mazola
Sep 5, 03:15 PM
Steve's debuting a new series of "I'm a Mac" TV ads
:P
:P
xjebbx
Sep 4, 08:56 PM
Video, music, pictures, DVD, all sound great, but what i really want is my printer right next to my TV.
Dr. Echsel
Apr 30, 01:52 PM
I've been waiting to buy my first Mac desktop for some time now... and an i7 SB iMac should last me through college :D
infidel69
Apr 20, 11:33 AM
Shame that everyone is going to jump to conclusions rather than work out why this is stored.
And really, would you rather have the information stored on the device or logged by Google?
Neither, I was wondering how long it would be before some fanboy would bring up Google.
And really, would you rather have the information stored on the device or logged by Google?
Neither, I was wondering how long it would be before some fanboy would bring up Google.
daneoni
Sep 14, 11:30 AM
Looks like the C2D MBPs will be unveiled here. I mean the 17 MBP was unveiled at NAB, which is another imaging related event. Why do i get the feeling that Adobe might surprise us with CS3 there?..i mean if Apple is sending out invites then something big is happening and no its not an iSLR :rolleyes:
batistuta
Mar 22, 05:33 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
What is it with the 24"? I would like to see something larger than 27 (as I have 30" already). Mini refresh would be nice - then I'd keep my 30".
They need to do it soon or people will wait for Lion before upgrading their hardware.
What is it with the 24"? I would like to see something larger than 27 (as I have 30" already). Mini refresh would be nice - then I'd keep my 30".
They need to do it soon or people will wait for Lion before upgrading their hardware.
CDCC
Apr 19, 02:45 PM
They have plenty of patents. It wasn't until the 90s that the patent madness really started with software. Google is also leading the bidding for a large portfolio of mobile patents to protect them against Apple and Microsoft.
Google has more copyrights than patents. However, they are still to cheap to buy most copyrights if they can get away with it. They are illegally scanning all books and photos to feed their hungry "big brother" search engines.
http://gizmodo.com/#!5070029/google-pays-125-million-to-writers-and-buys-us-some-free-books
Wire-haired Dachshund dog
4 month old red long haired
long haired dachshund
A wire-haired dachshund named
Dachshund means quot;badger dogquot;
cute long haired miniature
Bear is a mini long haired
Miniature long haired
She#39;s the sweetest little long
the wire-haired Dachshunds
4 month old red long haired
little brown long haired
Google has more copyrights than patents. However, they are still to cheap to buy most copyrights if they can get away with it. They are illegally scanning all books and photos to feed their hungry "big brother" search engines.
http://gizmodo.com/#!5070029/google-pays-125-million-to-writers-and-buys-us-some-free-books
LondonCentral
Mar 29, 02:15 PM
Someone needs to bookmark this thread so we can come back to it in 2015. If there's a new CEO (or group of CEO's) for Apple and Nokia/MS have a brilliant partnership, I don't see where the humor is. Four years is a hell of a long time for a new OS to mature.
ChrisTX
Apr 25, 06:44 PM
Just purchased the latest refresh of the MacBook Pro to replace a a 2006 model, and couldn't be happier with my purchase. I had a hunch the next refresh would be a case redesign, still no regrets.
rmhop81
Apr 22, 09:20 AM
That is the problem I'm seeing too....the bandwidth. Everyone is screaming about HDDs. Hello, storage is cheap. I just see the carriers salivating at the idea of Apple wanting people to stream. I do see and understand that some people can find this new setup useful. However, a LOT of us see a major problem in terms of data charges. If Apple still gives the storage capacity in its devices as it does now, then I personally will NOT have a problem with this. I would prefer to have it stored locally. Cellular data connectivity is no where where it needs to be for me to happy with it as a replacement for local storage. Nah uh...no way. With my music, video and pictures, I have 3 running copies at any given time and this has worked out for me for many years. Why fix something that isn't broke?
when you are at home turn on your WIFI...
why is this concept so hard to grasp?
you are a different kind of user. 3 running copies at once?? you rely way too much on physical stuff....so obviously this won't be for you.
when you are at home turn on your WIFI...
why is this concept so hard to grasp?
you are a different kind of user. 3 running copies at once?? you rely way too much on physical stuff....so obviously this won't be for you.
TigerWoodsIV
Mar 23, 05:56 PM
Miles you make a great point... You also confirm that Apple better pull them, its a pointless app because if your so drunk then you can't operate a phone let alone an app.
I beg to differ. I can operate my phone quite well and not even remember doing it lol. Although, you just shouldn't be driving drunk so that you have to avoid the checkpoints.
I beg to differ. I can operate my phone quite well and not even remember doing it lol. Although, you just shouldn't be driving drunk so that you have to avoid the checkpoints.
aristotle
Nov 13, 05:08 PM
So I guess this puts every iPhone VNC client in violation of Apple's terms as it would be displaying Apple copyrighted images...
I'm on RA's side on this one!
No, VNC displaying the entire screen from the computer and Apple has a built in VNC server in their OS. This is a matter of taking the icon images themselves and using them for another purpose in a client/server application rather than in an app running on the mac itself. It is a clear case of copyright infringement. RA could have avoided all of this by simply providing their own licensed icons.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
I'm on RA's side on this one!
No, VNC displaying the entire screen from the computer and Apple has a built in VNC server in their OS. This is a matter of taking the icon images themselves and using them for another purpose in a client/server application rather than in an app running on the mac itself. It is a clear case of copyright infringement. RA could have avoided all of this by simply providing their own licensed icons.
@guet: You should read what you wrote. You are proving yourself wrong with your own points. They are licensed for use on a mac, not for distribution to a client machine be it an iphone, Blackberry or Android.
jonnyb
Apr 20, 09:57 AM
When did 'reached out' become a better phrase to use than simply 'contacted'?
0815
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I don't usually read SLA's, but it's all right there, Page 1, Section 4, subsection b. And if don't want your iPhone to collect this data, turn off the feature.
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdf
Interesting find - but it seems that it is not possible to turn just the data collection in the center of this discussion off. You can only turn everything off or specific apps (but I don't think I saw this one listed somewhere as an app)
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone4.pdf
http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iPadSoftwareLicense.pdf
Interesting find - but it seems that it is not possible to turn just the data collection in the center of this discussion off. You can only turn everything off or specific apps (but I don't think I saw this one listed somewhere as an app)
Multimedia
Jul 20, 11:27 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
shawmanus
Sep 10, 08:53 AM
Couple of things
Kentsfield is not replacing conroe. Its only replacing conroe xe. Intel does not see mainstream quad core for atleast 2 years when s/w gets multithreaded. So Kentsfield should atleast cost $999 and would be seen in gaming platforms and workstations.
Tigerton is new xeon mp solution to replace netburst based tulsa. It is definately not pin compatible with kentsfield. Apple currently does not have any MP ( >= 4P solutions) in their portfolio. Maybe they would create one in their xserve portfolio. Tigerton would be extremely expensive as well.
iMac currently have laptop processors having around ~30w TDP. Kentsfield will have 110w tdp and I dont see Apple redesigning iMac to accomodate it. Maybe once intel has a native quad core on 45nm with around 60w TDP we will see a quad core in iMac.
Apple should release a "headless tower" with conroe/kentsfield. That should be significantly cheaper than Macpro.
Kentsfield is not replacing conroe. Its only replacing conroe xe. Intel does not see mainstream quad core for atleast 2 years when s/w gets multithreaded. So Kentsfield should atleast cost $999 and would be seen in gaming platforms and workstations.
Tigerton is new xeon mp solution to replace netburst based tulsa. It is definately not pin compatible with kentsfield. Apple currently does not have any MP ( >= 4P solutions) in their portfolio. Maybe they would create one in their xserve portfolio. Tigerton would be extremely expensive as well.
iMac currently have laptop processors having around ~30w TDP. Kentsfield will have 110w tdp and I dont see Apple redesigning iMac to accomodate it. Maybe once intel has a native quad core on 45nm with around 60w TDP we will see a quad core in iMac.
Apple should release a "headless tower" with conroe/kentsfield. That should be significantly cheaper than Macpro.
Josias
Aug 28, 12:26 PM
God I want a 15" Merom MBP, but I need to get rid of my MB first, and I want iLife '07 in them. I can't wait for Leopard. Please Steve, read it...:D
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:37 AM
You have to wonder how tenuous Apple's position was considering that they have settled so early (in huge lawsuit time). 100 million dollars is a lot of money to spend to get Creative off their back.
