RCGMac
Mar 29, 10:07 AM
Can't store my music on my work machines.
Similar issue here. I have been hooking my phone to my computer to listen to music while at work. Now I can dump all my music into the cloud and listen.
Similar issue here. I have been hooking my phone to my computer to listen to music while at work. Now I can dump all my music into the cloud and listen.
harrymerkin
Apr 25, 09:53 AM
Who cares if they do track me? people actually think they are of importance that apple wants to know there whereabouts of some ******* with an Iphone 4?
apolloa
Apr 21, 06:53 PM
You know, you would have to say 'About friggin time APPLE!!'
Interesting idea for design though, tower case and rack mountable, can see that being very popular :)
Interesting idea for design though, tower case and rack mountable, can see that being very popular :)
illbeback
Apr 5, 04:31 PM
Jobs should just make an iCar and show Toyota how to do it!
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
wclyffe
Jan 23, 02:34 PM
I am new to this forum, and a true novice with tomtom and car kits. I just downloaded the application onto my iPhone, and then setup the car kit. It works fine. What I have is probably what sounds like the dumbest of questions:
What is the car kit's resistance to cold temperatures? I live in Cleveland, OH and if I live the mount in the car for a whole day during winter, will the chips or anything be damaged?
Do you advice dismounting the kit every time I park for a few hours, and/or for the night? My garage is not heated.
Thanks!
I use to live in Minneapolis so I understand these kind of concerns, but I'm really not sure. My instinct is to say take it in overnight, but what a pain! It gets pretty cold where you are, but not bitter cold like in MN. Why not email TomTom and ask them by sending the temperature range for your area?
What is the car kit's resistance to cold temperatures? I live in Cleveland, OH and if I live the mount in the car for a whole day during winter, will the chips or anything be damaged?
Do you advice dismounting the kit every time I park for a few hours, and/or for the night? My garage is not heated.
Thanks!
I use to live in Minneapolis so I understand these kind of concerns, but I'm really not sure. My instinct is to say take it in overnight, but what a pain! It gets pretty cold where you are, but not bitter cold like in MN. Why not email TomTom and ask them by sending the temperature range for your area?
bedifferent
Apr 22, 04:29 PM
Steve: "Introducing, the new iRack!" :D
Madtv - Apple iRack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE)
Best. Skit. Ever.
Madtv - Apple iRack (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw2nkoGLhrE)
Best. Skit. Ever.
sth
Apr 20, 02:08 AM
People underestimate how big of a change the 3GS was on the hardware side. It was based on a whole different architecture (ARM Cortex A8 CPU + PowerVR SGX535 GPU, same as the later A4-based devices but at a lower clock speed).
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
Of course, the iPhone4 was the biggest refresh to the iPhone ever since the original was introduced, but I would call the 3GS number 2 on that list.
The iPhone 3G on the other hand was so close to the original iPhone in terms of hardware, that it didn't even get it's own internal revision number.
Why do we still call it iPhone 5? Everything points to iPhone 4S.
IMHO the reason why the 3GS was named like that was to bring the iPhone names in line with the respective hardware generation. In other words: New iPhones will most likely just be called iPhone 5/6/7...
to really stay ahead of the market Apple will need to:
add a 4" screen
keep the same form factor
add the dual core A5 processor
update the GPU to something similar (but most likely not as powerful) as in the iPad 2
while keeping the same or possibly even improving the battery life
add a 64GB version
(possible 8 MP backlit CMOS sensor camera along side possible 1080p recording since the iPad can now output in full 1080p through HDMI)
I guess the CPU/GPU will be the same as on the iPad 2, probably with slightly lower Clock speeds, just as they did with the iPhone4 and the iPad.
Don't know about the screen, though. I'd really like to see them getting rid of the black borders left and right, but I don't think they'll be able to fit a 4" screen without making the device physically larger. Also they couldn't just change the resolution because that would break all apps. I'd say either the device gets slightly smaller or no change at all. There's a slim chance of a just slightly bigger screen (3.7" or something like that) at the same resolution but I somehow don't think Apple would do such a thing.
slackintosh
Jul 30, 09:53 PM
As the previous post states, the typeface of that add should have caught anyone, apple undertook a subtle identity change around the time it introduced G4 ibooks, most significant was a change in typeface.....
I think the rumour is nothing but a rumour, wasn't it a similar mysterious source who mentioned to a gas station attendant the pending arrival of 42" Plasmas or some $#!+???
I think the rumour is nothing but a rumour, wasn't it a similar mysterious source who mentioned to a gas station attendant the pending arrival of 42" Plasmas or some $#!+???
balamw
Nov 27, 01:04 AM
The iBook is a close also ran IMHO. Given the comments here there is a desire for something the size of the 10" Sony sub-notebook that would give users the option of a touch screen and keyboard. In particular, if it were very near or under the $1000 price point.
Perhaps it helps to think of the tablet as an iPod video with optional KB & mouse? Or a mini iMac with a battery. Or maybe even iTV to go! :p
I think the market for a well-executed device like this is much larger than one might think, particularly after the last time I flew long distance in coach and saw lots of folks trying to watch DVDs on their 15" Windows notebooks and trying to balance them on their laps partially open to as to not interfere with the seatback in front of them.
B
Perhaps it helps to think of the tablet as an iPod video with optional KB & mouse? Or a mini iMac with a battery. Or maybe even iTV to go! :p
I think the market for a well-executed device like this is much larger than one might think, particularly after the last time I flew long distance in coach and saw lots of folks trying to watch DVDs on their 15" Windows notebooks and trying to balance them on their laps partially open to as to not interfere with the seatback in front of them.
B
-Damian
May 4, 04:20 PM
Made a poll in the Mac OS X Lion forums. Vote your preferred way of distribution :)
Short hairstyles for 2009
short prom hairstyles
medium length hairstyles with
Medium Hairstyles for Women
hairstyles women over 40
vintage hair styles
styles for women over 40quot;,
short hair cuts styles
elgrecomac
Apr 5, 04:43 PM
Look who is acting like Big Brother...
Jail breaking, as an act, is not illegal. Apple is flexing its influence as a it has a right to do. they are worried/scared that the jail breaking phenomenon is spreading to far and this seems like a desperate act.
AND they are worried about a secondary app market place. Hmmm, I'm no lawyer but is there may be an anti-trust case building against Apple.
And as for the warranty...it is a non-issue. Your fallback is to restore to standard iOS. o big deal.
It too more than 30 years but Apple is acting like Microsoft!
-----
IP4 4.3.1 jailbroken, of course. iPad 2, MBP 17"
Jail breaking, as an act, is not illegal. Apple is flexing its influence as a it has a right to do. they are worried/scared that the jail breaking phenomenon is spreading to far and this seems like a desperate act.
AND they are worried about a secondary app market place. Hmmm, I'm no lawyer but is there may be an anti-trust case building against Apple.
And as for the warranty...it is a non-issue. Your fallback is to restore to standard iOS. o big deal.
It too more than 30 years but Apple is acting like Microsoft!
-----
IP4 4.3.1 jailbroken, of course. iPad 2, MBP 17"
doctor-don
Apr 26, 02:57 PM
One interesting thing to note. Apple held 25% of recent acquirers with 2 phone models. The iPhone 4 and iPhone 3GS. They are also on only 2 carriers, and have only been with Verizon for part of the time leading up to the march survey. Android however is on dozens of handsets and all four US carriers. I would say apple is doing amazingly well when you consider those specifics.
I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Too bad Apple didn't see the light and make its iPhone available across all carriers.
I am not worried about iOS not having a larger chunk of the market, I am blown away that it has 25%.
Too bad Apple didn't see the light and make its iPhone available across all carriers.
acslater017
Mar 30, 07:02 PM
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
I don't throw the word "troll" around much (it's overused) but stop trolling.
-Do we know the price?
-Have you heard any credible information that the Macs will EVER only use the App Store?
-how is Lion "nothing" - it unifies the window/Space/Dashboard viewing systems, it rethinks the entire process of file saving and revision, it adds tons of useful multitouch gestures, it implements new ways of downloading/sorting/viewing/launching apps, it adds new methods of wireless file sharing and adds security features.
Tell me, what aspect of personal computing in OS X should be improved, and how would you do it
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
I don't throw the word "troll" around much (it's overused) but stop trolling.
-Do we know the price?
-Have you heard any credible information that the Macs will EVER only use the App Store?
-how is Lion "nothing" - it unifies the window/Space/Dashboard viewing systems, it rethinks the entire process of file saving and revision, it adds tons of useful multitouch gestures, it implements new ways of downloading/sorting/viewing/launching apps, it adds new methods of wireless file sharing and adds security features.
Tell me, what aspect of personal computing in OS X should be improved, and how would you do it
heesey1010
Jul 21, 08:59 PM
I hope Meroms end up in MBs by the end of this year
And this is a little off-topic, but is it too late to speculate a release date for any other products? Only thing I can speculate is that something might be released in/around September, because the Mac + iPod rebate ends September 16th, and if anyone recalls last year, the Nano was intro'd in September.
I think it's too early for updated MBs, but I wish there'd be some. Either that, or cheaper MBPs with Merom.
And this is a little off-topic, but is it too late to speculate a release date for any other products? Only thing I can speculate is that something might be released in/around September, because the Mac + iPod rebate ends September 16th, and if anyone recalls last year, the Nano was intro'd in September.
I think it's too early for updated MBs, but I wish there'd be some. Either that, or cheaper MBPs with Merom.
Nuvi
May 7, 04:46 PM
Only if you choose to "sync" your data in the preferences as was stated before in this thread so in fact iDisk out of the box does "not" work like Drop Box. I think WebDAV may be a speed culprit as well but if anyone knows of a blazing fast WebDAV service chime in.
I would say thats bit trivial since if you don't need to watch for amount data transfer the logical choice is "Automatic". If you pay for according to transfer or if there are limitations on it (tethering with some service providers etc.) you would then be better off with the "Manual" option. In any case you are always working with local files which are sitting in you local HD. Even if you have chosen "Manual" and then sync the transfer happens in the background. Anyway, you're correct that WebDAV is what really sets these apart (and not in the good way from Apple's perspective). Also I'm betting my money on low number of data centers and lack of spread (due to global variations in transfer speeds).
What actually worries me is the quality of service if Apple decides to make MobilMe a free service. In its current form iDisk is far from being snappy™ but what happens when the masses start rolling in? One gigantic data center means very little in global perspective. You need wide spread of them all around the world if you want to offer free and reliable cloud services. Just looking at Google data centers in 2008 gives good idea what was required back then... I'm well aware that Google is a different kind of beast but it's a beast with good access and response.
Google data centers in 2008:
http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/04/11/map-of-all-google-data-center-locations/
I would say thats bit trivial since if you don't need to watch for amount data transfer the logical choice is "Automatic". If you pay for according to transfer or if there are limitations on it (tethering with some service providers etc.) you would then be better off with the "Manual" option. In any case you are always working with local files which are sitting in you local HD. Even if you have chosen "Manual" and then sync the transfer happens in the background. Anyway, you're correct that WebDAV is what really sets these apart (and not in the good way from Apple's perspective). Also I'm betting my money on low number of data centers and lack of spread (due to global variations in transfer speeds).
What actually worries me is the quality of service if Apple decides to make MobilMe a free service. In its current form iDisk is far from being snappy™ but what happens when the masses start rolling in? One gigantic data center means very little in global perspective. You need wide spread of them all around the world if you want to offer free and reliable cloud services. Just looking at Google data centers in 2008 gives good idea what was required back then... I'm well aware that Google is a different kind of beast but it's a beast with good access and response.
Google data centers in 2008:
http://royal.pingdom.com/2008/04/11/map-of-all-google-data-center-locations/
milo
Sep 11, 01:14 PM
The only things comin out are the Video Rental service, and a size increase for the Nano.
Move along.
Should we laugh at you now, or wait until the announcment? :rolleyes:
Rumor has it Steve wasn't able to secure download rights..only rental. Guess we'll find out by this time tomorrow.
What's your source? Every rumor site I've seen (and especially Appleinsider, which has the best record lately) says sales.
I want firewire aswell usb 1 is far toooo slow. How my sposed to transfer films with USB, It will take all day.
With USB2, which transfers to iPod about the same speed as FW.
Move along.
Should we laugh at you now, or wait until the announcment? :rolleyes:
Rumor has it Steve wasn't able to secure download rights..only rental. Guess we'll find out by this time tomorrow.
What's your source? Every rumor site I've seen (and especially Appleinsider, which has the best record lately) says sales.
I want firewire aswell usb 1 is far toooo slow. How my sposed to transfer films with USB, It will take all day.
With USB2, which transfers to iPod about the same speed as FW.
KnightWRX
May 4, 08:08 PM
But likely not if the mood strikes you at 2 AM, or on a holiday.
You don't have to convince me that downloads are good, again, I have been installing my OSes over the Internet since the 90s. Apple is late to this game.
But the premise here was that it was "easier". It isn't. It might be more convenient for some people, but the Mac App Store doesn't make it any easier than it was from physical media.
You don't have to convince me that downloads are good, again, I have been installing my OSes over the Internet since the 90s. Apple is late to this game.
But the premise here was that it was "easier". It isn't. It might be more convenient for some people, but the Mac App Store doesn't make it any easier than it was from physical media.
Benjy91
Mar 27, 05:56 AM
Going to be fun on my 500MB data limit.
Unorthodox
Aug 2, 12:09 PM
What time is the QT stream likely to be uploaded at Apple.com?
BTW I know its not a live feed!
2 hours after the keynote.
OK, I just made that up. Now that I have stated an incorrect fact, this post should get flooded with replies toting the correct answer.
I can't be avoided, watch as they fall prey to my cunning trap.
Baw ha ha.
w00t! 4 days 23 hours 51 minuets! w00t! w00!
BTW I know its not a live feed!
2 hours after the keynote.
OK, I just made that up. Now that I have stated an incorrect fact, this post should get flooded with replies toting the correct answer.
I can't be avoided, watch as they fall prey to my cunning trap.
Baw ha ha.
w00t! 4 days 23 hours 51 minuets! w00t! w00!
gnasher729
Aug 4, 02:16 PM
I don't see why Apple would put a mobile chip into the iMac. I bought one for my work around a month ago and yes, its portable but not that portable,
Well, there is a portable chip in it right now...
Remember, a chip is not "portable" because it is less heavy, but because it takes less power. Conroe takes twice the power of Meron. There is a heating problem with twice the power in an iMac. I am not saying it cannot be cooled down, but it would be really hard to cool it down without making it louder.
Well, there is a portable chip in it right now...
Remember, a chip is not "portable" because it is less heavy, but because it takes less power. Conroe takes twice the power of Meron. There is a heating problem with twice the power in an iMac. I am not saying it cannot be cooled down, but it would be really hard to cool it down without making it louder.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:14 PM
i hope apple comes out with a shoe phone, something the pink panther or inspector gadget would use.
Would you believe agent Maxwell Smart?
https://www.cia.gov/spy_fi/graphics/shoe_phone.jpg
Would you believe agent Maxwell Smart?
https://www.cia.gov/spy_fi/graphics/shoe_phone.jpg
Dr.Gargoyle
Sep 11, 03:19 AM
i present you...
the mediamac:
http://www.twirl.ch/mc/other/mediamac.jpg
I wouldn't be surprised if a MediaMac had the same form factor as the Mac Mini. However, a Media Mac needs 3.5'' HD to keep the price resonable.
the mediamac:
http://www.twirl.ch/mc/other/mediamac.jpg
I wouldn't be surprised if a MediaMac had the same form factor as the Mac Mini. However, a Media Mac needs 3.5'' HD to keep the price resonable.
asleep
Mar 28, 11:33 AM
I've always expected Apple to switch to a pre-Christmas release -- like October/November -- to dominate the "Christmas present chatter" every year.
This appears to be the best chance for that to happen.
This appears to be the best chance for that to happen.