![�sterreich karte. Österreichs [KARTE] (1/98)](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_uGMN9AE3vh1-84vYPnPRbhg57NDC4j7xPXI1_dkhf_ZTtgcuDhR4K9zY6eV9JSTTCQFJJO9sxfkqQNHf6bGzjQ3kEnLRGXAIY1ZT_KxbdwH0ESQ_6K2JUbA7QPRx87=s0-d "Österreichs [KARTE] (1/98)")
eddiejsmall
Apr 14, 12:34 PM
Why would it?? It's not a feature release.
#.#.X releases are bug fix releases.
Maybe because 4.2.6 had feature releases inside the update.
#.#.X releases are bug fix releases.
Maybe because 4.2.6 had feature releases inside the update.
D4F
Apr 15, 07:38 AM
Battery drain still here.
BlowJobs always says that battery is crucial and that is why they miss implementing things just so that matter can be improved... Well what a lame excuse cause batt is draining like **** anyway.
BlowJobs always says that battery is crucial and that is why they miss implementing things just so that matter can be improved... Well what a lame excuse cause batt is draining like **** anyway.
briankeith513
Apr 18, 08:23 PM
i had to activate the multi-touch gestures with "Xcode", the new 4.3.2 update doesn't activate multi-touch....
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
iJays
May 4, 03:20 AM
next iPhone Sept/Oct timeframe and new ones every 6 months after that ;)
Darkroom
Jun 6, 09:14 AM
sure. apple has no problem giving a refund, as they keep their 30% that the developer now has to pay. that's a cool $300 that apple just ripped off from the developer all to protect their mistake and their idiot customers.
HMFIC03
Apr 13, 04:53 PM
Apple would be better off having other companies such as Samsung that already put wi-fi receivers in there TVs buy Apple TV licenses.
NightFox
Apr 14, 05:31 AM
OK, I have two problems with this being anything more than just a glitch.
First, it's for developers to define which devices their apps are compatible with. When Apple does bring out a new device, it has never updated the compatibility of existing apps AFAIK.
Second, if there was a new device or iOS>OSX functionality on the way, updating the App store to show compatibility would have been one of the very last stages before (or even after) launch. As we've had NO indication or rumours of either of these things being forthcoming, I really can't imagine a major launch by Apple within the next few days.
It's nice to have something to get excited about, but I think the only relevance in this placeholder is the ix to the IX Legion, i.e. it'll simply vanish without a trace.
First, it's for developers to define which devices their apps are compatible with. When Apple does bring out a new device, it has never updated the compatibility of existing apps AFAIK.
Second, if there was a new device or iOS>OSX functionality on the way, updating the App store to show compatibility would have been one of the very last stages before (or even after) launch. As we've had NO indication or rumours of either of these things being forthcoming, I really can't imagine a major launch by Apple within the next few days.
It's nice to have something to get excited about, but I think the only relevance in this placeholder is the ix to the IX Legion, i.e. it'll simply vanish without a trace.
rmhop81
Apr 26, 02:09 PM
Yes.
My original point is though that, given that you ALREADY have all of your music (and probably videos) stores on your local hard drive of your computer, and have your computer connected to the internet, why the heck would you need APPLE to stream your music from the internet, when you can just buy StreamToMe or Audio Galaxy or 20 other apps that can do this for a $5 TOTAL incremental cost from what you already have. You can stream all of your music, including your already set up playlists, AND your video right from your figgin' hard drive. Why the heck do you need to pay APPLE anything?
The only benefit I can see it to not eat into your HOME data cap limits, which are usually pretty high anyway (I've NEVER had an issue, and I stream all of the time). But you'd have to upload your non-iTunes purchased songs to their servers anyway, which would offset that somewhat.
Tony
not everyone wants a dedicated home server that they load everything on and let it run 24 hours a day. We just have a MBA.... i'm not gonna load all my music on there and leave it plugged in 24 hours a day. Just not gonna happen.
My original point is though that, given that you ALREADY have all of your music (and probably videos) stores on your local hard drive of your computer, and have your computer connected to the internet, why the heck would you need APPLE to stream your music from the internet, when you can just buy StreamToMe or Audio Galaxy or 20 other apps that can do this for a $5 TOTAL incremental cost from what you already have. You can stream all of your music, including your already set up playlists, AND your video right from your figgin' hard drive. Why the heck do you need to pay APPLE anything?
The only benefit I can see it to not eat into your HOME data cap limits, which are usually pretty high anyway (I've NEVER had an issue, and I stream all of the time). But you'd have to upload your non-iTunes purchased songs to their servers anyway, which would offset that somewhat.
Tony
not everyone wants a dedicated home server that they load everything on and let it run 24 hours a day. We just have a MBA.... i'm not gonna load all my music on there and leave it plugged in 24 hours a day. Just not gonna happen.
InuNacho
May 1, 10:35 PM
Since he's dead doesn't this technically mean that the "War on Terror" is technically over?
Full of Win
Apr 24, 09:32 AM
god what is it with the US and their billion different frequencies
That is just how we roll.
Its the same in others places, such as Japan, South Korea and China. In fact, the GSM iPhone 4 had an additional band added specifically for Japanese market.
That is just how we roll.
Its the same in others places, such as Japan, South Korea and China. In fact, the GSM iPhone 4 had an additional band added specifically for Japanese market.
blow45
Apr 13, 11:57 PM
double post
fily
Sep 15, 05:22 PM
http://img.game.co.uk/images/content/SpecialEditions/HaloReachConsole3.jpg
Im such a geek haha.
Say goodbye to co-op (if that's the 4GB model).
Im such a geek haha.
Say goodbye to co-op (if that's the 4GB model).
godrifle
Mar 31, 10:50 AM
Just what I wanted to see.
Bye Bye UI Guidelines.
This is going to be huge for Mac OS X. UI Guidelines were great but could stagnant the look. The OS needs to look rich in colour.
Very happy with the change and the development.
Just my 2 cents.
Dear God! Eliminate the consistency that UI guidelines create and usability goes out the window. Net result - Mac OS X becomes no different than Window.
I'm hoping these are red herrings by Apple, because these are just ass ugly.
Bye Bye UI Guidelines.
This is going to be huge for Mac OS X. UI Guidelines were great but could stagnant the look. The OS needs to look rich in colour.
Very happy with the change and the development.
Just my 2 cents.
Dear God! Eliminate the consistency that UI guidelines create and usability goes out the window. Net result - Mac OS X becomes no different than Window.
I'm hoping these are red herrings by Apple, because these are just ass ugly.
AppleScruff1
Apr 13, 07:28 PM
What are they gonna call it? Apple TV?
Sheep tv would be more like it. What's next, a supermarket?
Sheep tv would be more like it. What's next, a supermarket?
KnightWRX
Apr 17, 08:04 AM
What about a Magic Trackpad?
Trackpads and touch screens are quite different input devices. Touch screen input requires that you actually "touch" what you want to manipulate. With a trackpad, you don't have quite the precision to precisely put your finger on an object on screen, since the object is not displayed on the track pad.
It just doesn't translate that well. Trackpads still very much require cursors, which iOS's UI lacks.
Trackpads and touch screens are quite different input devices. Touch screen input requires that you actually "touch" what you want to manipulate. With a trackpad, you don't have quite the precision to precisely put your finger on an object on screen, since the object is not displayed on the track pad.
It just doesn't translate that well. Trackpads still very much require cursors, which iOS's UI lacks.
brepublican
Jul 21, 11:26 AM
If joe pc-user becomes joe mac-user, then macs wont be fun anymore :(
That said, i'd like to see market share go up in certain areas. A lot more scientists are switching (mostly switching back, after ditching around late 90s) these days.
It's hard to be an elitist mac user if you're no longer in the minority...
I'm not too sure I agree with the reason you give though. My main concern is quality control. Even with the paltry share increase Apple has seen during the past year, quality control has become an issue. Would not like to see how much poorer with a 10% share thats all :rolleyes:
That said, i'd like to see market share go up in certain areas. A lot more scientists are switching (mostly switching back, after ditching around late 90s) these days.
It's hard to be an elitist mac user if you're no longer in the minority...
I'm not too sure I agree with the reason you give though. My main concern is quality control. Even with the paltry share increase Apple has seen during the past year, quality control has become an issue. Would not like to see how much poorer with a 10% share thats all :rolleyes:
Don't panic
Apr 28, 09:46 AM
45 minutes to go
if my count is correct, the current status is:
nies 5 (dontpanic, appleguy, ibro, moyank, aggie)
aggie 3 (eldiablo, ucfgrad, nies)
eldiablo 2 (chrmjenkins, jav)
if my count is correct, the current status is:
nies 5 (dontpanic, appleguy, ibro, moyank, aggie)
aggie 3 (eldiablo, ucfgrad, nies)
eldiablo 2 (chrmjenkins, jav)
PghLondon
Apr 28, 11:26 AM
This is fun.
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
Yes, the iPhone does compete against Android. The last time I went into a AT&T or Verizon store, this was obvious. To say that the iPhone does not compete against Android is silly.
WRONG. iPhone = hardware. Android = software.
iOS competes against Android.
Because there is only two hardware choices, the iPhone 4 or iPhone 3GS. Making this argument is so empty, in that it does not take into account the reasons behind it.
WRONG. The choice is iPhone OR any Android phone OR any Win7 Phone OR any RIM phone, etc.
Hello Mr. Straw man. The article was about iPhone; if you read it it states "covering U.S. mobile phone sales". Now, if by mobile OS, you are also adding in the iPad, that is debatable. I've been a iPad 3G owner since April 30th and I can tell you that I do not consider the iPad a mobile device. Sure, its easy to carry, but to lump in its sales with phone handset sales is a stretch. If you are making that stretch, how about adding netbooks into the mix as well?
If those netbooks ran Android, I'd count them. But they don't. And YOU'RE bringing up straw men? Phone versus non-phone makes no difference if they're running the same OS and same apps.
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
In your mind maybe. But only in your mind.
PS: Handset OS sales? What the hell does that mean?
Rodimus Prime
Dec 29, 11:09 AM
fattest person in the world is not exactly an honor anyone should want.
blipmusic
Apr 19, 04:33 PM
Games. Don't tell me you want to play WoW on a 11" monitor.
I want to. Stop projecting. The 11" MBA will become my only computer when I get it in a few months and that includes playing the odd game, possibly including WoW.
Heck, the *iPad* could probably be my only computer with a keyboard dock if it did untethered OS updates and could compile LaTeX documents natively. But you're probably about to burst now so I'll stop.
I want to. Stop projecting. The 11" MBA will become my only computer when I get it in a few months and that includes playing the odd game, possibly including WoW.
Heck, the *iPad* could probably be my only computer with a keyboard dock if it did untethered OS updates and could compile LaTeX documents natively. But you're probably about to burst now so I'll stop.
salmonstk
Apr 26, 12:49 PM
my bet is its free for a year with any purchase of a Mac, iPhone, iPad, or ipod touch.
Then perhaps $20 a year after. Which if true would mean few people would ever pay as long as you rbuy a new Mac or iPhone or iPad every couple of years
Then perhaps $20 a year after. Which if true would mean few people would ever pay as long as you rbuy a new Mac or iPhone or iPad every couple of years
AlanAudio
Jul 28, 08:02 AM
When Microsoft claim that their investment might not pay off for five years, they're paving the way for failure. For the next two or three years, when pressed about the lack of profits, they can claim that the payoff will be in a couple of years from then. They won't have to actually admit that they've failed until after 2010. It's not dissimilar to Bill Gates claiming that there's an 80% chance of Vista shipping on time, it sounds positive, but few people believe it actually will ship in January. It's just paving the way for the next excuse.
It's very important that Microsoft try very hard with Zune. They keep claiming that the iPod succeeded simply because of slick marketing, whereas everybody else knows that it succeeded by being an attractive proposition, combining style with ease of use. It was word-of-mouth publicity that really worked for the iPod. You can't buy that, it added massive value to the money that was spent on advertising.
So here's Microsoft's opportunity to look at the last five years of the iPod, together with three years of iTMS, take it all in and apply their 'innovation', show us the ultimate product and then spend a fortune marketing it. There must be no doubt that Microsoft must be seen to throw everything into this project. Then Steve Jobs will be delighted to rise to the challenge and delight in humiliating Bill Gates.
It's very important that Microsoft try very hard with Zune. They keep claiming that the iPod succeeded simply because of slick marketing, whereas everybody else knows that it succeeded by being an attractive proposition, combining style with ease of use. It was word-of-mouth publicity that really worked for the iPod. You can't buy that, it added massive value to the money that was spent on advertising.
So here's Microsoft's opportunity to look at the last five years of the iPod, together with three years of iTMS, take it all in and apply their 'innovation', show us the ultimate product and then spend a fortune marketing it. There must be no doubt that Microsoft must be seen to throw everything into this project. Then Steve Jobs will be delighted to rise to the challenge and delight in humiliating Bill Gates.
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...
dsensi
Apr 27, 06:14 PM
Seriously, why not an Imac with touch-screen right now? Will we need to wait for the next iMac update to see this technology implemented?
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
No comments:
Post a Comment