Sparced
May 3, 08:07 AM
$200 difference between 21.5" and 27" iMac and the rest of the specs are the same, is it usually that price?
puma1552
Apr 22, 07:58 PM
That phone is disgusting.
I hope they keep the IP4 design, with maybe a little better antenna and faster internals.
I hope they keep the IP4 design, with maybe a little better antenna and faster internals.
kas23
Apr 26, 04:12 PM
THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE ABOUT STREAMING. It is going to be about smart syncing media across Macs & iOS devices. You wont delete all your music on your phone or Mac BUT you wont have to have all of it stored locally to have access to all of it. This is going to be how Apple transitions Macs to Flash storage but still allows one to have gigantic iTunes and iPhoto and iMovie libraries. Same with phones and iPads.
This isn't about streaming? So, if I'm driving down I-95 with no music stored locally on my iPhone, how do you expect my iPhone to play my music? Magic, like what the iPad runs on?
This isn't about streaming? So, if I'm driving down I-95 with no music stored locally on my iPhone, how do you expect my iPhone to play my music? Magic, like what the iPad runs on?
Aetherhole
Mar 16, 08:10 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8B117 Safari/6531.22.7)
In line at Fashion Island. #6 in line. Here we go again!
In line at Fashion Island. #6 in line. Here we go again!
more...
cRuNcHiE
Apr 14, 03:00 AM
Its probably apple TV yep
But, the imac is due a refresh. Imac touch with ios apps as widgets?
But, the imac is due a refresh. Imac touch with ios apps as widgets?
KyPosey
Jan 26, 11:40 AM
http://i766.photobucket.com/albums/xx302/ajithrockscc/shopandbargain/Call-of-Duty-Black-Ops-Xbox-360.jpg
yeah im behind the times.
yeah im behind the times.
more...
josece
Apr 14, 12:51 PM
I don't think Apple TV is what the product is, it's too difficult to use some apps only with the IR remote control.
I'm going for an iOS App store and Mac store integration, some of the apps that have been built for iPad could run perfectly on a Mac, and the other way around, plus, Steve even said that they would bring their best technologies "from the iPad to the Mac and with the new multi-touch gestures we believe our Macs will become more intuitive than ever".
This way, all the apps in your iDevices and Macs would be synced at all times.
Either that or Apple's new HDTV with a completely new input method that could let you use iOS apps on your TV properly, but I really don't think this is very likely.
I'm going for an iOS App store and Mac store integration, some of the apps that have been built for iPad could run perfectly on a Mac, and the other way around, plus, Steve even said that they would bring their best technologies "from the iPad to the Mac and with the new multi-touch gestures we believe our Macs will become more intuitive than ever".
This way, all the apps in your iDevices and Macs would be synced at all times.
Either that or Apple's new HDTV with a completely new input method that could let you use iOS apps on your TV properly, but I really don't think this is very likely.
solvs
Jul 11, 11:56 PM
I'm all for competition, but this is just a bad idea. MS is only going to be competing with other WMA players like they do with their oh so successful Music Store. The business world is one thing, even gaming I could see them being somewhat successful with one of these years as that's what PCs seem to be best at. The xBox is just a little computer anyway. But this is a different kind of entertainment. It's about cool. It's about style. It's about stuff that people want to just work. MS doesn't have any of that. This will be a me too product that few will care about.
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
It's not like Apple's resting on it laurels either. I'm sure they've got something cool planned that'll blow us all away, or at least stave off the "competition" for a little while. I just hope it has better battery life. :p
more...
appleguy123
Apr 17, 06:35 PM
Maybe you could reach out to Nies And ucfgrad93 to see if they would like to play in this game. hopefully that simple game I ran got us some lifelong new players. :D
MacRumors
Jul 21, 10:06 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Along with the recent encouraging 3Q 2006 financial results (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml) from Apple on Wednesday, independent research firms Gartner and IDC have recently reported on 2Q 2006 market share (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/20/marketshare/index.php) (via MacWorld). Both firms report solid gains from 1 year ago, with IDC reporting a jump from 4.4 to 4.8% U.S. Marketshare and Gartner reporting a jump from 4.3 to 4.6%, making the Mac maker the 4th largest maker of computers behind Dell (32%), HP (18.9%), and Gateway (6.2%).
This is the first reported gains in marketshare for Apple since the Intel transition, as last quarter saw minor losses (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060601164133.shtml). From last quarter, it appears as though Apple has gained an entire percentage point in market share (up from 3.5-3.6% 1Q 2006).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Marketshare_Increasing)
Along with the recent encouraging 3Q 2006 financial results (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/07/20060719164004.shtml) from Apple on Wednesday, independent research firms Gartner and IDC have recently reported on 2Q 2006 market share (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/20/marketshare/index.php) (via MacWorld). Both firms report solid gains from 1 year ago, with IDC reporting a jump from 4.4 to 4.8% U.S. Marketshare and Gartner reporting a jump from 4.3 to 4.6%, making the Mac maker the 4th largest maker of computers behind Dell (32%), HP (18.9%), and Gateway (6.2%).
This is the first reported gains in marketshare for Apple since the Intel transition, as last quarter saw minor losses (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060601164133.shtml). From last quarter, it appears as though Apple has gained an entire percentage point in market share (up from 3.5-3.6% 1Q 2006).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Marketshare_Increasing)
more...
Mystikal
Mar 17, 01:05 PM
Anyone have any luck with CSUF or UCI?
I go to CSUF. They only have iPad 1's.
Same as yesterday Was it the older guy with the eye that looked the other way? A-holes.
--Sean
Thats why you guys shouldn't go to mall stores, the cops are dicks.
I go to CSUF. They only have iPad 1's.
Same as yesterday Was it the older guy with the eye that looked the other way? A-holes.
--Sean
Thats why you guys shouldn't go to mall stores, the cops are dicks.
PeterQVenkman
Apr 13, 08:15 PM
Anyone actually planning on buying this? Especially with a refresh right around the corner?
I dunno, September announcement and probably October for real availability seems a long time to wait.
The white one looks hot.
I dunno, September announcement and probably October for real availability seems a long time to wait.
The white one looks hot.
more...
JoeG4
Dec 1, 04:53 PM
I know I'm going to get labeled as a mac zealot and linux apologist for asking this, but isn't it weird how the project spent ALMOST ALL OF ITS TIME looking for ways to crucify OS X/Linux, but they avoided MS like the plague, as if they were afraid to make them look bad?
"I didn't have much time left for working on Microsoft Windows but I've received the most helpful feedback from the MSRC"
Riiiight. :p
"I didn't have much time left for working on Microsoft Windows but I've received the most helpful feedback from the MSRC"
Riiiight. :p
toddybody
Apr 25, 12:40 PM
I am mentally jumping for joy!
My newest computer is a 17" 2006 iMac. I play (some of) the latest PC games, I develop games and I edit trailers/other mid-high endery stuff. My iMac is a beast for getting through this far but it's starting to really show its age.
As soon as the new models are out you can consider a 27" bought. Words can't express how much I'm looking forward to this.
Looking forward to owning my first glossy display too. I imagine it's beautiful for photo editing+gaming.
Glad to see another PC Gamer + Mac User on the forums. One day my friend, we could perhaps game on our Macs...one day:( *soft weeping
My newest computer is a 17" 2006 iMac. I play (some of) the latest PC games, I develop games and I edit trailers/other mid-high endery stuff. My iMac is a beast for getting through this far but it's starting to really show its age.
As soon as the new models are out you can consider a 27" bought. Words can't express how much I'm looking forward to this.
Looking forward to owning my first glossy display too. I imagine it's beautiful for photo editing+gaming.
Glad to see another PC Gamer + Mac User on the forums. One day my friend, we could perhaps game on our Macs...one day:( *soft weeping
more...
*LTD*
Apr 24, 03:40 PM
There is a lot of Apple Dick riding going on. Their is nothing wrong with that. But at some point you have to wake up and look at the rest of the world. World wide in smartphone sells Iphone leads by a large margin. World wide Smartphone OSs, iPhone is generally in third or fourth place (Depends on who made it, Some put RIM in front of iOS). But the majority of them place Android or Symbian as the top selling OS.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
Thanks for the anecdote.
The iPhone sets the bar. Google has to flood the market with a lot of junk to achieve higher share. That's hardly impressive. Google is the MS of mobile. Hardly a compliment. License out your beta OS to anyone that can slam together a box, give it away, and away you go.
The iPhone is still the #1 selling handset. Where are the iPhone killers? There aren't any. Because the competition doesn't know how to make one. Because Apple approaches tech from a totally different place.
The iOS platform still dominates, and given the iPad's success, it'll be that way for the foreseeable future.
Android enjoys highest smartphone market share. Yet the OS is pretty brutal and their ecosystem is a mess. So why do they have greater share? Not because they make a superior product, but because the only alternative to an iPhone was an Android-based device, and Eric T. Mole got to work licensing it out to everyone with no regard for design or User Experience. If you flood the market with what, 70+ (probably a lot more) devices and let everyone and their dog make the devices you'll eventually enjoy force of numbers.
Android is given away free to anyone to manufacture, to make as many POS devices as they wish, to sell for peanuts, in massive volume.
That's all it is. Market flooding at every price point and you get some sort of touchscreen and some sort of app store. And given Google's Microsoftian horizontal business model, that's all it'll ever be.
For instance, THIS is the kind of total junk that Google puts their name to:
http://www.gsmarena.com/zte_racer-reviews-3423.php
And guess what: Dell went ahead and copied it. The DELL XCD28. Same junk. But Android market share just went up!
Here's another amazing Android device:
http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/reviews/2010/11/worst-gadget-ever-ars-reviews-a-99-android-tablet.ars
Anything to be proud of? But hey, they're dirt cheap. And uh . . . "open" or whatever.
If Google actually *cared* about what they put the Android name to, if they actually gave a damn about the USER, would they allow this? Ask yourself that. That's the difference. There are some things Apple *will not* allow to exist - namely: garbage.
Google does not care - I'll repeat that - DOES NOT CARE, about what happens to their OS, on what devices it's used, what the result is when someone like ZTE or Dell gets their hands on it. It's a great recipe for pushing huge amounts of volume. It's also a great recipe for manufacturing cheap, poorly-made phones in China. The upshot of all this is you get massively inflated market share, a good chunk owing to phones that should have never seen the light of day. Yes, you have the choice to buy junk. You have the choice to just buy a cheapie. Nothing inherently wrong with this. It's your call, right? HOWEVER, this also contributes to Android market share. That's the catch. The question is not just: how big is your market share? But also: what constitutes your market share?
What constitutes Apple's market share? There's no chance for any confusion here. The iPhone. Same attention to detail in hardware and OS, same high-quality User Experience device to device. All the things that make it the #1 selling handset. There is no chance of junk. In fact, if you're Apple, you owe it to yourself to get as close to perfection as you can every time, because you only sell ONE phone, and not on every carrier, and your licensing is closed. Every last % of Apple's share is an iPhone. There is no chance for crap or inflated share from the sale of cheap commodity-phones.
Apple's share constitutes the #1-selling handset. Exclusively. Android share constitutes: the good, the bad, and the downright ugly.
How does Android market share look now? I'd wager it looks a bit different than before you looked at what's behind the numbers, that is, the kind of infrastructure that supports those high numbers.
Yes, highest market share for Android. Until you go hunting for the REASON.
mc68k
Nov 30, 12:11 PM
Here is a link to Atlas's machine stats, it's freeking awesome (http://atlasfolding.com/fahstats/summary.html)to look at!!!!!man the failed stats there are pretty big
more...
FloatingBones
Nov 23, 11:35 PM
I'll say this one last time. Flash is not an app! It's a method of delivering content on a web site.
If there were not Flash applications, then Adobe would not have developed and released its Packager for iPhone (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/packagerforiphone/).
Flash is also a way to deliver video. The Skyfire App (http://skyfire.com/product/iphone) is a way for iOS users to view those legacy Flash videos. When sites update their video to be HTML compliant, bridging services like Skyfire will no longer be needed for that conversion.
Finally, as you note, Flash is also a way to deliver web content.
You cannot make iOS "apps" to replace a web page dude.
Why not? That sounds like the exact purpose of Adobe's new packager tool.
As long as there are Flash only web sites, there will be a demand for Flash plugins.
Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins.
As long as websites serve up some or all of their content solely through Flash, they will be shut out from users on those iOS devices. Adobe recognizes this shortcoming in Flash and is rapidly developing a Flash to HTML5 converter (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999):
Here's what Adobe blogged about that (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html) after a demo at their Adobe MAX 2010 conference in October:
How could I create rich experiences that run on desktops (where Flash is the obvious, consistent (cross-browser/-platform) choice) and on iOS devices where Flash isn�t allowed? I�d have to create two versions of a everything�one Flash, and one HTML5*. Good luck getting clients to double their budgets, though, and yet they don�t want richness cut in half.
So, the opportunity: Cut the cost of targeting multiple runtimes & we�ll deliver real wins: more richness for clients, and a competitive advantage for customers. [...]
Adobe lives or dies by its ability to help customers solve real problems. That means putting pragmatism ahead of ideology.
Once a website has gone through the process of serving up HTML5, why bother serving up Flash to anybody? This tool will continue to lessen the need for Flash on the browser for everybody.
This Skyfire app is proof of that.
Not exactly. Skyfire is not optimal for iPhone users, because videos they request have to go through Skyfire's servers for conversion. It's also not a complete solution for websites, because only a fraction of the iOS users will purchase the Skyfire app. Skyfire functions as a bridging app to give websites access to iOS users until they convert their video inventory to HTML5.
I won't bother arguing anymore about the other things as it's a complete waste of my time.
That would be good.
Ironically, Adobe's new conversion tools will accelerate the demise of Flash on the web.
If there were not Flash applications, then Adobe would not have developed and released its Packager for iPhone (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/packagerforiphone/).
Flash is also a way to deliver video. The Skyfire App (http://skyfire.com/product/iphone) is a way for iOS users to view those legacy Flash videos. When sites update their video to be HTML compliant, bridging services like Skyfire will no longer be needed for that conversion.
Finally, as you note, Flash is also a way to deliver web content.
You cannot make iOS "apps" to replace a web page dude.
Why not? That sounds like the exact purpose of Adobe's new packager tool.
As long as there are Flash only web sites, there will be a demand for Flash plugins.
Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins.
As long as websites serve up some or all of their content solely through Flash, they will be shut out from users on those iOS devices. Adobe recognizes this shortcoming in Flash and is rapidly developing a Flash to HTML5 converter (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999):
Here's what Adobe blogged about that (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html) after a demo at their Adobe MAX 2010 conference in October:
How could I create rich experiences that run on desktops (where Flash is the obvious, consistent (cross-browser/-platform) choice) and on iOS devices where Flash isn�t allowed? I�d have to create two versions of a everything�one Flash, and one HTML5*. Good luck getting clients to double their budgets, though, and yet they don�t want richness cut in half.
So, the opportunity: Cut the cost of targeting multiple runtimes & we�ll deliver real wins: more richness for clients, and a competitive advantage for customers. [...]
Adobe lives or dies by its ability to help customers solve real problems. That means putting pragmatism ahead of ideology.
Once a website has gone through the process of serving up HTML5, why bother serving up Flash to anybody? This tool will continue to lessen the need for Flash on the browser for everybody.
This Skyfire app is proof of that.
Not exactly. Skyfire is not optimal for iPhone users, because videos they request have to go through Skyfire's servers for conversion. It's also not a complete solution for websites, because only a fraction of the iOS users will purchase the Skyfire app. Skyfire functions as a bridging app to give websites access to iOS users until they convert their video inventory to HTML5.
I won't bother arguing anymore about the other things as it's a complete waste of my time.
That would be good.
Ironically, Adobe's new conversion tools will accelerate the demise of Flash on the web.
blow45
Apr 13, 11:52 PM
Oh great! Now Steve Jobs will add an even larger non-visible glossy-ass display and consumers’ will embrace it, because Steve will convince you it’s ‘magical’.
yeah because the ipad isn't really magical (it is in the sense that Steve used it) that's why all the non apple sheep are buying it and it's flying off the shelves everywhere...:rolleyes:
But of course we should just go by your big, fat, loud and misinformed opinion.
Hmm, the same Gene Munster who:
-- predicted 4.3M iPads sold in 2010 (he actually lowered his estimate and ~15M were sold).
-- predicted "lines will be small" for iPad2 (by his own later admission, they were longer than for the original iPad).
-- predicted Apple would sell half a million iPhone 3GS during launch weekend (they sold double that).
-- predicted Apple would not launch a new iPhone at the 2009 WWDC (they did).
-- predicted in 2005 "Apple is prepping Macs to serve as a hub for digital media for consumers by incorporating Tivo-like DVR capabilities"
-- Has missed numerous financial estimates by large margins.
To be fair, Munster is better than most "professional" analysts, he does a bit more research and has a decent track record on certain details. But I'm just saying, don't put much "stock" into this.
To be fair Gene is better than some "analysts", but having said that is a joke that he get mentioned at macrumors without a modicum of reporting on his track record.
This misleads a lot of new users.
yeah because the ipad isn't really magical (it is in the sense that Steve used it) that's why all the non apple sheep are buying it and it's flying off the shelves everywhere...:rolleyes:
But of course we should just go by your big, fat, loud and misinformed opinion.
Hmm, the same Gene Munster who:
-- predicted 4.3M iPads sold in 2010 (he actually lowered his estimate and ~15M were sold).
-- predicted "lines will be small" for iPad2 (by his own later admission, they were longer than for the original iPad).
-- predicted Apple would sell half a million iPhone 3GS during launch weekend (they sold double that).
-- predicted Apple would not launch a new iPhone at the 2009 WWDC (they did).
-- predicted in 2005 "Apple is prepping Macs to serve as a hub for digital media for consumers by incorporating Tivo-like DVR capabilities"
-- Has missed numerous financial estimates by large margins.
To be fair, Munster is better than most "professional" analysts, he does a bit more research and has a decent track record on certain details. But I'm just saying, don't put much "stock" into this.
To be fair Gene is better than some "analysts", but having said that is a joke that he get mentioned at macrumors without a modicum of reporting on his track record.
This misleads a lot of new users.
Moyank24
Apr 26, 02:04 PM
Then we got this guy over here. If you don't like capitalists what the **** are you doing on a macrumors forum? If 20 bucks made you just **** your pants, how did you afford a Mac or a iPad or iPhone. Not to be a dick but, Shouldn't you be buying some horse **** 3rd world version of the iPad from a lepar off the back of a horse buggy or something? SoundCloud has over a million subscribers, for a argueably less intuitive platform. Thats not capitalism?
It's only ****ing capitalism when Apple does something and has the audacity to charge for it. When any other company does it, it's just good business.
People will complain about anything.
It's only ****ing capitalism when Apple does something and has the audacity to charge for it. When any other company does it, it's just good business.
People will complain about anything.
renewed
Sep 15, 07:37 PM
^^^^
WHAT... is that? :eek:
WHAT... is that? :eek:
dXTC
Jan 12, 10:35 AM
...
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
Golf clap. F'real. This echoes one of the core tenets of the Size Acceptance movement: Accept people as they are, not as you think they should be.
Don't be repelled by the severely obese person you meet or the severely emaciated person you meet; these are real people with real feelings, real issues hiding in there somewhere and the bottom line is that these are people who need help.
Golf clap. F'real. This echoes one of the core tenets of the Size Acceptance movement: Accept people as they are, not as you think they should be.
AppleScruff1
Apr 22, 01:23 AM
Corporations are evil.
Apple is evil, so is samsung. Why anyone would have an emotional yearning for one company above another is beyond me, both companies would gladly take all your money for nothing if you let them.
Let them duke is out, neither is right.
There you go, making sense. That isn't tolerated around here. :D
Apple is evil, so is samsung. Why anyone would have an emotional yearning for one company above another is beyond me, both companies would gladly take all your money for nothing if you let them.
Let them duke is out, neither is right.
There you go, making sense. That isn't tolerated around here. :D
kalsta
Apr 20, 09:28 AM
Was thinking more of a desktop touch screen device. Different from the iPad which wants to be picked up and used, but is workable on your lap. This mythical desktop touch device would still need to be light enough that you could lift it up and just change it's orientation at will like an iPad. Yet with a stand so it could be standing upright in portrait or landscape yet moved and sit anywhere down to almost flat on the desk. That way if you want the screen upright you can have, yet small enough that your not putting it to far away and for the odd navigation touch command would not be to bad. Yet lying down you get the full advantage and directness of touch screen.
I do get the picture — this concept of 'best of both worlds'. But I think the reality wouldn't be quite as great as you imagine. Mouse input and touchscreen input are quite different things, and you'd be asking developers on this platform to support both with their apps in order for things to work whether the user has the device upright with a mouse plugged in, or horizontal for touchscreen input as you describe. Otherwise the user would be constantly expected to switch between the two for different tasks, and that would make it a nightmare to use.
You mention in there that the 'odd navigation touch command would not be too bad' on a vertical screen, and that may be true. If that is your only expectation, that's fine. So what you probably have in that case is still a Mac running Mac OS X, but with a touchscreen capable of supporting certain touch commands and gestures. Of course, Macs are already capable of supporting various multi-touch gestures through a touchpad (or Magic Mouse or whatever), so it's conceivable that they could add a touchscreen as well, to be used occasionally as the need arises, but I'm not convinced that is going to offer the Mac a whole lot more functionality or that it would justify a whole new marketing name.
See the other part that seems to missing is something that has the directness of touch but and doesn't obscure what your doing like a mouse so you get the accuracy, but you can't do this at the expense of the other input means on there respective platforms. Or in other words a stylus but it has to work with fingers as well but not spongy like the current ones you can buy.
Adding a stylus to the iPad for certain tasks is fine IMO, and far more natural than switching between a real keyboard and touchscreen. Unfortunately, Steve Jobs made that comment which has been interpreted as 'stylus = fail', so you're not likely to see Apple encouraging that any time soon.
To me the keyboards a red herring, both OSX and iOS can use either real or on screen keyboard.
Sure, the iPad can use a real keyboard, but when you do, it really isn't the same experience that makes the iPad special anymore. It's a compromise in order to salvage some of what makes a desktop machine feel more precise, and that's my point — it feels like a compromise between both platforms, not a new and superior experience. The iPad really shines when you're touching it, because that's what it was designed for.
Yeah okay, so Apple released iWork for the iPad just to show us that they could. I won't be buying it though. It's not what the iPad excels at.
It's funny for all the advantages of computers it's only now we see them becoming as intuitive as pencil and paper some time in the next 5ish years.
I think the iPad is already pretty much there when it comes to ease of use (depending on which apps you're using of course). That's why the in-store hands-on display is so effective — anyone from age 3 through to 103 can pick one up and start using it straight away.
Sometimes less is more, and I think that is probably true of touchscreen interfaces, and why the iPad has hit the mark where Windows-based tablet PC's failed in the past.
As for why they split off iOS as a branch, well where now five years in and only with Lion is it looking like the two will align.
People look at the superficial similarities between Lion and iOS and think the two are merging into one OS. I see it differently. Time will tell.
I do get the picture — this concept of 'best of both worlds'. But I think the reality wouldn't be quite as great as you imagine. Mouse input and touchscreen input are quite different things, and you'd be asking developers on this platform to support both with their apps in order for things to work whether the user has the device upright with a mouse plugged in, or horizontal for touchscreen input as you describe. Otherwise the user would be constantly expected to switch between the two for different tasks, and that would make it a nightmare to use.
You mention in there that the 'odd navigation touch command would not be too bad' on a vertical screen, and that may be true. If that is your only expectation, that's fine. So what you probably have in that case is still a Mac running Mac OS X, but with a touchscreen capable of supporting certain touch commands and gestures. Of course, Macs are already capable of supporting various multi-touch gestures through a touchpad (or Magic Mouse or whatever), so it's conceivable that they could add a touchscreen as well, to be used occasionally as the need arises, but I'm not convinced that is going to offer the Mac a whole lot more functionality or that it would justify a whole new marketing name.
See the other part that seems to missing is something that has the directness of touch but and doesn't obscure what your doing like a mouse so you get the accuracy, but you can't do this at the expense of the other input means on there respective platforms. Or in other words a stylus but it has to work with fingers as well but not spongy like the current ones you can buy.
Adding a stylus to the iPad for certain tasks is fine IMO, and far more natural than switching between a real keyboard and touchscreen. Unfortunately, Steve Jobs made that comment which has been interpreted as 'stylus = fail', so you're not likely to see Apple encouraging that any time soon.
To me the keyboards a red herring, both OSX and iOS can use either real or on screen keyboard.
Sure, the iPad can use a real keyboard, but when you do, it really isn't the same experience that makes the iPad special anymore. It's a compromise in order to salvage some of what makes a desktop machine feel more precise, and that's my point — it feels like a compromise between both platforms, not a new and superior experience. The iPad really shines when you're touching it, because that's what it was designed for.
Yeah okay, so Apple released iWork for the iPad just to show us that they could. I won't be buying it though. It's not what the iPad excels at.
It's funny for all the advantages of computers it's only now we see them becoming as intuitive as pencil and paper some time in the next 5ish years.
I think the iPad is already pretty much there when it comes to ease of use (depending on which apps you're using of course). That's why the in-store hands-on display is so effective — anyone from age 3 through to 103 can pick one up and start using it straight away.
Sometimes less is more, and I think that is probably true of touchscreen interfaces, and why the iPad has hit the mark where Windows-based tablet PC's failed in the past.
As for why they split off iOS as a branch, well where now five years in and only with Lion is it looking like the two will align.
People look at the superficial similarities between Lion and iOS and think the two are merging into one OS. I see it differently. Time will tell.
wmk461
Jan 30, 05:27 PM
*Twilight Zone music playing...*
Let me correct myself... I didn't mean to say occupy, I meant that we have troops in US bases in over 200 countries.
Let me correct myself... I didn't mean to say occupy, I meant that we have troops in US bases in over 200 countries.
No comments:
Post a Comment