celebrian23
Jul 24, 08:53 PM
I wonder if all of these possibilities for the 6G are all compatible with each other.
Swinny
Jul 28, 07:29 AM
Its interesting to see Microsoft's strategy on this - I think its only a good thing that somebody is trying to look at the whole player/content ecosystem in the same way that Apple have...that competition can only be a good thing surely?
However...some of the comments do seem to suggest they already expect to be losing the battle though - surely if you really thought you could compete with iPod/iTunes you would be a little bolder? Makes it sound half-hearted, and thats a shame.
However...some of the comments do seem to suggest they already expect to be losing the battle though - surely if you really thought you could compete with iPod/iTunes you would be a little bolder? Makes it sound half-hearted, and thats a shame.
Cigsm
Apr 30, 07:45 PM
Stealing cars is free too, what's your point?
Torrents are free! :D
Torrents are free! :D
shecky
Oct 24, 07:56 AM
one thing i am very pleased about is that the stock 17" has all the specs i need (i will get more RAM elsewhere, not from apple, and not yet) 2GB RAM, 160GB HD, 2.33 C2D so now i do not have to CTO from apple, i can just go buy it in store.
the only things i wish for more of would be a higher-end video card and easy access HD bay. other than that i am pleased.
the only things i wish for more of would be a higher-end video card and easy access HD bay. other than that i am pleased.
more...
mtkagan
Mar 11, 07:21 AM
I'll be at south coast plaza
ForzaJuve
Apr 26, 12:03 PM
Yes, that's great, but I am surprised it's already noon and there have been no articles about who is suing who yet.
more...
SeanZy
Mar 16, 11:09 AM
I just posted this so if no one has a trade for me I may do it.
Check with me later
You live around Brea I assume?
I could ask him if he may be willing to pay a premium. Nothing too much but possibly. I know I would but I cannot speak on his behalf. But I guarantee you he would buy it from you today.
if you dont mind messaging me your phone # and I can give you his / mine as well.
Check with me later
You live around Brea I assume?
I could ask him if he may be willing to pay a premium. Nothing too much but possibly. I know I would but I cannot speak on his behalf. But I guarantee you he would buy it from you today.
if you dont mind messaging me your phone # and I can give you his / mine as well.
chrmjenkins
Apr 28, 11:10 PM
Just picked up a white one for the wife. I can confirm the very slightly fatter profile just like everyone else.
more...
rusty2192
Apr 3, 08:29 AM
Another one from my outing last week. I got some nice shots yesterday, but I'm still working on editing them. I tried avoiding posting this one, but ran out of others. While I am happy with it for myself, I know it is rather (ok, very) cliche to post a duck shot ;)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
leekohler
Nov 8, 10:27 AM
I won't get it but:
more...
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
cslewis
Jul 24, 09:35 PM
How about a proto-telepathic interface? :cool:
more...
little.pm
Apr 14, 07:35 AM
Nano. Like, obviously.
Seems like everyone forgot about the somewhat recent rumors about a smaller iphone. (Ok, just kidding.)
Maybe apple wants the rumor mill to get up to speed as they want to introduce anything but nobody got a hint or has a clue yet. Total disclosure is bad, but no rumors is even worse.
regards
--------
I just have Macs, in various sizes. All run on Darwin.
Seems like everyone forgot about the somewhat recent rumors about a smaller iphone. (Ok, just kidding.)
Maybe apple wants the rumor mill to get up to speed as they want to introduce anything but nobody got a hint or has a clue yet. Total disclosure is bad, but no rumors is even worse.
regards
--------
I just have Macs, in various sizes. All run on Darwin.
iphone3gs16gb
Apr 28, 08:56 PM
some comparisons with my iResQ back:s
You should do a *proper* comparison and take the photo *exactly* in the middle of *both* iPhones with *proper* stance...
Just a thought ;)
You should do a *proper* comparison and take the photo *exactly* in the middle of *both* iPhones with *proper* stance...
Just a thought ;)
more...
mjuarez
Apr 12, 09:27 AM
Agreed, put it on the second page. This "might/might not" constant chatter is not helpful.
awmazz
Mar 11, 10:15 AM
And that's what bugs me. That's the only time I can think of on TV where they actually pulled a switcheroo instead of having the character killed or sending him or her on a long trip to visit Aunt Edna in Schenectady.
D'oh, how could I forget Zev Bellringer in LEXX played by Eva Habermann. Who became Xev Bellringer played by Xenia Seeberg.
Not really the same though as simply dropping a new actor in the same role without skipping a beat, as being sci-fi they could regenerate her in a different body. And what a body. Both of them. I preferred Zev myself, sad to see her go.
Dr Who has been using this technique for decades. ;)
Also, slightly different situation as well, every time they make a TV series out of a successful movie they swap the actors in the same roles. Nearly all of them in most cases. M*A*S*H and Stargate for example. Radar and Father Mulcahy were the only two to remain the same in M*A*S*H I think. And only the two characters from the planet of Abidos in Stargate if I recall.
D'oh, how could I forget Zev Bellringer in LEXX played by Eva Habermann. Who became Xev Bellringer played by Xenia Seeberg.
Not really the same though as simply dropping a new actor in the same role without skipping a beat, as being sci-fi they could regenerate her in a different body. And what a body. Both of them. I preferred Zev myself, sad to see her go.
Dr Who has been using this technique for decades. ;)
Also, slightly different situation as well, every time they make a TV series out of a successful movie they swap the actors in the same roles. Nearly all of them in most cases. M*A*S*H and Stargate for example. Radar and Father Mulcahy were the only two to remain the same in M*A*S*H I think. And only the two characters from the planet of Abidos in Stargate if I recall.
more...
OllyW
Dec 29, 11:24 AM
She's obviously anorexic: Every time she looks in the mirror she sees a fat person. :)
Indeed...
http://www.weightlosssurgerychannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/donna-simpson.jpg
Indeed...
http://www.weightlosssurgerychannel.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/03/donna-simpson.jpg
rnelan7
Sep 12, 08:13 PM
Played the back 9 at http://www.pittsburghgolf.com/
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/1205/golffox.jpg
Played terrible but did see a red fox out on the course. :D
Took the photo with my iPhone 4 for a ways away (Probably 50 yards) used the HDR setting, came out a lot better than the non HDR photo.
Very cool, I've worked at this course (http://www.tavistockcc.org/) the past two years and it was always a joy seeing wild life.
http://img409.imageshack.us/img409/1205/golffox.jpg
Played terrible but did see a red fox out on the course. :D
Took the photo with my iPhone 4 for a ways away (Probably 50 yards) used the HDR setting, came out a lot better than the non HDR photo.
Very cool, I've worked at this course (http://www.tavistockcc.org/) the past two years and it was always a joy seeing wild life.
Detlev_73
Oct 23, 07:35 PM
OMG, ROTFL!!!
This is HILARIOUS! We should send this to all our so-called "friends" who use Windows.
Well then...if this is the case, who needs XP or Vista? I may just install Windows RG on my macbook pro when I get it. And yes...we educated Windows RG users use only the best hardware. I'll be waiting for C2D too. :)
For me, it's either Mac OS Windows RG. :rolleyes:
For a preview of Windows RG: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/winrg.php
:D ;)
This is HILARIOUS! We should send this to all our so-called "friends" who use Windows.
Well then...if this is the case, who needs XP or Vista? I may just install Windows RG on my macbook pro when I get it. And yes...we educated Windows RG users use only the best hardware. I'll be waiting for C2D too. :)
For me, it's either Mac OS Windows RG. :rolleyes:
For a preview of Windows RG: http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/flash/winrg.php
:D ;)
mdriftmeyer
Apr 22, 04:26 PM
The iPhone 4 had just the right thickness. Tapering everything to a weak point is bad engineering.
MattInOz
Apr 23, 04:35 PM
No thanks.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
You can fit 4.3 in the same size if you make the screen longer only and drop the home button. The bonus is you get an extra row of icons.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
You can fit 4.3 in the same size if you make the screen longer only and drop the home button. The bonus is you get an extra row of icons.
roadbloc
Apr 13, 05:38 PM
Yawn. What is the point? Seriously? A TV with a gyro and shake to undo? :rolleyes:
WelshBluebird
Apr 24, 10:46 AM
While I don't doubt that Apple are working on an iPhone that works on T-Mobile US's 3G band, is there any actual proof that this phone is connected to the T-Mobile network in the US?
We have a T-Mobile network in the UK, and they use the "normal" 3G frequencies, so any GSM iPhone 4 would work on it.
We have a T-Mobile network in the UK, and they use the "normal" 3G frequencies, so any GSM iPhone 4 would work on it.
ssdeg7
Jul 15, 07:52 PM
Well, they got the money back.
No comments:
Post a Comment