firestarter
May 1, 10:01 PM
I'm kind of surprised that he was still alive.
Apparently he had long term kidney disease... I thought he would have died in a cave years ago and no-one had found his body (we haven't seen him in the media for years).
Props to the US forces.
It's certainly good news... but might not mean very much. Al Qaeda was always more of a movement or 'franchise' than a hierarchical organisation with command and control.
Apparently he had long term kidney disease... I thought he would have died in a cave years ago and no-one had found his body (we haven't seen him in the media for years).
Props to the US forces.
It's certainly good news... but might not mean very much. Al Qaeda was always more of a movement or 'franchise' than a hierarchical organisation with command and control.
SeanZy
Mar 11, 02:41 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A306 Safari/6531.22.7)
Also ATT stores only carry 3G version
Also ATT stores only carry 3G version
MacinDoc
Apr 13, 09:06 PM
Spec bump?
32 and 64?
Snowball's hope in hell...
32 and 64?
Snowball's hope in hell...
iCrizzo
Apr 29, 05:03 PM
Remember when tiered pricing was announced, Steve said more songs would be available for $.69 than $1.29...I have yet to see a $.69 song.
We are seeing them now, sadly not from Apple though. :(
We are seeing them now, sadly not from Apple though. :(
more...
redsteven
Apr 13, 07:53 PM
Anyone feel confident buying a white one given the problems they've had getting one made?
If they hadn't solved the problems, I'm not so sure they'd release it at all at this point.
If they hadn't solved the problems, I'm not so sure they'd release it at all at this point.
crisss1205
Nov 10, 05:14 PM
What's with all the developers that won't do Universal Apps?
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
So I can charge more money for 2 platforms! Thats why (I think) the SlingPlayer app will not be universal. If you want to get the iPhone and iPad app it will be $60 instead of $30
If you're supporting both platforms anyway, it's actually far less code, and less testing to just do a Universal App. (I know, I've done two of them so far.)
So I can charge more money for 2 platforms! Thats why (I think) the SlingPlayer app will not be universal. If you want to get the iPhone and iPad app it will be $60 instead of $30
more...
kevin.rivers
Jul 28, 09:07 AM
Here is my take on this.
Apple has this market wrapped up. People don't know what an MP3 player is, they know what an iPod is.
Those who love the Zune are hypocrites. Everyone hates the iPod. Why? Inferior everything. Plus you are locked into the iPod/iTunes/iTMS and can't do what you want with your music.
Now, MS is doing the same thing. And everyone praises it. They are pulling the same add campaign as Sandisk was. Conforming isn't cool, don't be a sheep. If everyone starts buying a Zune aren't you still a sheep if you buy it? Not to mention they are dumping PlaysForSure, the DRM they helped build, and screwing tons of people who have bought PFS music already. Not to mention screwing their partners.
The fact that the will buy you out of iTunes shows what kind of game they are playing. They don't care about consumers, all they care about is winning. All I can say is they are 5 years late to the ball game. Good luck.
Also, it is slated that the big Zune will be $399, with a nice feature set including bluetooth, wifi, 30GB, big screen, etc.
Apple will release new ipods. If they will replace the current iPods or be a new product I am not sure. But we expect them to be the true video iPod. In which case it will have more capacity and the same feature set if not more for the same price. With the brand recognition it has already they will surely win.
Apple has this market wrapped up. People don't know what an MP3 player is, they know what an iPod is.
Those who love the Zune are hypocrites. Everyone hates the iPod. Why? Inferior everything. Plus you are locked into the iPod/iTunes/iTMS and can't do what you want with your music.
Now, MS is doing the same thing. And everyone praises it. They are pulling the same add campaign as Sandisk was. Conforming isn't cool, don't be a sheep. If everyone starts buying a Zune aren't you still a sheep if you buy it? Not to mention they are dumping PlaysForSure, the DRM they helped build, and screwing tons of people who have bought PFS music already. Not to mention screwing their partners.
The fact that the will buy you out of iTunes shows what kind of game they are playing. They don't care about consumers, all they care about is winning. All I can say is they are 5 years late to the ball game. Good luck.
Also, it is slated that the big Zune will be $399, with a nice feature set including bluetooth, wifi, 30GB, big screen, etc.
Apple will release new ipods. If they will replace the current iPods or be a new product I am not sure. But we expect them to be the true video iPod. In which case it will have more capacity and the same feature set if not more for the same price. With the brand recognition it has already they will surely win.
WestonHarvey1
Apr 13, 03:39 PM
I would hate this. TV technology is very taste specific, and Apple would have to get behind a single one. I like plasma, you may like LCD. Edge lit, back lit, 3D or no 3D? 3 color or 4 color elements?
I think Apple TV is the right way to go. A simple box that converts any TV of your choice into whatever TV experience Apple has in mind.
I think Apple TV is the right way to go. A simple box that converts any TV of your choice into whatever TV experience Apple has in mind.
more...
WeegieMac
Apr 14, 03:50 PM
Okay, I just reproduced this problem. After which I rolled my eyes and said "What's the big deal?"
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
I mean really, this is BEYOND picky. No wonder us Apple users have a reputation for being douchebags.
I hadn't even NOTICED this until now, and now that I have, I'm not really sure why I'm supposed to care. Honestly, if it's a choice between fixing this and putting more development resources into iOS 5, I much prefer the latter.
-Z
EDIT: I wanted to add that I'd rather my app launch faster than for time to be wasted playing a silly animation. Based on how fast the app comes up, that may be what's going on here.
Calling people "douchebags"? Seriously, get some grown up patter ... honestly to God, what is this? US TV Stereotypes Vol.1?
It's not "beyond picky" based on two FACTS.
1. It wasn't present or an issue in iOS 4.0 to 4.2.
2. The stock Apple apps don't do it, so to say it's Apple making the apps launch quicker would require 0.0002 seconds of brain power to realise, "Oh wait, if they were making apps load quicker, it'd be across the ENTIRE operating system".
Think. Think some more. Then consider typing ...
kalsta
Apr 26, 09:32 AM
I have the last model of 24" iMac that had an anti-glare screen. I just had to make the first repair, replaced the hard drive.
My fear is that I will be forced to build a Hackintosh or get an iMac with one of these new cheaper screens.
I stopped buying iMacs the day they went gloss. I now have a bunch of minis with the older Matte Cinema Displays. As simple as that � I put my money where my mouth is. If I couldn't get these, I would buy other branded displays.
When Steve Jobs made a comment a couple of years ago about Apple's customers saying they preferred gloss (or something like that) I wrote to Apple to say that at least one customer doesn't prefer gloss and why, and there is a pretty vocal group of Apple customers who share my sentiments. At least we were given the option on the MacBook Pros. I hate having to pay extra on an already expensive machine, but that's what I've done with my new just-ordered MBP. It's one small and expensive vote for usability to prevail over eye-candy. Sigh.
My fear is that I will be forced to build a Hackintosh or get an iMac with one of these new cheaper screens.
I stopped buying iMacs the day they went gloss. I now have a bunch of minis with the older Matte Cinema Displays. As simple as that � I put my money where my mouth is. If I couldn't get these, I would buy other branded displays.
When Steve Jobs made a comment a couple of years ago about Apple's customers saying they preferred gloss (or something like that) I wrote to Apple to say that at least one customer doesn't prefer gloss and why, and there is a pretty vocal group of Apple customers who share my sentiments. At least we were given the option on the MacBook Pros. I hate having to pay extra on an already expensive machine, but that's what I've done with my new just-ordered MBP. It's one small and expensive vote for usability to prevail over eye-candy. Sigh.
more...
Defender2010
May 4, 02:02 AM
No offense but customer service reps will say anything
Evangelion
Jul 25, 11:50 AM
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
more...
7on
Jan 31, 10:13 AM
I have to ask... :zipsupflamesuit: whats an iTouch? :rolleyes:
http://itouch.net/
http://itouch.net/
ArchaicRevival
Apr 14, 04:57 AM
I'll see it when I believe it. :rolleyes:
more...
TwinCities Dan
Jan 25, 09:09 PM
The most awesome prop ever for my toy trains! :cool: :o
268809
268809
Dagless
Apr 28, 07:04 AM
The wait is killing me! I'm sitting here working on my old model trying to develop a shader heavy action game, I'll need to record footage for a trailer soon and I don't think my iMac will be able to handle it. Come on May the 3rd!
Seriously, why not an Imac with touch-screen right now? Will we need to wait for the next iMac update to see this technology implemented?
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
Touchscreen computers are terrible. I used to do design work for a company that sold them. Computers in their current form do not work well as touchscreens. They even gave me a large touchscreen display as a gift... great display, terrible arm pain!
Leave touchscreens where they work - portable devices. The mouse is so much more precise, comfortable and cheaper.
Seriously, why not an Imac with touch-screen right now? Will we need to wait for the next iMac update to see this technology implemented?
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
Touchscreen computers are terrible. I used to do design work for a company that sold them. Computers in their current form do not work well as touchscreens. They even gave me a large touchscreen display as a gift... great display, terrible arm pain!
Leave touchscreens where they work - portable devices. The mouse is so much more precise, comfortable and cheaper.
more...
motulist
Aug 18, 09:16 PM
what are you after then?
I want to be able to move several events to another day or time, and since there's no "shift event times" feature, I want to at least be able to cut and paste them and remain in their original calendar! This happens every time there is a change in a day's schedule where several events have to happen sequentially.
For instance, let's say this is my typical monday schedule
johnny depp#39;s recent wife
johnny depp wife name.
I want to be able to move several events to another day or time, and since there's no "shift event times" feature, I want to at least be able to cut and paste them and remain in their original calendar! This happens every time there is a change in a day's schedule where several events have to happen sequentially.
For instance, let's say this is my typical monday schedule
RalfTheDog
Apr 12, 11:53 AM
...
I think the current iPod line is just about perfect. I just wish the Shiny Back would go away for the Classic and the Touch. Looks pretty for the first day... then even one scratch blows that.
I think Liquid metal should take care of the scratch problem.
My argument, as well as others, is that you shouldn't have to do that. That's the complaint. They should give an option for a "Vanilla" install, and leave it at that. This is the same issue with Windows. You buy a new PC from DELL, HP, or whoever, and it's filled with all this extra stuff. Sure, I can reformat it, and do all that, but why? It's BRAND NEW. I shouldn't have to do anything, except install the apps I want/need, and files.
If you buy a new Dell or HP, your first step should be to write 0's to the hard drive, then install Linux or some form of BSD.
I'm curious why you would automatically upgrade at all, since you have an iPhone 4 already. What do you expect out of version 5 that you can't do now? I'm not being critical, if that's what you want go for it. I'm just curious why some people plan to upgrade every time, sight unseen.
4G data for tethering (probably unlimited when in 4g) as well as a better screen (Not more pixels, just sharper pixels with better color balance. Perhaps a bigger screen.)
***
As to the timing of the release, the later it is released, the better the selection of components they can choose to put in it. I am hoping for a release on the day after Thanksgiving.
Edited to say: I want an FM radio for when I go to the drive in.
I think the current iPod line is just about perfect. I just wish the Shiny Back would go away for the Classic and the Touch. Looks pretty for the first day... then even one scratch blows that.
I think Liquid metal should take care of the scratch problem.
My argument, as well as others, is that you shouldn't have to do that. That's the complaint. They should give an option for a "Vanilla" install, and leave it at that. This is the same issue with Windows. You buy a new PC from DELL, HP, or whoever, and it's filled with all this extra stuff. Sure, I can reformat it, and do all that, but why? It's BRAND NEW. I shouldn't have to do anything, except install the apps I want/need, and files.
If you buy a new Dell or HP, your first step should be to write 0's to the hard drive, then install Linux or some form of BSD.
I'm curious why you would automatically upgrade at all, since you have an iPhone 4 already. What do you expect out of version 5 that you can't do now? I'm not being critical, if that's what you want go for it. I'm just curious why some people plan to upgrade every time, sight unseen.
4G data for tethering (probably unlimited when in 4g) as well as a better screen (Not more pixels, just sharper pixels with better color balance. Perhaps a bigger screen.)
***
As to the timing of the release, the later it is released, the better the selection of components they can choose to put in it. I am hoping for a release on the day after Thanksgiving.
