vincenz
Apr 29, 04:08 PM
Not bad, not bad, but it almost looks like a move that's a little too late...
spaceballl
Apr 22, 06:54 PM
This mockup does not put the mute rocker on the side - whoops.
As long as battery life and CPU speed go up, i'll be a happy camper.
As long as battery life and CPU speed go up, i'll be a happy camper.
Jazwire
May 1, 10:32 PM
How long till pics are leaked?
playaj82
Jul 26, 02:02 PM
Have you see the "gestures" video? It would be done by physically touching the iPod. No camera needed.
Do you have a link? I have not seen them.
Do you have a link? I have not seen them.
more...
theBB
Jul 21, 12:13 PM
I didn't buy my Mac to be popular and I don't particularly care that lots of people are (or are not) using them. It's just an irrelevant metric to me.
Neither did I, but more market share means more software developers and more apps. That's the only reason I care.
Neither did I, but more market share means more software developers and more apps. That's the only reason I care.
MacYale
Apr 22, 06:59 PM
The iphone 4 has an amazing design. the metal band is epic. the consistent thickness from top to bottom is ideal. it's incredible. the only thing i want improved is a larger screen�i was hoping for 4", but i'll take 3.7. i really don't see why they would do a design after 1 gen, especially one that seems to step backward into the ipod touch again. in fact, i would believe it more likely tha the next ipod touch would look more like the iphone 4.
more...
mkjj
Jul 25, 09:16 AM
Your kidding?
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
http://homepage.mac.com/markjjohnson/.cv/markjjohnson/Sites/.Pictures/Collection/AdjKey.jpg-thumb_140_105.jpg
May have been $250! released in 1992, earliest UK price I can find (old MacFormat 1996) it was still �149 GBP and that was 4 years after release
mdriftmeyer
Jul 21, 01:26 PM
schiller also said � i think the day before boot camp was announced � that apple wouldn't prevent users from putting windows on the intel macs, but they wouldn't facilitate it either.
apple is notorious for saying one thing and then turning around and doing the exact opposite the video ipod being a perfect example. i'm not saying it will happen, i'm just saying don't put much stock in comments from apple execs regarding future products.
What's your point?
Dual Boot allowing for multiple OS's to be selected at boot time vs. true virtualization allowing multiple OS's to be instantiated within OS X, albeit at a reduced performance aren't contradicting Phil's two statements.
We provide the boot loader.
Parallels provides the virtual solution. If you want native speed then you can run reboot into a different OS with boot camp. If you don't then go with Parallels.
apple is notorious for saying one thing and then turning around and doing the exact opposite the video ipod being a perfect example. i'm not saying it will happen, i'm just saying don't put much stock in comments from apple execs regarding future products.
What's your point?
Dual Boot allowing for multiple OS's to be selected at boot time vs. true virtualization allowing multiple OS's to be instantiated within OS X, albeit at a reduced performance aren't contradicting Phil's two statements.
We provide the boot loader.
Parallels provides the virtual solution. If you want native speed then you can run reboot into a different OS with boot camp. If you don't then go with Parallels.
more...
kernkraft
Jun 6, 09:29 AM
CNET has a good video about Apple's refund. If you mistakenly purchased, you have a 90 day period to rectify the problem and Apple deals with it, not the developer.
Even 7 days is not enough to see your bank statement, so I wouldn't be surprised if Android had a similar period.
Besides, no sane company wants to have this sort of bad publicity. It's fairly obvious that people make mistakes.
Somebody suggested that the developer would lose Apple's $300 cut - that's not the case.
Even 7 days is not enough to see your bank statement, so I wouldn't be surprised if Android had a similar period.
Besides, no sane company wants to have this sort of bad publicity. It's fairly obvious that people make mistakes.
Somebody suggested that the developer would lose Apple's $300 cut - that's not the case.
odedia
Jul 10, 01:46 PM
Maybe they'll even offer ground-breaking features like bi-directional text editing :rolleyes:
Seriously, if Apple wants to compete in the word processing field, they need to start addressing people around the world, not just those who they consider guranteed target audience.
