cpgallo
Sep 30, 05:52 PM
I live in upstate NY and I've only had maybe 2-3 dropped calls on my iPhone since I've had the 3g. I now have the 3gs and it's the same.
TrollToddington
Apr 25, 12:00 PM
I'm interested to see what ends up in this refresh. My MacBook Pro is great, but a good base iMac option could be appealing. My guesses:
Base 21.5"
Quad Core i7 (2.2GHz?); 2x2GB 1333 DDR3; 640GB 7200RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6670; Thunderbolt, ditch Firewire?; 1920x1080
Fully Loaded 27"
3.4GHz Quad Core i7; 4x4GB 1333 DDR3; 512GB SSD & 2TB 7200 RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6870 (1GB); 2560x1440I think dual core i7 or i5 is more likely for the base 21.5". It's great there will be newer machines. I won't be upgrading my 4-month-old base. Instead, I'd get a SSD, 128GB or 160GB would do fine for me. Waiting for the prices to fall down.
Base 21.5"
Quad Core i7 (2.2GHz?); 2x2GB 1333 DDR3; 640GB 7200RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6670; Thunderbolt, ditch Firewire?; 1920x1080
Fully Loaded 27"
3.4GHz Quad Core i7; 4x4GB 1333 DDR3; 512GB SSD & 2TB 7200 RPM HDD; ATI Radeon HD 6870 (1GB); 2560x1440I think dual core i7 or i5 is more likely for the base 21.5". It's great there will be newer machines. I won't be upgrading my 4-month-old base. Instead, I'd get a SSD, 128GB or 160GB would do fine for me. Waiting for the prices to fall down.
thefunkymunky
Aug 15, 02:14 PM
Anyone else notice the window shadows are still visible in the Expose/Spaces screenshot. Windows shadows disappear when you invoke Expose in Tiger. Maybe this is power of Core Animation starting to show?
I think Apple have something quite amazing happening with the Finder interface in Leopard which is now possible with the introduction of Core Animation.
I think Apple have something quite amazing happening with the Finder interface in Leopard which is now possible with the introduction of Core Animation.
damage00
Oct 1, 11:19 AM
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of cell towers is unworkable. You think it is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no coverage at all.
There has to be an entirely new technology for this, or the use of satellites or aircraft instead of silly towers. C'mon Apple, solve this problem.
That's like saying:
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of freeways is unworkable. You think traffic is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no pavement at all.
There has to be an entirely new form of transportation for this, or the use of maglev or star trek transporters instead of silly roads. C'mon Toyota (maker of the Prius), solve this problem.
I'm not picking on you, carlgo. I'm saying, what you suggest is a little like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
Cell works, and has been working since the mid-80's and trillions of calls have been successfully placed. Apple didn't design it so they don't get the credit or the blame -- all they did was bring a new gadget to market. It's not the tech that is bad, it's the implementation that is at fault.
And it's AT&T's implementation that is to blame -- because it is cheap. Take a look at their stock price since the iPhone was introduced. They *want* $100 bucks every month from every customer in the US, but they aren't willing to reinvest enough of that into an infrastructure to support the number of customers they negotiated for.
Corporations tend establish ad campaigns to counter bad press or customer concerns/complaints, not what they do well. For instance, AT&T has the iPhone and no one else does. That's good. You would think they want to tell the world about that. No. It runs television spots for their Samsung/LG/etc. but not the iPhone.
On the other hand, AT&T has lousy coverage. Just look at your bars in SFO or NYC or even most of New Mexico -- doesn't matter where -- that's not a bandwidth issue. It's coverage. That's bad, so they advertise "more bars in more areas". These ads usually play on emotions, like two young lovers being separated, or they borrow on another organizations goodwill, like a company that gives shoes to the poor. They do not use demonstration or facts, because there aren't any. When I see these, I interpret them as the corporation's admission there is a problem.
There has to be an entirely new technology for this, or the use of satellites or aircraft instead of silly towers. C'mon Apple, solve this problem.
That's like saying:
Nice explanation. It seems that the whole idea of freeways is unworkable. You think traffic is bad in the cities? Even semi-rural areas have no pavement at all.
There has to be an entirely new form of transportation for this, or the use of maglev or star trek transporters instead of silly roads. C'mon Toyota (maker of the Prius), solve this problem.
I'm not picking on you, carlgo. I'm saying, what you suggest is a little like throwing the baby out with the dirty bath water.
Cell works, and has been working since the mid-80's and trillions of calls have been successfully placed. Apple didn't design it so they don't get the credit or the blame -- all they did was bring a new gadget to market. It's not the tech that is bad, it's the implementation that is at fault.
And it's AT&T's implementation that is to blame -- because it is cheap. Take a look at their stock price since the iPhone was introduced. They *want* $100 bucks every month from every customer in the US, but they aren't willing to reinvest enough of that into an infrastructure to support the number of customers they negotiated for.
Corporations tend establish ad campaigns to counter bad press or customer concerns/complaints, not what they do well. For instance, AT&T has the iPhone and no one else does. That's good. You would think they want to tell the world about that. No. It runs television spots for their Samsung/LG/etc. but not the iPhone.
On the other hand, AT&T has lousy coverage. Just look at your bars in SFO or NYC or even most of New Mexico -- doesn't matter where -- that's not a bandwidth issue. It's coverage. That's bad, so they advertise "more bars in more areas". These ads usually play on emotions, like two young lovers being separated, or they borrow on another organizations goodwill, like a company that gives shoes to the poor. They do not use demonstration or facts, because there aren't any. When I see these, I interpret them as the corporation's admission there is a problem.
more...
Full of Win
Apr 29, 03:26 PM
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
How do you know this? Just curious. I've heard all sorts of numbers bandied about, but yet to see a confirmation as to the distribution.
I'm not a lawyer, but why does it need any explaining? Could it be that Amazon was better at negotiating than Apple, and got a better deal from the content providers? Is there a legal reason that Amazon cannot get more concessions and thus a lower price than does Apple?
mac1984user
Apr 13, 08:16 PM
Well, with a sample size of 2, my wife bought a white iP3G and I bought a black one...
This made me chuckle. Thanks for that! =)
This made me chuckle. Thanks for that! =)
more...
-aggie-
Apr 27, 08:34 PM
Anyone else find it odd the way jav has been acting?
Pot meet kettle.
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
Wow, maybe there�s something to Appleguy�s theory about you.
Anyway, I�m going into the hospital tomorrow morning and I�m not sure when I�ll be posting again. So, I�ll just leave it at:
The village would be making a HUGE mistake to vote me off, if it comes to that. One of these two, Eldiablowjoe or nies without the bun is probably a WW.
Pot meet kettle.
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
Wow, maybe there�s something to Appleguy�s theory about you.
Anyway, I�m going into the hospital tomorrow morning and I�m not sure when I�ll be posting again. So, I�ll just leave it at:
The village would be making a HUGE mistake to vote me off, if it comes to that. One of these two, Eldiablowjoe or nies without the bun is probably a WW.
tipdrill407
Jul 24, 03:57 PM
I think this BT MM will replace the Apple BT mouse currently available. Apple is already offering the MM with all mac desktops except the mini. And to me i think it's very annoying to be stuck with one button when using a desktop so it only makes sense to get rid of the one button BT mouse.
more...
dethmaShine
Apr 13, 07:12 AM
You sound like I am against it.
Yes. You sounded like one. But apologies if you weren't.
In my opinion, dashboard is coming with iOS 5.0.
Apple did incorporate dashboard in iPhone OS 1.0 with the first iPhone but due to issues with performance they had to remove it.
This can be verified by debugging and going through iPhoneOS 1.0; navigating to /Library/Widgets folder. It was empty though.
Personalization is good. But the way its done on Android is ridiculous.