Edited to say: I want an FM radio for when I go to the drive in.
archipellago
Apr 29, 06:04 PM
It would seem unusual to give a company with 10% of the revenue at least 35% rebate over a company with 90% of the revenue. This looks very much anti-competitive to me.
They have even much cheaper downloads sometimes; I suspect some were pricing mistakes. The iTunes LP "Plastic Beach" by Gorillaz was �1.69 (18 songs, one video + extras), probably a mistake :-) "24 Hour of Classical Music" is exactly that for �7.99.
You know that you have to pay tax on all items that you buy without paying sales tax? Most people just "forget" to tell the tax man.
anti-competitive when the prices goes down..??
wow, which planet do you live on..?
They have even much cheaper downloads sometimes; I suspect some were pricing mistakes. The iTunes LP "Plastic Beach" by Gorillaz was �1.69 (18 songs, one video + extras), probably a mistake :-) "24 Hour of Classical Music" is exactly that for �7.99.
You know that you have to pay tax on all items that you buy without paying sales tax? Most people just "forget" to tell the tax man.
anti-competitive when the prices goes down..??
wow, which planet do you live on..?
kiljoy616
Apr 12, 09:32 AM
Breaking news, iPhone 5 to come out within the next 10 years :rolleyes:
You mean iPhone 15 right? ;) A chip in every brain :D
You mean iPhone 15 right? ;) A chip in every brain :D
IJ Reilly
Jul 10, 05:45 PM
Part of the problem is the way they market it. There was such an emphasis on templates and graphic-intensive stuff when it was first demoed in MacWorld 2005 that it's hard to think it can be a good word processor. My first thought was how it looked 100x better than Microsoft Publisher.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
I entirely agree with you on these points. Apple is barely marketing iWork at all, let alone in a way which would help people understand its value. At MW last January I made a point of mentioning the Mac owner confusion over what Pages does to one of the reps on the floor who was demonstrating the new version. He also happened to be on the Pages programming team. (Which game me an opportunity to show him a bug I'd found. :))
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
Again, I think this latest rumor shows that Apple will address some of the perceptions (or misperceptions, depending on who you ask) by allowing people to dive into word processing mode and adding better search and research functions. It just might make me a convert.
I entirely agree with you on these points. Apple is barely marketing iWork at all, let alone in a way which would help people understand its value. At MW last January I made a point of mentioning the Mac owner confusion over what Pages does to one of the reps on the floor who was demonstrating the new version. He also happened to be on the Pages programming team. (Which game me an opportunity to show him a bug I'd found. :))
He seemed surprised to be hearing what I was telling him, and I wasn't entirely sure he believed me in the end, but perhaps this rumor reflects some understanding on Apple's part that they're not getting the message out about these applications, particularly Pages. Maybe they'll get serious about marketing in version 3.
One other thing, I think Apple ought to be bundling iWork with most if not all of their systems, and not necessarily because we like to get free booty. The more Mac owners used iWork, the more who would see the value in forking out for the upgrades. This is exactly how Apple already markets iLife, so why they're not doing this for iWork is just plain mystifying.
silentnite
Apr 23, 10:36 AM
another unhappy marriage, can't we all just play nice.
milo
May 3, 08:52 AM
Is it confirmed these beauties have SATA III?
Exactly what I'm wondering. The new laptops have SATA III for the boot drive but II for the optical. I would hope these have III for the boot drive and optional SSD, it would be nice if they just went ahead and used it for the optical as well.
Now how about a mac pro update, now there are two cheaper lines with thunderbolt (and likely SATA III).
Exactly what I'm wondering. The new laptops have SATA III for the boot drive but II for the optical. I would hope these have III for the boot drive and optional SSD, it would be nice if they just went ahead and used it for the optical as well.
Now how about a mac pro update, now there are two cheaper lines with thunderbolt (and likely SATA III).
WiiDSmoker
Nov 10, 03:30 PM
I wonder what battery life will be like.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Battery life would show no change what so ever. The iPad is seeing it as HTML5.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Battery life would show no change what so ever. The iPad is seeing it as HTML5.
No comments:
Post a Comment