gloss
Sep 14, 07:08 AM
Maybe the reason for not having a traditional keypad is that this is actually the iPhone Shuffle.
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
This was great.
Apple's market research team has concluded that people get tired of talking to the same people all time. And since the iPod Shuffle is such a hit playing songs randomly,
the new iPhone Shuffle will randomly dial numbers, so every call you make is never boring.
Got more than 240 numbers in your adressbook? No problem. Let iTunes autofill your iPhone shuffle and get a new telephonic experience every time. Mom follows Work. Home follows Pizza Parlor. iPhone shuffle loves to improvise. Take the Shuffle switch, for instance. Even if you�ve synced a particular call-list, you can shuffle numbers with a flick.
This was great.
seashellz
Nov 13, 01:54 PM
99% of these are in a huff self important 'tempest in a teapot' stories;
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
its not required-nay not even helpful to be a fanboy to point this out-just 2 good eyes and a brain;
Alway been complainers, always will be;
If the rules are clearly spelled out and they dont follow them-then they shouldnt be crybabies in public
simple
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
follow them
dont try to breach them
you dont need a PhD to understand this
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 01:04 PM
I would love to have a red iPod, but I don't know why we would ever give money to help fight AIDS on a continent where the people take NO precautions to prevent themselves from getting AIDS... I mean, sure many children are born with it in Africa, but for soooo many adults, they could prevent the spread if they would just be monogamous.
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
Unfortunately, your solution just doesn't work very well for actually solving the problem. A program just to educate Africans about how AIDS is spread would be an enormous cost alone. But I'm sure you're just looking to get flamed. Well, it won't be long now, just wait for it.
So there, I solved AIDS for free, no Oprah, no Bono, no Ipods. Just have sex only within a lifetime committed relationship and AIDS is all but gone in one generation!
I'll stick to my black aluminum iPod nano, anyhow. I just hope 10% of the proceeds didn't go to research finding cures for the black plague... or frostbite...
Unfortunately, your solution just doesn't work very well for actually solving the problem. A program just to educate Africans about how AIDS is spread would be an enormous cost alone. But I'm sure you're just looking to get flamed. Well, it won't be long now, just wait for it.
A.Fairhead
Sep 14, 08:21 AM
Whether the iPhone, if/on release, is in two models (similar to the nano/video relationship) or not, here's a mockup I've just created, depicting what I would expect of the device at the moment.
I don't usually do mock-ups (this is in fact my first one) but with all the numpad/touchscreen/slide-down ideas in the works, I wanted to show a solution which is based very much on what we have right now. It would make sense that the devices would sit snugly in line with Apple's other mobile products.
http://www.adamfairhead.co.uk/iphone.jpg
I don't usually do mock-ups (this is in fact my first one) but with all the numpad/touchscreen/slide-down ideas in the works, I wanted to show a solution which is based very much on what we have right now. It would make sense that the devices would sit snugly in line with Apple's other mobile products.
http://www.adamfairhead.co.uk/iphone.jpg
jaw04005
Nov 23, 12:34 PM
Airfoil Speakers Touch 1.0.2 is out. It restores the computer artwork. Apple finally did the right thing.
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/utm/2009/11/23/airfoil-speakers-touch-1-0-2-is-now-available/
Looks like Apple admitted it was in the wrong.
http://www.rogueamoeba.com/utm/2009/11/23/airfoil-speakers-touch-1-0-2-is-now-available/
Looks like Apple admitted it was in the wrong.
gnasher729
Jul 17, 11:47 AM
www.theregister.com quotes a chinese language website which apparently has leaked price information for the Merom chips. This is what it looks like: Merom will supposedly come in variants with 2.33, 2.16, 2.00, 1.83 and 1.66GHz. The versions with 2.00 or more GHz have four MB L2 cache, the slower ones have two MB L2 cache. Prices up to 2.16 are exactly the same as the current Yonah chips in the latest intel price list ($209, $241, $294 and $423 when buying 1000 chips), and the 2.33 GHz is supposed to cost $637.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
That means that Apple could afford to replace every Yonah with a Merom of same clock speed and sell them at exactly the same price. Even with current 32 bit applications, this should give 10 percent speed because of better execution units, and another 10 percent speed on the faster chips for the larger L2 cache, with another ten percent in the future with 64 bit applications. There might be a 2.33 GHz option for a premium price.