Hardly any at all. Apple has $10 billion in cash in the bank.
Even at a measily 3% interest, Apple will make $300 million in interest alone, not accounting for the fact that they are adding about $3 billion to their cash horde per year.
To look at it another way, iPod will generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue going forward for Apple. For Creative to settle for a measily $100 million out of tens of billions means they were desperate/forced to settle. Considering Creative all but accused Apple of stealing their design to make the iPod, settling for pennies on the dollar is not a sign that Creative was bargaining from a position of strength.
Rather, it was Apple probably dictating the terms.
Look at it another way. RIM - the makers of Blackberry - settled with NTP for $450 million after spending tens of millions of dollars and years fighting NTP in court. NTP, like Creative, claimed RIM infringed on important patents in making the popular Blackberry device.
During fiscal RIM made $2 billion total revenue. That's about as much iPod makes each quarter.
In other words, NTP was able to extract 4.5 times the licensing fee for a product that generates just 1/4 of the iPod's revenue.
I don't think it was Creative who won here. Creative, most likely, was desperate to settle so it could move onto other, more important battles, like figuring how it can survive the Zune onslaught (which is why becoming a paying member of the "Made for iPod" club is suddenly significant).
Hardly any at all. Apple has $10 billion in cash in the bank.
Even at a measily 3% interest, Apple will make $300 million in interest alone, not accounting for the fact that they are adding about $3 billion to their cash horde per year.
To look at it another way, iPod will generate tens of billions of dollars in revenue going forward for Apple. For Creative to settle for a measily $100 million out of tens of billions means they were desperate/forced to settle. Considering Creative all but accused Apple of stealing their design to make the iPod, settling for pennies on the dollar is not a sign that Creative was bargaining from a position of strength.
Rather, it was Apple probably dictating the terms.
Look at it another way. RIM - the makers of Blackberry - settled with NTP for $450 million after spending tens of millions of dollars and years fighting NTP in court. NTP, like Creative, claimed RIM infringed on important patents in making the popular Blackberry device.
During fiscal RIM made $2 billion total revenue. That's about as much iPod makes each quarter.
In other words, NTP was able to extract 4.5 times the licensing fee for a product that generates just 1/4 of the iPod's revenue.
I don't think it was Creative who won here. Creative, most likely, was desperate to settle so it could move onto other, more important battles, like figuring how it can survive the Zune onslaught (which is why becoming a paying member of the "Made for iPod" club is suddenly significant).
supmango
Mar 29, 01:33 PM
This is laughable at best. I would not want to be the one who decided it was a good idea to make a prediction this far out. Far too many unknown factors will happen between now and then.
kdarling
Apr 20, 09:25 AM
My favorite was a few years ago when Apple tried to stop New York (aka the Big Apple) from using this logo for their "Green New York" environmental project.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
Apple claimed it would "seriously injure the reputation which it has established for its goods and services."
.
MultiMediaWill
Apr 4, 11:46 AM
Steve Jobs: "you're robbing us wrong"
baryon
Apr 22, 02:20 AM
I have no idea how this would be useful. Buffer times, connection loss, no WiFi around, these are all problems that will prevent this from working.
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
What's wrong with storing music on hard drives locally?
retroactiv
Mar 29, 11:51 AM
Windows is as easy to use as SL. I'd say in terms of functionality Windows beats SL hands down. But most Apple fans idea of functionality in Windows is complexity and they prefer the dumbed down Mac operating system.
When I start using Mac OS X 2 years ago, it took me two solid months to get used to its ways. I can tell you, when I started out, I would not have described Apple's operating system as easy to use. Now I'm competent using two operating systems, and can appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of both. Neither are very difficult to use if you apply yourself to learning, but you have to put in the time to take full advantage of either one of them.
Well put :)
When I start using Mac OS X 2 years ago, it took me two solid months to get used to its ways. I can tell you, when I started out, I would not have described Apple's operating system as easy to use. Now I'm competent using two operating systems, and can appreciate the strengths and weaknesses of both. Neither are very difficult to use if you apply yourself to learning, but you have to put in the time to take full advantage of either one of them.
Well put :)
vincenz
Apr 20, 12:47 PM
Let's all wave and say hello, Big Brother.