Seriously, if Apple wants to compete in the word processing field, they need to start addressing people around the world, not just those who they consider guranteed target audience.
more...
Lutris
Mar 31, 12:14 PM
Anyone else keep getting distracted by an urge to tear off the little torn bits of the 'previous' sheet of paper? :rolleyes:
FloatingBones
Nov 23, 11:35 PM
I'll say this one last time. Flash is not an app! It's a method of delivering content on a web site.
If there were not Flash applications, then Adobe would not have developed and released its Packager for iPhone (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/packagerforiphone/).
Flash is also a way to deliver video. The Skyfire App (http://skyfire.com/product/iphone) is a way for iOS users to view those legacy Flash videos. When sites update their video to be HTML compliant, bridging services like Skyfire will no longer be needed for that conversion.
Finally, as you note, Flash is also a way to deliver web content.
You cannot make iOS "apps" to replace a web page dude.
Why not? That sounds like the exact purpose of Adobe's new packager tool.
As long as there are Flash only web sites, there will be a demand for Flash plugins.
Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins.
As long as websites serve up some or all of their content solely through Flash, they will be shut out from users on those iOS devices. Adobe recognizes this shortcoming in Flash and is rapidly developing a Flash to HTML5 converter (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999):
Here's what Adobe blogged about that (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html) after a demo at their Adobe MAX 2010 conference in October:
How could I create rich experiences that run on desktops (where Flash is the obvious, consistent (cross-browser/-platform) choice) and on iOS devices where Flash isn�t allowed? I�d have to create two versions of a everything�one Flash, and one HTML5*. Good luck getting clients to double their budgets, though, and yet they don�t want richness cut in half.
So, the opportunity: Cut the cost of targeting multiple runtimes & we�ll deliver real wins: more richness for clients, and a competitive advantage for customers. [...]
Adobe lives or dies by its ability to help customers solve real problems. That means putting pragmatism ahead of ideology.
Once a website has gone through the process of serving up HTML5, why bother serving up Flash to anybody? This tool will continue to lessen the need for Flash on the browser for everybody.
This Skyfire app is proof of that.
Not exactly. Skyfire is not optimal for iPhone users, because videos they request have to go through Skyfire's servers for conversion. It's also not a complete solution for websites, because only a fraction of the iOS users will purchase the Skyfire app. Skyfire functions as a bridging app to give websites access to iOS users until they convert their video inventory to HTML5.
I won't bother arguing anymore about the other things as it's a complete waste of my time.
That would be good.
Ironically, Adobe's new conversion tools will accelerate the demise of Flash on the web.
If there were not Flash applications, then Adobe would not have developed and released its Packager for iPhone (http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/packagerforiphone/).
Flash is also a way to deliver video. The Skyfire App (http://skyfire.com/product/iphone) is a way for iOS users to view those legacy Flash videos. When sites update their video to be HTML compliant, bridging services like Skyfire will no longer be needed for that conversion.
Finally, as you note, Flash is also a way to deliver web content.
You cannot make iOS "apps" to replace a web page dude.
Why not? That sounds like the exact purpose of Adobe's new packager tool.
As long as there are Flash only web sites, there will be a demand for Flash plugins.
Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins.
As long as websites serve up some or all of their content solely through Flash, they will be shut out from users on those iOS devices. Adobe recognizes this shortcoming in Flash and is rapidly developing a Flash to HTML5 converter (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999):
Here's what Adobe blogged about that (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html) after a demo at their Adobe MAX 2010 conference in October:
How could I create rich experiences that run on desktops (where Flash is the obvious, consistent (cross-browser/-platform) choice) and on iOS devices where Flash isn�t allowed? I�d have to create two versions of a everything�one Flash, and one HTML5*. Good luck getting clients to double their budgets, though, and yet they don�t want richness cut in half.