It seems that using Yonah would only make sense if Intel reduces Yonah prices a lot, and only for low-end products, like an entry level MacBook or the MacMini.
iJohnHenry
Apr 20, 08:09 AM
I'm still finding it hard not to believe this is a parody.
You can live a long time without heat, electricity, oil.
You can live for about 2 weeks without food.
You can live 3 days without water. ;)
A "North American Union" is a strategic planning balloon, or worse, and hardly a joke to Canadians.
You can live a long time without heat, electricity, oil.
You can live for about 2 weeks without food.
You can live 3 days without water. ;)
A "North American Union" is a strategic planning balloon, or worse, and hardly a joke to Canadians.
cwt1nospam
Jan 1, 07:18 PM
i think it's pretty common knowledge that Apple devices will be targeted more by virus making idiots in the future as they become more popular.
Targeting is one thing. Successfully attacking is a completely different animal. They've been targeting OS X since it came out a decade ago. Successful attacks range from barely a blip on the radar to nonexistent, depending on how you define success. There's no reason to believe that attacks on IOS will be half as successful as the pitiful attacks on OS X.
Targeting is one thing. Successfully attacking is a completely different animal. They've been targeting OS X since it came out a decade ago. Successful attacks range from barely a blip on the radar to nonexistent, depending on how you define success. There's no reason to believe that attacks on IOS will be half as successful as the pitiful attacks on OS X.
sevimli
Apr 20, 09:55 AM
This really sucks! :eek:
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 11:46 AM
It could be no other thing.
It could be many other things--Aperture, iSight, Cinema Displays, updated laptops, etc.
What it won't be is an iPhone.
It could be many other things--Aperture, iSight, Cinema Displays, updated laptops, etc.
What it won't be is an iPhone.
Unspeaked
Mar 29, 12:35 PM
But when I see an article predicting MS will dominate the smartphone market in 3 years, well, I find it totally amusing given Apple and Android's overall adoption rate today and the the fact that Apple, more than any company on the planet, really understands the 'user experience'. People like the iPhone and iPad not only because Apple Marketing is extraordinary but also, the SOFTWARE is great and the App Store is not bad either. After 25+years of being force-fed a weak OS (Windows, Windows 95, XP and Vista) I am not one to bet the future on Microsoft's ability to write a great, wildly accepted OS on any platform.
:cool:
Someone else who didn't bother reading the article, or even looking at the pictures.
No one is saying Microsoft will dominate the smartphone market. IDC is saying Google will dominate the smartphone market. They just also think Microsoft will have passed Apple as the next largest player.
:cool:
Someone else who didn't bother reading the article, or even looking at the pictures.
No one is saying Microsoft will dominate the smartphone market. IDC is saying Google will dominate the smartphone market. They just also think Microsoft will have passed Apple as the next largest player.
nsayer
Mar 23, 06:12 PM
136 negatives to this story ... nice. :rolleyes:
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
Yes. It actually does. Because without freedom, human life has no value.
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
Yes. It actually does. Because without freedom, human life has no value.
URFloorMatt
Mar 30, 01:17 PM
After a bit of thought I think I'm siding with Apple... here's why:
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...Disagree because "Ope System" is not the accepted abbreviation: "OS" is. Do you think Microsoft should be able to rename Windows OS and then trademark OS? Of course not, and accordingly Apple shouldn't get a trademark on App Store.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...Disagree because "Ope System" is not the accepted abbreviation: "OS" is. Do you think Microsoft should be able to rename Windows OS and then trademark OS? Of course not, and accordingly Apple shouldn't get a trademark on App Store.
Apple should lose this dispute on the merits. Whether they do or not will depend on the caliber of their lawyers. On the two briefs we've seen so far, Apple clearly has some advantage, so they might pull this out nonetheless.
cwt1nospam
Feb 1, 11:07 AM
Yeah, the fact that there are no Mac viruses and Mac trojans are spectacularly unsuccessful means nothing. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
And IOS devices are sitting ducks, being locked down to the point where users cannot load un-vetted applications. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sheesh!
And IOS devices are sitting ducks, being locked down to the point where users cannot load un-vetted applications. :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
Sheesh!
mmcc
Apr 22, 08:47 AM
when ur at ur home you'd be connected to wifi so usage wouldn't be a problem. i don't know why anyone pays for the $15/month plan that's a complete ripoff to begin with.
My wife and I both opted for the 200MB plan because our usage over the previous year never exceeded that amount (and often never got close) even while on vacation and using Maps. Therefore paying twice that, or more, for unlimited usage is/was a waste of $. For two iPhones that saved $360/yr which is substantial for us.
If the Apple service works like DropBox to sync all my music on all my iTunes/iPod devices AND is only active over WiFi, then I will probably make use of the service since it would essentially be the wireless syncing for which many have been asking.
As an on-the-go music stream over cell service it is useless to me.
My wife and I both opted for the 200MB plan because our usage over the previous year never exceeded that amount (and often never got close) even while on vacation and using Maps. Therefore paying twice that, or more, for unlimited usage is/was a waste of $. For two iPhones that saved $360/yr which is substantial for us.
If the Apple service works like DropBox to sync all my music on all my iTunes/iPod devices AND is only active over WiFi, then I will probably make use of the service since it would essentially be the wireless syncing for which many have been asking.
As an on-the-go music stream over cell service it is useless to me.
segfaultdotorg
May 3, 02:32 PM
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
Perhaps they're comparing the old i7 to the new i7?
powerbuddy
Sep 5, 01:52 PM
9.99? you can rent movies from Mlink or Cinemanow for 4.99 or DVR's from 3.99. Just stupid if we dont keep to buy and keep the movie for that price.
toddybody
Mar 22, 03:12 PM
Now I can rid myself of my 27" i7 2009 iMac.
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Ha ha ha ha! GTX 560 ti! Youre a funny guy! Apple always fails on it's GPU choices. :(
Things that I would see/would like to see on the new iMacs:
- Thunderbolt (2 ports would be nice)
- Target DisplayPort Mode with HDMI + HDMI audio in, without needing to fully power up the entire computer (and a toggle that doesn't require an Apple keyboard)
- USB3 (I know Intel isn't natively putting USB3 on their chipsets until Ivy Bridge, but Apple could do the right thing and add this)
- get rid of the internal speakers as an option for more cooling
- at least a Radeon 6850 or GeForce GTX 560 Ti (preferably the nVidia card for CUDA/HW accelerated stuff) with at least 1 (2 please) GB of GDDR5 (I'm still boggled why they even offered a 256MB 6490 on the MacBook Pro)
- easily accessible 2.5" port for an SSD (doubt it)
- i7-2600 at the high end (Apple won't sell the K version, unless they go nuts and allow overclocking)
- a side mounted USB port or 2 would be nice, hell, more USB ports period (6-8) would be nice
- a second Firewire 800 (or 1600 if Apple is feeling frisky) port
- matte screen option (this, like the 2.5" bay, has a snowballs' chance in hell)
- Blu-Ray (see my note on the matte screen)
Wonder if Apple will allow for the full 32GB support that the Sandy Bridge processors can fully take, and the DDR3-1600 speeds, since they are limiting both on the MacBook Pros at the moment.
Ha ha ha ha! GTX 560 ti! Youre a funny guy! Apple always fails on it's GPU choices. :(
ravenvii
Apr 14, 02:35 PM
Well that settles it, I know what I'm waiting for.
poppe
Sep 4, 08:49 PM
Who wants to be that Steve, when he gets his live press release that is streaming to London or where ever it was, will be using this new technology to show how wonderful it works.
nemaslov
Sep 26, 11:58 AM
Hey the Cingular deal is only six months exclusive, like the RAZR was. So you can all get it probably many more places afterwards and all of the bugs will be worked out by then.. I use Cingular and LOVE it due to the coverage in San Francisco which is difficult due to the seven hills. May other carriers I tried before including verizon and t mobile were much worse here.
Buy I have an 80GB iPod with 18,ooo songs so this thing will me useless to me. But it sure sounds cool!!
Buy I have an 80GB iPod with 18,ooo songs so this thing will me useless to me. But it sure sounds cool!!
miranon
Aug 28, 05:53 PM
They were not the first with core duo, nor with woodrest.
cardude280
May 3, 11:33 AM
As before, that support is entirely derived from ATI's GPUs and the available number of outputs.
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
You can get 5 Mini-DisplayPort connectors on a single slot video card.
but i thought half the point of TB was that you would only need one output from the computer, and since we don't have any TB displays (or anything for that matter) how do we know that the ports are limited to one display?
MagnusVonMagnum
Apr 16, 09:23 AM
Or you could just buy a multi-port Thunderbolt adapter(that supports USB 3) for less than $10 when they are released making your half-baked scenario completely worthless.
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also. From your ass perhaps?
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.
Yes because everyone loves to carry around external breakout boxes with their sleek portable Macbooks.... :rolleyes:
And $10? For Thunderbolt? You are DREAMING. You can't even get a decent USB2 hub for $10.
Oh and why would someone pay extra money for a drive that can reach at the LOWEST twice the performance of USB 3? Gee, I wonder. I'd love to know where you got the sales figures from also. From your ass perhaps?
Twice the performance of USB3? That would be Thunderbolt's maximum possible data rate. No single consumer hard drive on earth supports that kind of speed (let alone even USB3's top speed) so I haven't a clue what you're getting at. Why would someone pay MORE to get a drive that is no faster than a USB3 drive? They would almost certainly have to as demand determines price/availability and there is nearly zero demand for TB devices at this point in time while USB3 are backwards compatible with the vast majority of the computers on the planet. My sales figures are based on the relative cost of drives with Firewire interfaces (the closest example that already exists to Thunderbolt in terms of technology versus low demand) against drives that only support USB2 and/or USB3. There is always a large premium for a drive with a FW interface, even today when a fair amount of computers exist with FW interfaces (i.e. SOME demand). Therefore TB compatible drives will likely cost considerably more money than USB3 drives for the SAME underlying drive. You will pay a premium for the interface just like Firewire to offset the higher costs of low production numbers created by little demand compared to USB3/2 interfaces. There will be no speed advantage on a consumer drive because no consumer drive even comes CLOSE to the limits of either interface. So unlike YOUR $10 scenario, I didn't just make a number up out of thin air. Furthermore, the scenario is hardly half-baked given USB drives are already common at places like Best Buy (I personally already own TWO 3TB USB3 drives) so the unlikely 'friend' in the stated scenario would be more likely to already own a USB3 drive than a currently non-existent TB drive that will undoubtedly cost MORE when it does finally arrive.
TB is more suited to high-end professional use where maximum overall data throughput (probably across multiple banks of drives per interface) and low overhead is desired (e.g. professional video, future high-speed server banks, live audio, etc.) The average consumer doesn't want to pay $50-100 more for FW800 drive interface over USB2 today (nor is their computer even likely to have FW if it's not a Mac) even if does have a benefit over USB2. They certainly aren't going to want to pay a potentially larger premium to get the same relative performance (perhaps with a bit of CPU overhead differences) versus USB3 with today's drives that don't come near USB3 levels, let alone Thunderbolt.
Be my guest and continue to insult and rant and dream big of TB heaven where USB doesn't exist. I live in a more practical and logical world.