+ Widgets should always be sandboxed, the way they are in Dashboard.
[Both Google & MS failed to understand that btw]
I think personalization is good till the time it hinders the brand and brand quality. Folders/Wallpaper[:p] were one way to achieve that. There 'might' be more in the future but I highly doubt that.
All I can vouch for is that dashboard is coming in iOS 5.0.
Personalization in its entirety? Never in iOS 5.0.
Yes. You sounded like one. But apologies if you weren't.
In my opinion, dashboard is coming with iOS 5.0.
Apple did incorporate dashboard in iPhone OS 1.0 with the first iPhone but due to issues with performance they had to remove it.
This can be verified by debugging and going through iPhoneOS 1.0; navigating to /Library/Widgets folder. It was empty though.
Personalization is good. But the way its done on Android is ridiculous.
+ Widgets should always be sandboxed, the way they are in Dashboard.
[Both Google & MS failed to understand that btw]
I think personalization is good till the time it hinders the brand and brand quality. Folders/Wallpaper[:p] were one way to achieve that. There 'might' be more in the future but I highly doubt that.
All I can vouch for is that dashboard is coming in iOS 5.0.
Personalization in its entirety? Never in iOS 5.0.
hulugu
Dec 2, 01:52 AM
After the Month of Kernel Bugs, are you concerned about Mac OS X security?
No - 62%
See, that bugs me. Everyone should be concerned about security. I believe OS X's overriding security feature is obscurity, and once that situation changes I can see the OS falling over very quickly.
One of the weakest links in the chain is the user, and if the user is not concerned then you have a problem.
Dont get me wrong, I think OS X is great, but it just hasn't been "weathered" in the wild like Windows has. If OS X becomes a viable target then we're in for a bumpy ride.
OSX is based on FreeBSD, which has been around for an eternity and includes modules from even older Unixy stuff. There's paying attention, there's worrying, and then there's running around with your hair on fire digging for a bomb shelter with your bare hands. We're at the pay attention stage.
MOKB showed that the kernel can be a source of bugs and that OS design should incorporate this problem into the design. This doesn't mean panic or worry or take a pair of scissors to your broad-band connection, this means Apple has some things to fix. It also showed that wireless is inherently insecure and the problems with drivers can affect Windows, Mac OSX and Linux.
Again, MOKB isn't all that important, it's Apple's response to problems that really matters.
No - 62%
See, that bugs me. Everyone should be concerned about security. I believe OS X's overriding security feature is obscurity, and once that situation changes I can see the OS falling over very quickly.
One of the weakest links in the chain is the user, and if the user is not concerned then you have a problem.
Dont get me wrong, I think OS X is great, but it just hasn't been "weathered" in the wild like Windows has. If OS X becomes a viable target then we're in for a bumpy ride.
OSX is based on FreeBSD, which has been around for an eternity and includes modules from even older Unixy stuff. There's paying attention, there's worrying, and then there's running around with your hair on fire digging for a bomb shelter with your bare hands. We're at the pay attention stage.
MOKB showed that the kernel can be a source of bugs and that OS design should incorporate this problem into the design. This doesn't mean panic or worry or take a pair of scissors to your broad-band connection, this means Apple has some things to fix. It also showed that wireless is inherently insecure and the problems with drivers can affect Windows, Mac OSX and Linux.
Again, MOKB isn't all that important, it's Apple's response to problems that really matters.
more...
BigJamoke
Apr 15, 07:28 AM
They have GOT to fix the battery drain issue. It started with 4.3 and was NOT fixed with 4.3.1.
If your device is dead, "fixing" the other things doesn't really accomplish anything does it?
If your device is dead, "fixing" the other things doesn't really accomplish anything does it?
andyjslin
Oct 20, 10:22 PM
I want to finish writing my thesis and have it submitted.
Plus an iPhone 4.
Plus an iPhone 4.
more...
Dr.Gargoyle
Jul 28, 08:36 AM
Too many features can be a bad thing. I remember guy back in college... He always had the latest and greatest gadgets. Cell phone and beeper on his belt, you know they type. ***** tool.
Almost everybody have a cellphone these days. Add a iPod to that and possibly even a pocket pc and we all look like that poor dweeb. I doubt toolbelts filled with gadgets ever will make it as a fashion statement.
As you said yourself: As long as the iPod keeps it's position as the "cool" MP3 player, they will be just fine.
IMO, Apple needs to integrate the "must haves" in the iPod, or they will soon loose the "cool factor".
Almost everybody have a cellphone these days. Add a iPod to that and possibly even a pocket pc and we all look like that poor dweeb. I doubt toolbelts filled with gadgets ever will make it as a fashion statement.
As you said yourself: As long as the iPod keeps it's position as the "cool" MP3 player, they will be just fine.
IMO, Apple needs to integrate the "must haves" in the iPod, or they will soon loose the "cool factor".
AaronEdwards
Apr 28, 07:52 PM
You don't get it.
That's all you got?
What don't I get?
How I can get a 3GS for $50? Or how I can get a 3GS for $50 with a $10/month additional line? Please tell me how.
Or why paying 90% of the total cost for a 4 and only getting a 3GS is a good deal.
That's all you got?
What don't I get?
How I can get a 3GS for $50? Or how I can get a 3GS for $50 with a $10/month additional line? Please tell me how.
Or why paying 90% of the total cost for a 4 and only getting a 3GS is a good deal.
more...
Mobius 1
May 3, 08:01 AM
is the GPU good for gaming like Ported BO, Portal and intel cider SWBF?
and MINECRAFT. is it good?
going 2 get a new mac
and MINECRAFT. is it good?
going 2 get a new mac
bella92108
Jun 6, 09:08 PM
I always love to bring that up at those Mcdonalds debates.
Yeah, after all if you buy a coffee there u have to sign a waiver of responsibility for burns, then reply YES three times to the cashier asking "Are you sure you want to buy this potentially scalding-hot coffee?" ... but what's it matter, thanks to people not wanting to take responsibility we can't buy coffee above 82 degrees fahrenheit. lol
:-)
Yeah, after all if you buy a coffee there u have to sign a waiver of responsibility for burns, then reply YES three times to the cashier asking "Are you sure you want to buy this potentially scalding-hot coffee?" ... but what's it matter, thanks to people not wanting to take responsibility we can't buy coffee above 82 degrees fahrenheit. lol
:-)
more...
plinden
Jul 24, 02:18 PM
On Anandtech (http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=3475)
Apple has submitted a filing with the FCC for the Bluetooth version of its single-button right-clickable mouse, the Mighty Mouse. The new mouse will be exactly the same as the current Mighty Mouse except for its wireless feature. The mouse comes with a single button that does both left-click and right-click duties. One omni-directional pointing ball in the middle allows you to scroll in any direction.
The new Mighty Mouse uses two standard AA batteries and will be compatible with OS X 10.4.6 and later. Some users reported that the Mighty Mouse had some issues with right clicking, and often times the single fat button would click both sides of the mouse. It is unclear whether or not this has been addressed.
No release date is set for the new Bluetooth Mighty Mouse -- currently codenamed M6, but judging from the FCC filing, the new mouse should arrive soon.
Apple has submitted a filing with the FCC for the Bluetooth version of its single-button right-clickable mouse, the Mighty Mouse. The new mouse will be exactly the same as the current Mighty Mouse except for its wireless feature. The mouse comes with a single button that does both left-click and right-click duties. One omni-directional pointing ball in the middle allows you to scroll in any direction.
The new Mighty Mouse uses two standard AA batteries and will be compatible with OS X 10.4.6 and later. Some users reported that the Mighty Mouse had some issues with right clicking, and often times the single fat button would click both sides of the mouse. It is unclear whether or not this has been addressed.
No release date is set for the new Bluetooth Mighty Mouse -- currently codenamed M6, but judging from the FCC filing, the new mouse should arrive soon.
Chrispy
Oct 23, 10:45 AM
I could care less what the microsoft's EULA agreement says. If I'm able to install it I could care less if it is illegal. As long as it is only on one computer then I'm doing it. And they wonder why people pirate their software...
Kyffin
Nov 16, 05:52 PM
New dinner service
iJohnHenry
Mar 8, 04:27 PM
Who said we have to live til 105 years old?
Live, or merely exist?
I have met crazier "normal" people who weren't even on drugs!
I'm sorry, but I'm terrible with names.
Where was that again???
Live, or merely exist?
I have met crazier "normal" people who weren't even on drugs!
I'm sorry, but I'm terrible with names.
Where was that again???
roland.g
Apr 13, 02:12 PM
The one thing that Apple TV is missing an actual TV could incorporate in the bezel is a FaceTime/Skype Camera. There are TVs on the market, marketing Skype integration, albeit with ugly bar mounted top cameras instead of integrated ones, but that is what we need for home video chats with relatives.
But really just add a FaceTime app to the Apple TV 2, and then either an integrated camera, or a micro-USB webcam using the Apple TV 2 USB port.
But really just add a FaceTime app to the Apple TV 2, and then either an integrated camera, or a micro-USB webcam using the Apple TV 2 USB port.
Illuminated
Jan 29, 10:50 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5056/5397569736_b3f2b18cb9_b.jpg
I *just* opened this a few minutes ago. My girlfriend got it for me for my birthday. I absolutely love it... wanted one for a while. :)
Uh? what is that?
I *just* opened this a few minutes ago. My girlfriend got it for me for my birthday. I absolutely love it... wanted one for a while. :)
Uh? what is that?
Snowy_River
Jul 26, 05:52 PM
...
As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.
...
Trademarks must be able to be shown to be in use to be defensible. You cannot simply trademark any name or phrase you want. You have to demonstrate the current or intended future use of the name or phrase.
With regards to "doPod", Apple doesn't need to trademark that, as they could argue that the name of a device that was called a doPod was too similar to their, already trademarked, device called "iPod".
As far as the trademark stuff goes, it is the same logic. Apple needs to protect as many derivations of the "*Pod" mark in order to make their Pod trademarks even stronger. Apple will probably never produce something with the "doPod" trademark, but any other company thinking about naming their product the "doPod" will think twice before getting into a legal battle with Apple, who has one of the most recognized digital entertainment trademarks in the world.
...
Trademarks must be able to be shown to be in use to be defensible. You cannot simply trademark any name or phrase you want. You have to demonstrate the current or intended future use of the name or phrase.
With regards to "doPod", Apple doesn't need to trademark that, as they could argue that the name of a device that was called a doPod was too similar to their, already trademarked, device called "iPod".
hayesk
Jul 26, 04:02 PM
They most certainly did have physical feedback. You had to touch them to activate the buttons or drag your finger across the scroll wheel to use it. This would constitute a tactile feedback, even if there is no click.
Just touching it is not tactile feedback. That would be like saying a piece of paper provides feedback if you touch it. Feedback means a signal is sent back to the user to acknowledge the the pressing of the control. The 3G iPod buttons gave an audio click - that is aural feedback. They also showed things on the screen - that is visual feedback. But they didn't spring, or have a physical barrier that you push through, so there was no tactile feedback (i.e. nothing that can be physically felt) to let you know that you pressed the button.
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
Just touching it is not tactile feedback. That would be like saying a piece of paper provides feedback if you touch it. Feedback means a signal is sent back to the user to acknowledge the the pressing of the control. The 3G iPod buttons gave an audio click - that is aural feedback. They also showed things on the screen - that is visual feedback. But they didn't spring, or have a physical barrier that you push through, so there was no tactile feedback (i.e. nothing that can be physically felt) to let you know that you pressed the button.
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
0 comments:
Post a Comment