So, the opportunity: Cut the cost of targeting multiple runtimes & we�ll deliver real wins: more richness for clients, and a competitive advantage for customers. [...]
Adobe lives or dies by its ability to help customers solve real problems. That means putting pragmatism ahead of ideology.
Once a website has gone through the process of serving up HTML5, why bother serving up Flash to anybody? This tool will continue to lessen the need for Flash on the browser for everybody.
This Skyfire app is proof of that.
Not exactly. Skyfire is not optimal for iPhone users, because videos they request have to go through Skyfire's servers for conversion. It's also not a complete solution for websites, because only a fraction of the iOS users will purchase the Skyfire app. Skyfire functions as a bridging app to give websites access to iOS users until they convert their video inventory to HTML5.
I won't bother arguing anymore about the other things as it's a complete waste of my time.
That would be good.
Ironically, Adobe's new conversion tools will accelerate the demise of Flash on the web.
more...
kernkraft
Oct 26, 09:58 PM
I want world peace and everybody in the world be safe, fed and loved.
I'm only kidding. I want my well-deserved anal.
I'm only kidding. I want my well-deserved anal.
haveaniceday91
May 3, 08:17 AM
Finally!
I was going to spring for the refurb i5 at $1449 but then I saw the late 2009 i7 for $1369 and was wondering which model I should go for.
I'm honestly leaning towards the i7 and have a lot of faith in apple refurb products.
I was going to spring for the refurb i5 at $1449 but then I saw the late 2009 i7 for $1369 and was wondering which model I should go for.
I'm honestly leaning towards the i7 and have a lot of faith in apple refurb products.
more...
DMann
Oct 1, 02:36 PM
AT&T has hands down the worst service I have ever experienced.
It is as though they were operating in an emerging mobile phone world sometime in the early 80's when phones were the size of a Sat phone or you carried it in its own portable case.
In all the years I was with Verizon I had maybe 10 dropped calls.
They should be ashamed of themselves. But really what do they care, they have the iphone exclusively for the time being.
I must say this reflects poorly on Apple who picked these idiots in the first place.
Honestly, on a day to day basis, I think about going back and just giving up, the service is just terrible and I live in NYC! Where there are towers everywhere, and I usually have 5 bars.
Despicable profit seeking, customer service unfriendly whores is what they are!Blame Verizon then. Apple approached Verizon first, and Verizon was unwilling to allow Apple to have full control over the OS, the design of the iPhone
itself, or to make concessions regarding profit sharing. CDMA would not have been an ideal choice for a global phone, in any event.
Hi,
I'm thinking of switching from Verizon to AT&T to get the iPhone. However, I'm hearing horror stories of up to 30% dropped calls in the NY area.
For all iPhone/AT&T users in northern NJ and NYC area, can you verify that you experience around 30% of dropped calls?? is this true??
http://gizmodo.com/5370493/apple-genius-bar-iphones-30-call-drop-is-normal-in-new-york
I want the iPhone, but not if it comes with such bad service!!
Thank you,
olimits7Northern NJ: zero dropped calls, excellent coverage overall.
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
It is as though they were operating in an emerging mobile phone world sometime in the early 80's when phones were the size of a Sat phone or you carried it in its own portable case.
In all the years I was with Verizon I had maybe 10 dropped calls.
They should be ashamed of themselves. But really what do they care, they have the iphone exclusively for the time being.
I must say this reflects poorly on Apple who picked these idiots in the first place.
Honestly, on a day to day basis, I think about going back and just giving up, the service is just terrible and I live in NYC! Where there are towers everywhere, and I usually have 5 bars.
Despicable profit seeking, customer service unfriendly whores is what they are!Blame Verizon then. Apple approached Verizon first, and Verizon was unwilling to allow Apple to have full control over the OS, the design of the iPhone
itself, or to make concessions regarding profit sharing. CDMA would not have been an ideal choice for a global phone, in any event.
Hi,
I'm thinking of switching from Verizon to AT&T to get the iPhone. However, I'm hearing horror stories of up to 30% dropped calls in the NY area.
For all iPhone/AT&T users in northern NJ and NYC area, can you verify that you experience around 30% of dropped calls?? is this true??
http://gizmodo.com/5370493/apple-genius-bar-iphones-30-call-drop-is-normal-in-new-york
I want the iPhone, but not if it comes with such bad service!!
Thank you,
olimits7Northern NJ: zero dropped calls, excellent coverage overall.
NoNothing
Mar 29, 01:50 PM
The difference being:
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
Another big reason is Google had pre-announced Google I/O with pre-registration active for over a week. This is important if you need to work out schedules at work and such. With Apple, you had 1day to work that out. For Google I/O, you had over a week to decide if the schedule worked for you.
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
Another big reason is Google had pre-announced Google I/O with pre-registration active for over a week. This is important if you need to work out schedules at work and such. With Apple, you had 1day to work that out. For Google I/O, you had over a week to decide if the schedule worked for you.
more...
skunk
Feb 12, 07:12 PM
He makes me think of his father: in two or three years, Aaron Sorkin will put together a TV series where Charlie Sheen plays the (heretofore unmentioned) son of Jed Bartlett, who has somehow managed to become president...
The Wasted Wing?It's happened before...
The Wasted Wing?It's happened before...
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Surf and Turf
Oct 24, 07:49 AM
Santa rosa platform is where it's at
CEAbiscuit
Jul 25, 08:12 AM
I wonder if it will moo?;)
scottnj1966
Sep 30, 05:27 AM
I really think AT&T cannot make it better.
MMS is not looking that good either. I know many that still cannot use it.
Dropped calls all the time. The alien voice syndrom was always funny, but not anymore.
They are over their heads. Too much to handle.
The only thing that they can do is let apple out of the agreement so other carriers can take some of the load off their hands.
I will stay with AT&T since most everyone I know uses it, but it would be nice to let everyone that came to AT&T to be able to go back to the carrier of their choice.
I also think AT&T should lower the monthly charges. They were suppose to use the extra to upgrade. That didnt happen. Now they are scrambling.
MMS is not looking that good either. I know many that still cannot use it.
Dropped calls all the time. The alien voice syndrom was always funny, but not anymore.
They are over their heads. Too much to handle.
The only thing that they can do is let apple out of the agreement so other carriers can take some of the load off their hands.
I will stay with AT&T since most everyone I know uses it, but it would be nice to let everyone that came to AT&T to be able to go back to the carrier of their choice.
I also think AT&T should lower the monthly charges. They were suppose to use the extra to upgrade. That didnt happen. Now they are scrambling.
Apple...
Apr 22, 05:08 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Thoughts:
Likely: same design as current iPhone with antenna tweaks, A5 dual-core chip, more RAM, 8MP back camera, 1.3MP front camera, 64GB capacity (max), iOS 5, incresased battery life, etc.
Somewhat Likely: "gestures", LiquidMetal, 4G (probably not till 2012, but who knows), improved display, etc.
Not Likely: complete redesign
That's what I'm betting on. I know I'm probably forgetting some things, but oh well.
Thoughts:
Likely: same design as current iPhone with antenna tweaks, A5 dual-core chip, more RAM, 8MP back camera, 1.3MP front camera, 64GB capacity (max), iOS 5, incresased battery life, etc.
Somewhat Likely: "gestures", LiquidMetal, 4G (probably not till 2012, but who knows), improved display, etc.
Not Likely: complete redesign
That's what I'm betting on. I know I'm probably forgetting some things, but oh well.
ECUpirate44
Jan 27, 10:36 AM
Why? I'd love to buy some Beats headphones. Like the style of it.
You wont like the sound of it..
You wont like the sound of it..
Plutonius
Apr 17, 11:04 PM
I really don't know how I missed him in the list. I swear, I did read it. :eek:
But then again, nies hasn't signed up yet.
But then again, nies hasn't signed up yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment