese plant manufacturing electronic cigs?:confused:
I think it's just a mistranslation of the speaker's first language.
So he attends at university since fall (so since september) and studies Commerce. Yet he thinks this rumor is part of a leaked advertisement and cannot comprehend why it is advertised like that.
Well, that's what I get from it anyways...
It was spam, the spammer used some text to give the post the illusion of making a valid post (this time the text was pretty random) however the post also contained a signature with spam links.
You can report posts like this via the report post button http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/report.gif which is at the left of every post.
I think it's just a mistranslation of the speaker's first language.
So he attends at university since fall (so since september) and studies Commerce. Yet he thinks this rumor is part of a leaked advertisement and cannot comprehend why it is advertised like that.
Well, that's what I get from it anyways...
It was spam, the spammer used some text to give the post the illusion of making a valid post (this time the text was pretty random) however the post also contained a signature with spam links.
You can report posts like this via the report post button http://images.macrumors.com/vb/images/buttons/report.gif which is at the left of every post.
more...
b_scott
Apr 15, 12:52 PM
It came out yesterday. Not a couple of hours ago. I stream Sirius radio on the weekdays at work and I notice a difference in the battery usage.
yeah, but your post was still less than 24 hours since release, and unless you got it the second it came out, probably much less than that for you. Just saying give it time.
yeah, but your post was still less than 24 hours since release, and unless you got it the second it came out, probably much less than that for you. Just saying give it time.
more...
SolRayz
Apr 22, 12:23 PM
Woohoo!!! There will be nothing better than the iPhone 4G LTE on a data capped plan. Boy I can't wait!!!
more...
AaronEdwards
Apr 28, 06:10 PM
Imagine the iPhone 4 sitting in the 3GS position a year from now. It will be amazing you can get a phone like that for the price it will be available for...
The current 3GS with the cheapest plan you can get from AT&T would cost you 90% of what the same plan and a 4 would cost you.
Not sure what's amazing about that, and I'm pretty sure that when the 5 is out, the 4 will end up costing roughly the same.
Hardly amazing.
Unless you're math challenged.
Which anyone would be anyone who would consider such a deal for 3GS now or for a 4 when 5 is out.
Considering the number of 3GS still being sold, there's a lot of math challenged iOS users out there.
The current 3GS with the cheapest plan you can get from AT&T would cost you 90% of what the same plan and a 4 would cost you.
Not sure what's amazing about that, and I'm pretty sure that when the 5 is out, the 4 will end up costing roughly the same.
Hardly amazing.
Unless you're math challenged.
Which anyone would be anyone who would consider such a deal for 3GS now or for a 4 when 5 is out.
Considering the number of 3GS still being sold, there's a lot of math challenged iOS users out there.
more...
Joe The Dragon
Apr 11, 09:05 PM
I wonder how Thunderbolt will interact with the graphics card.
I expect that the video signals (DisplayPort) go from the graphics card back through the PCI bus to the TB chip and then out through the TB ports to the monitor. So when you upgrade the graphics card, it works (thinking of computers with replaceable PCI cards here, e.g. a Mac Pro with TB). But this will likely require the support of the graphics card manufacturers, so we have cards that are "compatible" with TB...?
Presumably one can still use the graphics cards' own video-out ports too.
Guess we'll see.
well TB seems to be add on to DP port. So VIDEO may work with a added in card and a voodoo 1 like loop back cable. But you don't TB tied to on board video and what about AMD / sever / upper mid - high end intel boards / other boards that don't have chipset / cpu based video. Some sever boards have on board pci based video.
I expect that the video signals (DisplayPort) go from the graphics card back through the PCI bus to the TB chip and then out through the TB ports to the monitor. So when you upgrade the graphics card, it works (thinking of computers with replaceable PCI cards here, e.g. a Mac Pro with TB). But this will likely require the support of the graphics card manufacturers, so we have cards that are "compatible" with TB...?
Presumably one can still use the graphics cards' own video-out ports too.
Guess we'll see.
well TB seems to be add on to DP port. So VIDEO may work with a added in card and a voodoo 1 like loop back cable. But you don't TB tied to on board video and what about AMD / sever / upper mid - high end intel boards / other boards that don't have chipset / cpu based video. Some sever boards have on board pci based video.
more...
Mord
Apr 27, 05:09 AM
Also, just wanted to weigh in on the "big hands" thing - I'm a woman, born a woman, never any question about it, but my hands are as big as most men's, especially considering I'm only 5'4". So are you going to beat me up just in case I'm a man?
That's a point I was also meaning to make, If you start scrutinising every woman to try to tell their history you're going to make a lot of false-positives. I have a couple of very tall and broad female friends that have suffered from this despite not being trans.
People really need to stop making other people's gender their own business, stop making assumptions and give people the basic courtesy of respecting their gender.
That's a point I was also meaning to make, If you start scrutinising every woman to try to tell their history you're going to make a lot of false-positives. I have a couple of very tall and broad female friends that have suffered from this despite not being trans.
People really need to stop making other people's gender their own business, stop making assumptions and give people the basic courtesy of respecting their gender.
more...
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
more...
Demoman
Jul 10, 09:37 PM
I entirely agree with you on these points. Apple is barely marketing iWork at all, let alone in a way which would help people understand its value. At MW last January I made a point of mentioning the Mac owner confusion over what Pages does to one of the reps on the floor who was demonstrating the new version. He also happened to be on the Pages programming team. (Which game me an opportunity to show him a bug I'd found. :))
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
That is really a sound idea. Personally, I do not mind paying the $79 for iWork, in fact it is a zero issue for me (I own Final Cut Studio, Macromedia Studio, Adobe Creative Suite, Shake, Lightwave, etc). I think establishing a user base is what Apple should be focusing on.
Migration into the business world can be a very tenuous undertaking, just ask Taligent (or Steve with Next). Having the best product does not guarantee success. In fact, the history of computers, especially PC's, is littered by the failures of superior technology. In the 80's there was a slogan among corporate computer buyers; "No one ever got fired for buying IBM". The simple truth is, corporations are usually very conservative when it comes to buying technology. Sure, there are exceptions. But, the majority has the mindset, "never put yourself in a position where you can be criticized.
I am an IT Manager and have brought in Macs on a trial basis. I convinced the technology budget oversight committee that we are better off with Mini�s, rather than Citrix thin clients. We still have to license each thin client for Office. The economics are:
Mini � Standard w/1GB RAM, iWork and Keyboard = $856.00 � before business discount
Thin - HP t5520, 64MB, Windows CE = $359 � Office Standard $335 � keyboard/mouse $75 = $769.00
With the Mini you actually have a fine computer. The thin client cannot do anything without momma. This is a very easy choice unless you have to add another ~ $400 for Mac:Office. That is why the spreadsheet is so important. I already know Pages works for the majority of my users. Any changes that make it more appealing is just that much better.
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
That is really a sound idea. Personally, I do not mind paying the $79 for iWork, in fact it is a zero issue for me (I own Final Cut Studio, Macromedia Studio, Adobe Creative Suite, Shake, Lightwave, etc). I think establishing a user base is what Apple should be focusing on.
Migration into the business world can be a very tenuous undertaking, just ask Taligent (or Steve with Next). Having the best product does not guarantee success. In fact, the history of computers, especially PC's, is littered by the failures of superior technology. In the 80's there was a slogan among corporate computer buyers; "No one ever got fired for buying IBM". The simple truth is, corporations are usually very conservative when it comes to buying technology. Sure, there are exceptions. But, the majority has the mindset, "never put yourself in a position where you can be criticized.
I am an IT Manager and have brought in Macs on a trial basis. I convinced the technology budget oversight committee that we are better off with Mini�s, rather than Citrix thin clients. We still have to license each thin client for Office. The economics are:
Mini � Standard w/1GB RAM, iWork and Keyboard = $856.00 � before business discount
Thin - HP t5520, 64MB, Windows CE = $359 � Office Standard $335 � keyboard/mouse $75 = $769.00
With the Mini you actually have a fine computer. The thin client cannot do anything without momma. This is a very easy choice unless you have to add another ~ $400 for Mac:Office. That is why the spreadsheet is so important. I already know Pages works for the majority of my users. Any changes that make it more appealing is just that much better.
more...
Yujenisis
Apr 22, 07:50 AM
Does anyone remember the 'look and feel' case Apple had against the eMachines eOne (http://news.cnet.com/Apple-sues-eMachines-for-iMac-look-alike/2100-1040_3-230054.html)?
http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/3057/eoneversusimac.jpg
Having not read the briefs on either side, I can't really offer a knee jerk reaction in either direction. I do find myself both frustrated with the state of intellectual-copyright law and also with the general stagnation in the industry that leads so many to borrow from other companies (mainly Apple). With the exception of Apple we have seen very little disruptive innovation in the last ten years.
My immediate thoughts is that this goes beyond what can be captured in side-by-side photographs. The iPhone is a wildly desirable device and as such is attractive equally to competitors. The issue becomes that rather than differentiate, overwhelmingly, we are seeing companies synthesize and replicate aspects of the iPhone to gain traction. There are deep 'look and feel' issues at play here and over time there is an extent to which it has become a 'cat and mouse' game.
In the end, just like every other one of these cases, it will end in a settlement and both sides will negotiate the most favorable outcome. That whole Creative-Apple row in 2006 ended with Creative becoming one of the first partners in Apple's Made for iPod initiative.
http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/3057/eoneversusimac.jpg
Having not read the briefs on either side, I can't really offer a knee jerk reaction in either direction. I do find myself both frustrated with the state of intellectual-copyright law and also with the general stagnation in the industry that leads so many to borrow from other companies (mainly Apple). With the exception of Apple we have seen very little disruptive innovation in the last ten years.
My immediate thoughts is that this goes beyond what can be captured in side-by-side photographs. The iPhone is a wildly desirable device and as such is attractive equally to competitors. The issue becomes that rather than differentiate, overwhelmingly, we are seeing companies synthesize and replicate aspects of the iPhone to gain traction. There are deep 'look and feel' issues at play here and over time there is an extent to which it has become a 'cat and mouse' game.
In the end, just like every other one of these cases, it will end in a settlement and both sides will negotiate the most favorable outcome. That whole Creative-Apple row in 2006 ended with Creative becoming one of the first partners in Apple's Made for iPod initiative.
more...
oldwatery
Mar 31, 08:03 PM
I find most of the comments puerile or insane--over reacting with disdain or glee--while the major concern should be the function. I still find iCal a little limited and annoyingly so in terms of notes attached to daily functions.
Who gives a crap how it is decorated! Make the thing work better and it will work better, and that's what matters to real people who need real organization within their lives.
Obviously loads of people do give a crap how it looks...so what are we chopped liver?
Real people indeed...:p
Who gives a crap how it is decorated! Make the thing work better and it will work better, and that's what matters to real people who need real organization within their lives.
Obviously loads of people do give a crap how it looks...so what are we chopped liver?
Real people indeed...:p
more...
bedifferent
Apr 11, 02:38 PM
Unlikely. USB still retains advantages in ubiquity, cost and far more devices supported per connection (128 vs 16). I would see WiFi and Bluetooth as bigger USB competitors.
Forgive my ignorance, but wasn't "Light Peak" supposed to be implemented via fiber optics for internal implementation? I always gathered from the last three years of research that "Light Peak" would become a universal system controller, replacing the need for multiple controllers such as FireWire, USB, etc as it would control components from internal devices such as HDD's to external devices such as iDevices, displays and HDD's. This would allow for less parts, faster speeds (although current HDD's may not benefit due to speed limitations, unlike SSD's) and smaller/lighter forms for portables.
Forgive my ignorance, but wasn't "Light Peak" supposed to be implemented via fiber optics for internal implementation? I always gathered from the last three years of research that "Light Peak" would become a universal system controller, replacing the need for multiple controllers such as FireWire, USB, etc as it would control components from internal devices such as HDD's to external devices such as iDevices, displays and HDD's. This would allow for less parts, faster speeds (although current HDD's may not benefit due to speed limitations, unlike SSD's) and smaller/lighter forms for portables.
more...
Bubba Satori
Mar 31, 12:58 PM
Um, whats up with the brown turd toolbar? :eek:
Well, it's a thin and sleek iTurd. Magic.
Well, it's a thin and sleek iTurd. Magic.
more...
0815
Apr 14, 07:18 AM
Why on earth would this happen? Why would they edit it to include the ix.Mac.MarketingName? I don't understand. Is there any logical explanation? I don't think it is a typo because I don't think Apple is stupid enough to edit it just in order to put a typo in. Weird.
Its humans at work - probably a human clicked a wrong button that added this thing with some placeholder name ... most likely means nothing or if anything than updated appleTV to run apps.
Universal MacOS/iOS apps just don't make sense (controlling the apps is just too different) and a apple branded TV makes no sense (appleTV does the trick for this and that way you don't have to buy an expensive TV to get the latest hardware - you just add it to the TV of your choice)
Its humans at work - probably a human clicked a wrong button that added this thing with some placeholder name ... most likely means nothing or if anything than updated appleTV to run apps.
Universal MacOS/iOS apps just don't make sense (controlling the apps is just too different) and a apple branded TV makes no sense (appleTV does the trick for this and that way you don't have to buy an expensive TV to get the latest hardware - you just add it to the TV of your choice)
more...
Jimmni
Aug 15, 04:50 PM
Call me crazy, but I'd not be surprised if Leopard was a free update for Tiger owners - if not all Mac owners. A great way to steal a good bit of Vista's thunder and address those absurd "Mac OS costs $5000 if you've bought every version and Windows only costs $100" complaints.
more...
awmazz
Mar 3, 06:38 PM
I don't think they're ruling out mental illness.
Doc750
Sep 16, 09:17 PM
I also think the trackpad is better than the mouse.
I love my trackpad .. I can't even remember the last time I used the magic mouse. $70 wasted now
I love my trackpad .. I can't even remember the last time I used the magic mouse. $70 wasted now
kirk26
Apr 14, 02:47 PM
as is usually the case after a reboot.
forget it.
It's not worth getting into. Not everyone has the issues with their phones. I reboot mine almost everyday and with this update I notice a speed difference. I don't have an issue with opening youtube vids in safari and I have no lag time with opening 3rd party apps. Get over it.
forget it.
It's not worth getting into. Not everyone has the issues with their phones. I reboot mine almost everyday and with this update I notice a speed difference. I don't have an issue with opening youtube vids in safari and I have no lag time with opening 3rd party apps. Get over it.
Xian Zhu Xuande
Mar 31, 12:31 PM
My first reaction to this was definitely 'ugh', but iCal could use a better interface. I'll hold off on my judgement until I actually use it a while. If it works more efficiently I'll be happy.
Luis
Jan 25, 06:40 PM
It's not only Apple, it's the whole market AFAIK.
Doc750
Jan 26, 10:59 AM
http://www.mediabistro.com/fishbowldc/files/original/flying-cat-fight.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment