tigres
Apr 15, 08:59 PM
Is iTunes up-to-date?
Yepper. Everything is. Thx
Yepper. Everything is. Thx
n00bst3r
Oct 18, 05:00 PM
Maybe if they weren't making a grand on each MBP..
Azadre
Apr 13, 08:19 PM
Might get this, might not. Don't do contracts so it would be a simple case of buying and selling. Something most people I know do. You lot (Americans) should start doing the same and stop being beholden to 24 month contracts.
You're going to pay the same rate for your service regardless of subsidy status of your iPhone. Why pay $650 when you can pay $200?
You're going to pay the same rate for your service regardless of subsidy status of your iPhone. Why pay $650 when you can pay $200?
SeattleMoose
Apr 15, 02:51 PM
Well Apple has used up all the "big cat" names like Tiger and Lion which means that either OS 11 is underway or they will be in the embarassing situation of having to use lesser cat names which imply "less".
Ocelot, Cheetah, Cougar, Fluffy, etc......:cool:
I for one am ready for OS 11.0 "Merlot"
Ocelot, Cheetah, Cougar, Fluffy, etc......:cool:
I for one am ready for OS 11.0 "Merlot"
more...
Lurchdubious
Sep 12, 06:32 PM
http://www.tkshare.com/pic/20100827/20100827184542813.jpeg
Mental Case for iPhone.
Mental Case for iPhone.
lgreenberg
Apr 28, 06:37 PM
Here are your measurements - http://www.tipb.com/2011/04/28/white-iphone-4-roughly-02mm-thicker-black-iphone/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TheIphoneBlog+%28TiPb%3A+iPhone%2C+iPad%2C+iPod%29
more...
Yvan256
Jul 28, 09:12 AM
I clearly state it's not an HD-DVD player, nor do I say it's the only upscaling "player" out there. It IS the only game console that upscales standard DVDs at this point though.
And you really think this is a major factor for people buying a 400$CAD - 500$CAD game console?
Upscaling DVDs to 720p is something I expect from those 30$CAD no-name DVD players in about 6 months.
And you really think this is a major factor for people buying a 400$CAD - 500$CAD game console?
Upscaling DVDs to 720p is something I expect from those 30$CAD no-name DVD players in about 6 months.
archipellago
Apr 29, 06:04 PM
It would seem unusual to give a company with 10% of the revenue at least 35% rebate over a company with 90% of the revenue. This looks very much anti-competitive to me.
They have even much cheaper downloads sometimes; I suspect some were pricing mistakes. The iTunes LP "Plastic Beach" by Gorillaz was �1.69 (18 songs, one video + extras), probably a mistake :-) "24 Hour of Classical Music" is exactly that for �7.99.
You know that you have to pay tax on all items that you buy without paying sales tax? Most people just "forget" to tell the tax man.
anti-competitive when the prices goes down..??
wow, which planet do you live on..?
They have even much cheaper downloads sometimes; I suspect some were pricing mistakes. The iTunes LP "Plastic Beach" by Gorillaz was �1.69 (18 songs, one video + extras), probably a mistake :-) "24 Hour of Classical Music" is exactly that for �7.99.
You know that you have to pay tax on all items that you buy without paying sales tax? Most people just "forget" to tell the tax man.
anti-competitive when the prices goes down..??
wow, which planet do you live on..?
more...
mozmac
Jul 28, 11:51 AM
Microsoft sounds like it wants to start a revolution in the music industry, but they don't know how to do it. And besides, the music industry just went through a revolution with Apple, so consumers don't want to go through it again.
A part of me wants to say Microsoft should just stay out because they have no experience, but look at the spalsh they made with the Xbox. People said the same thing to Microsoft back then. The video game market was crowded and seemingly had no room for another player, especially one who eats Rabbit poo for breakfast, but somehow M$ muscled its way in there. I just don't see the same thing happening this time with Zune-i-wanna-go-stick-my-hand-in-a-crocodile's-mouth.
A part of me wants to say Microsoft should just stay out because they have no experience, but look at the spalsh they made with the Xbox. People said the same thing to Microsoft back then. The video game market was crowded and seemingly had no room for another player, especially one who eats Rabbit poo for breakfast, but somehow M$ muscled its way in there. I just don't see the same thing happening this time with Zune-i-wanna-go-stick-my-hand-in-a-crocodile's-mouth.
aristobrat
Oct 24, 08:32 AM
802.11n pending firmware upgrade...
Great -- that was my only holdout. Where did you see the info about 802.11n being included?
Great -- that was my only holdout. Where did you see the info about 802.11n being included?
more...
Tone Driver
Apr 13, 09:03 PM
I've been waiting patiently for this white 4, suffering with my white 3G for it. I really just can't wait til at least the fall for the 5, so I'll probably be picking one of these up.
I can't be stuck with my 3G and its 100 dollar a month cost any more!
I can't be stuck with my 3G and its 100 dollar a month cost any more!
Apple Corps
Apr 12, 11:12 PM
That doesn't say anything remotely similar to "envisioned by apple." either. In fact, from your own article, try this link :
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/30/yeah-apple-wasnt-integral-in-light-peak-transfer-technology/
Let's not give a bigger role to Apple than the one they played.
NO - it does state that Apple had a major role - don't have the interest to get into a tech crunch vs engadget pi$$ing match as to which one is correct BUT there are some articles CITING the point.
http://www.crunchgear.com/2009/09/30/yeah-apple-wasnt-integral-in-light-peak-transfer-technology/
Let's not give a bigger role to Apple than the one they played.
NO - it does state that Apple had a major role - don't have the interest to get into a tech crunch vs engadget pi$$ing match as to which one is correct BUT there are some articles CITING the point.
more...
FloatingBones
Nov 23, 12:46 AM
That's not why I called him a Communist. I call him a Communist because he acts like a 1-person dictator.
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: more than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed in a flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
Cristiano Ronaldo,
more...
a lo Cristiano Ronaldo.
Cristiano Ronaldo
He's the CEO of a company: accountable to the Board of Directors and the stockholders of the publicly-traded company. There's no comparison between that and a communist dictator. Goofy.
Anyone who can provide a rational reason why these two things are comparable, please chime in.
Flash for iOS is no more of a security risk than it is for OSX in general or any other plugin from PDF readers to Javascript.
That's a terrible argument for having bundled Adobe products on iOS.
Adobe products are a large risk on Mac OS X. It's unbelievable to me that Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If you only view PDF files, you shouldn't even have Adobe Reader installed on your OS X computer. Apple Preview is better, faster, and far less bug-prone.
Steve Jobs "reason" for not including Flash is supposedly mostly about performance not security risks.
It's about both the performance and the security risks.
It's also about the identity-leaking through Flash cookies. Perhaps you missed that security discussion: more than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt). Flash cookies do not honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser; many users don't even know that Flash maintains its own set of cookies.
It's about the quirky UI interactions with Flash. Scrolling works differently when the mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that is displayed in a flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
Then why are they allowing Flash in regular OSX?
Software is much more tightly-controlled on iOS devices. There is a file system firewall between every app. Third-party apps must be submitted to Apple before they can be distributed, and Apple has the capability to remotely disable any third party app that begins to exhibit a malware-like behavior in the field.
Some of those controls are about advances in OS development since Mac OS X. Some have to do with the nature of the device: handhelds are more appliances than laptops.
One other reason to ban Flash on iOS: Flash apps can be packaged as iOS apps. This should be safe because of the way that iOS apps are firewalled from each other and the kill switch that Apple can use if an app is found to be rogue.
There are fundamental differences between iOS devices and laptops/desktops. Also, Apple no longer ships Adobe Flash on their newest computers. (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1034486) I'm guessing that Apple will ship Flash on no computers starting with the release of OS X 10.7 next year.
By your logic that would mean that Microsoft must be the most incompetent company out there.
I don't believe you read that headline carefully: Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm).
On the contrary, it indicates they are POPULAR.
No reason to shout.
Perhaps it indicates they have some fundamental problems in their software engineering. Did you read the podcast transcript about the latest Adobe bug? Adobe Reader has the same zero-day glitch as Flash. How does a PDF viewer get executable bugs like this?
How often does Apple update their security? I guess they're clueless too by your account. You won't admit that, however because you have an emotional investment in Apple.
Apple updates their software when updates are needed.
The point is that quarterly updates are far too infrequent. Did you read the transcript of the Security Now! podcast? Given the continuing number of Adobe zero-day bugs, Gibson asks:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
That is not what I said or what I proposed.
You proposed that Apple include Flash with iOS Safari and that users could turn it on. How you can possibly ensure that not a single iOS user will not lose anything the next time there's a zero day Adobe bug (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). You can't.
Kyffin
Oct 23, 12:02 PM
^ This
more...
basesloaded190
Apr 11, 03:08 PM
Ah, so ultimately there will still be 7+ cables, just not connected to the computer itself.
I think that's the idea. Being able to keep all of those connected when you take your laptop elsewhere and then just having to connect the TB cable when you come back.
I think that's the idea. Being able to keep all of those connected when you take your laptop elsewhere and then just having to connect the TB cable when you come back.
BrianMojo
Jul 25, 12:35 PM
Here's a radical suggestion, very unlikely to be implemented, but maybe interesting.
The iPod has a screen on the front which displays the controls, but the touch/presence/motion sensitive sensor is on the back. Since the controls are on the back, your view of the screen isn't obscured by your finger tapping on it.
But how do you see exactly where your fingers are? Simple - the "None Touch" sensor detects where your fingers are, and superimposes a representation of their position on the screen - it's almost like a transparent iPod, where your fingers behind the iPod are shown on the screen in front.
Benefits
- your fingers aren't obscuring your view of the screen
- you're not smudging or scratching the screen by tapping on it.
Disadvantages
more...
La novia de Cristiano Ronaldo
Cristiano Ronaldo presenta sus
kaka vs cristiano ronaldo
The iPod has a screen on the front which displays the controls, but the touch/presence/motion sensitive sensor is on the back. Since the controls are on the back, your view of the screen isn't obscured by your finger tapping on it.
But how do you see exactly where your fingers are? Simple - the "None Touch" sensor detects where your fingers are, and superimposes a representation of their position on the screen - it's almost like a transparent iPod, where your fingers behind the iPod are shown on the screen in front.
Benefits
- your fingers aren't obscuring your view of the screen
- you're not smudging or scratching the screen by tapping on it.
Disadvantages
more...
mrfoof82
May 3, 07:46 AM
No 512GB SSD option. I would've gladly paid the premium for it (+$1200 instead of +$750), considering how much of a PITA it is to get at that (full logic board removal).
Choosing any SSD brings shipping time up from 1-3 days to 4-6 weeks.
Choosing any SSD brings shipping time up from 1-3 days to 4-6 weeks.
Mac-Mariachi
Apr 12, 10:41 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Best comment on this thread!
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Best comment on this thread!
leekohler
Feb 28, 05:12 PM
I didn't say he should get more money. I said CBS will probably bring the show back because it make them so much money.
Reports are Cryer gets $1 million per. These figures include what they make on syndication too.
The that would bring the total between them to $80 million, which leaves everyone else with $20 million. That hardly seems OK or reasonable. There are a lot more people to pay and after that, what's left? I'd tell the guy to take a hike, especially with all the trouble he's caused.
Reports are Cryer gets $1 million per. These figures include what they make on syndication too.
The that would bring the total between them to $80 million, which leaves everyone else with $20 million. That hardly seems OK or reasonable. There are a lot more people to pay and after that, what's left? I'd tell the guy to take a hike, especially with all the trouble he's caused.
rman726
Apr 29, 11:23 PM
Remember when tiered pricing was announced, Steve said more songs would be available for $.69 than $1.29...I have yet to see a $.69 song.
Agreed. I heard Summer of 69 on the radio earlier today in the car, and the song has been stuck in my head all day. So I decided that would be a good song to test, as you would think a song from the 80's would be a song that would at highest price be $0.99. Low and behold, it is $1.29 on iTunes.
So apparently not only popular new songs, but "popular" old songs are even $1.29. I bought a couple of "Best Of" albums from Amazon today that were $5. You can't beat getting 12-15 of the top hits from artists for $5. Just 4 of those songs would cost you $5 on iTunes if they were $1.29, which most songs seem to be.
Agreed. I heard Summer of 69 on the radio earlier today in the car, and the song has been stuck in my head all day. So I decided that would be a good song to test, as you would think a song from the 80's would be a song that would at highest price be $0.99. Low and behold, it is $1.29 on iTunes.
So apparently not only popular new songs, but "popular" old songs are even $1.29. I bought a couple of "Best Of" albums from Amazon today that were $5. You can't beat getting 12-15 of the top hits from artists for $5. Just 4 of those songs would cost you $5 on iTunes if they were $1.29, which most songs seem to be.
myamid
Nov 4, 08:10 AM
If it's taking you two minutes to resume a session and two minutes plus to suspend it, on that machine you mentioned the specs of, something is frickin' wrong with that machine.
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I get similar performance on my slighly slower iMac.... And my VM images are on a less than ideal external FW drive!!! I'll second the opinion that if your system is significatly slower than this with Parallels, there's something VERY wrong with your Mac...
2.16 Core 2 Duo 20" iMac here, 2GB, stock 250GB drive, Parallels does the following:
- it cold starts in 4 seconds
- it boots my XP VM (512MB of RAM/8GB virtual hard disk) to the Desktop in 9
- it suspended that same XP VM in 14
- it restored that same XP VM in 11
And that's with Crossover for Mac running several Windows apps in the background too, so some of my resources are already drained when I fired up Parallels and the VM. Memory usage at the moment for the entire machine is sitting at 1154MB of 2048MB, 69 tasks, 330 threads as measured by MenuMeters.
So, give that box a tuneup or whatever, because you're certainly not getting the performance from Parallels that you should be getting. Also, check your VT-x flags under Parallels to make sure it's functioning properly.
btw, this is Parallels build 1970, the latest and greatest, and I've had nothing but positive usage of Parallels since I bought it off the shelf in an Apple Store along with this iMac a month ago. 3 upgrades so far, no issues at all.
bb
I get similar performance on my slighly slower iMac.... And my VM images are on a less than ideal external FW drive!!! I'll second the opinion that if your system is significatly slower than this with Parallels, there's something VERY wrong with your Mac...
zenvision
Oct 24, 09:33 AM
I do not have a practical answer for you, but I had a similar question when I was upgrading the HD in my powerbook - I wanted the fastest drive I could afford as this would give my PB the biggest performance boost. What I found out is that the 160GB 5400 perpendicular drives have about 90-95% the performance throughput of a non-perpendicular 7200 drive. The reason being that because the bit are perpendicular, the drive needs to rotate a shorter amount to read the same amount of data. I know at the microscopic size of the data on the drives this seems hard to believe, but logically, it makes sense to me. My PB is a screamer by comparison to the 4200 drive that was in there, which has not bearing to your question of course...
I suspect, that the 5400 160GB drive from Apple will have decent performance. Personally, I'm not impressed with the 4200 200GB offering, but for someone who needs more space and ultimate performance is not key, then this would be fine.
That all being said, I look forward to finding out the specs & models of the actual drives Apple is putting in the new MBP's before I'd put money down on one.
Cheers!
thanks for the info! sounds like the 5400 160gb drive is the one for me... :)
I suspect, that the 5400 160GB drive from Apple will have decent performance. Personally, I'm not impressed with the 4200 200GB offering, but for someone who needs more space and ultimate performance is not key, then this would be fine.
That all being said, I look forward to finding out the specs & models of the actual drives Apple is putting in the new MBP's before I'd put money down on one.
Cheers!
thanks for the info! sounds like the 5400 160gb drive is the one for me... :)
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 02:55 PM
I think the Amazon mp3's are of a lower bit rate though. I have a few and that was the case. Perhaps that has changed.
I stil prefer to own CD's and import them. Generally I can find the CD for less than the full album on-line. But I do by from itunes or amazon when I only want one song from an artist.
I stil prefer to own CD's and import them. Generally I can find the CD for less than the full album on-line. But I do by from itunes or amazon when I only want one song from an artist.
QCassidy352
Jul 25, 10:08 AM
oh, I forgot to mention one good thing about this mouse. Presumably it will work correctly with the option "allow bluetooth devices to wake this computer." 3rd party mice wake the computer up over and over ever since 10.4.6 when that option is checked. Of course, it would be nicer if apple would just fix their stupid OS version so that all BT mice worked correctly and not just their own... :rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment