hulugu
Apr 20, 04:54 PM
Sure is. A hypothetical I like to propose:
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
Considering that the discrepancies between "rich" and "poor" as far as voting goes are far over blown (http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/10/24/even-more-on-income-and-voting/) (Rich DO vote liberal and poor DO vote conservative) with the top third of white income earners STILL voting liberal, despite their high incomes and the ever-pervasive myth that rich people vote republican.
If this top third of income earners, instead of trying to legislate their charities through democratic votes and the force of law, simply put 50%, 60%, 70%, hell, 90% of their incomes towards charity rather than owning a home, owning multiple vehicles, owning boats, "traveling", shopping at Lunds or Kowalskis, etc, the poverty problem would be fixed, or at the very least, helped significantly without forcing ANYBODY to do ANYTHING.
But then again, these people would rather force everyone to pony up the dough rather than take a hit to their lifestyles.
Charity is a beautiful thing, but forced charity?
What programs do you consider to be 'forced charity?'
rileyes
Mar 29, 03:47 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
Str8edgepunker
Apr 25, 04:28 PM
Please no insane 15.6" screens with a 16:9 resolution ratio. I don't care whatever else happens.
MacRumors
Apr 20, 09:43 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/20/researchers-disclose-iphone-and-ipad-location-tracking-privacy-issues/)
A pair of security researchers today announced (http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/04/apple-location-tracking.html) that they are sounding the privacy warning bell about the capability of iOS 4 to track the location of an iPhone or iPad on an ongoing basis, storing the data to a hidden file known as "consolidated.db" in the form of latitude and longitude and a timestamp for each point.All iPhones appear to log your location to a file called "consolidated.db." This contains latitude-longitude coordinates along with a timestamp. The coordinates aren't always exact, but they are pretty detailed. There can be tens of thousands of data points in this file, and it appears the collection started with iOS 4, so there's typically around a year's worth of information at this point. Our best guess is that the location is determined by cell-tower triangulation, and the timing of the recording is erratic, with a widely varying frequency of updates that may be triggered by traveling between cells or activity on the phone itself.While the consolidated.db file has been known for some time and has played a key role in forensic investigations of iOS devices by law enforcement agencies, the researchers note the data is available on the devices themselves and in backups in unencrypted and unprotected form, leading to significant privacy concerns. Once gathered, the data is saved in backups, restored to devices if necessary, and even migrated across devices, offering a lengthy history of a user's movement.
Article Link: Researchers Disclose iPhone and iPad Location-Tracking Privacy Issues (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/20/researchers-disclose-iphone-and-ipad-location-tracking-privacy-issues/)
A pair of security researchers today announced (http://radar.oreilly.com/2011/04/apple-location-tracking.html) that they are sounding the privacy warning bell about the capability of iOS 4 to track the location of an iPhone or iPad on an ongoing basis, storing the data to a hidden file known as "consolidated.db" in the form of latitude and longitude and a timestamp for each point.All iPhones appear to log your location to a file called "consolidated.db." This contains latitude-longitude coordinates along with a timestamp. The coordinates aren't always exact, but they are pretty detailed. There can be tens of thousands of data points in this file, and it appears the collection started with iOS 4, so there's typically around a year's worth of information at this point. Our best guess is that the location is determined by cell-tower triangulation, and the timing of the recording is erratic, with a widely varying frequency of updates that may be triggered by traveling between cells or activity on the phone itself.While the consolidated.db file has been known for some time and has played a key role in forensic investigations of iOS devices by law enforcement agencies, the researchers note the data is available on the devices themselves and in backups in unencrypted and unprotected form, leading to significant privacy concerns. Once gathered, the data is saved in backups, restored to devices if necessary, and even migrated across devices, offering a lengthy history of a user's movement.
Article Link: Researchers Disclose iPhone and iPad Location-Tracking Privacy Issues (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/20/researchers-disclose-iphone-and-ipad-location-tracking-privacy-issues/)
yojitani
Aug 28, 06:08 PM
To be fair, direzz is just one person, not a major corporation who pride themselves on providing peerless products with few defects. That being said, with technology, there's always a certain percentage of failure rate with new systems. Eventually they work those out, but if you're an early adopter, then you run a higher risk of being in that percentile.
Additionally direzz, you said everytime you've bought a new apple product it's had defects. Yet you still buy from them. There's got to be a point where you should just say, "screw it. I'm not buying from X corporation anymore because I get bad products every time." Vote with your money. Go buy somewhere else. I would certainly go to another manufacturer if every product I bought from a particular company was defective.
Then again, you haven't really told us what you consider defective is. Sometimes programs crash, even on a mac. Sometimes little things happen that make you say, "darnit." Then you move on because it's not that big of a deal. Then there are some things, like a MB randomly shutting down, or batteries bursting into flames that make you say, "holy crap! This thing is messed up! And this is my third mac that this has happened to!" In other words, don't sweat the little stuff. :)
To be fair to direzz, he said that every mac LAPTOP he bought has sucked, not every computer.
I will buy a macbook soon, but I am worried after so many bad reports. And to add to that a friend bought a 17" MBP not so long ago and the workmanship really did look pretty shoddy and rushed. Sure enough, the keypad is now white and there is a nice discolored patch on her desk where the thing overheated.. how apple compares to other corporations, I don't honestly know. I like apple computers because they have been the most stable machines I've worked with and owned...maybe I had the bad luck of the draw with PC's. Anyway, any company will make a buck in whatever way possible-and will even vilify itself when it gets caught going a little too far in reducing labor costs:rolleyes: . They do it because they know they can get away with it. My friend with the pos MBP doesn't even want to complain about it. I don't think she is atypical...
Neh, Merom, schmerom. Not sure why a small change in processor will suddenly make macs comparatively worse computers..Apple 'competed' with the G4 chip all these years, I can't imagine that failure to announce an update the same day as a bunch of companies that also make sub-par products is really going to make a big difference. I think the financial argument is just another way of saying:"I want a [insert computer name] with a Merom chip NOW."
Additionally direzz, you said everytime you've bought a new apple product it's had defects. Yet you still buy from them. There's got to be a point where you should just say, "screw it. I'm not buying from X corporation anymore because I get bad products every time." Vote with your money. Go buy somewhere else. I would certainly go to another manufacturer if every product I bought from a particular company was defective.
Then again, you haven't really told us what you consider defective is. Sometimes programs crash, even on a mac. Sometimes little things happen that make you say, "darnit." Then you move on because it's not that big of a deal. Then there are some things, like a MB randomly shutting down, or batteries bursting into flames that make you say, "holy crap! This thing is messed up! And this is my third mac that this has happened to!" In other words, don't sweat the little stuff. :)
To be fair to direzz, he said that every mac LAPTOP he bought has sucked, not every computer.
I will buy a macbook soon, but I am worried after so many bad reports. And to add to that a friend bought a 17" MBP not so long ago and the workmanship really did look pretty shoddy and rushed. Sure enough, the keypad is now white and there is a nice discolored patch on her desk where the thing overheated.. how apple compares to other corporations, I don't honestly know. I like apple computers because they have been the most stable machines I've worked with and owned...maybe I had the bad luck of the draw with PC's. Anyway, any company will make a buck in whatever way possible-and will even vilify itself when it gets caught going a little too far in reducing labor costs:rolleyes: . They do it because they know they can get away with it. My friend with the pos MBP doesn't even want to complain about it. I don't think she is atypical...
Neh, Merom, schmerom. Not sure why a small change in processor will suddenly make macs comparatively worse computers..Apple 'competed' with the G4 chip all these years, I can't imagine that failure to announce an update the same day as a bunch of companies that also make sub-par products is really going to make a big difference. I think the financial argument is just another way of saying:"I want a [insert computer name] with a Merom chip NOW."
Counter
Sep 29, 05:50 PM
...My initial reaction was similar to many, in that I couldnt' imagine why people would want a digital file with no physical media, no artwork, and digital rights management, but I've begun to feel this will gain the same appeal as digital audio has...
Right. All that and the picture isn't as good, the audio isn't as good, there's no cost benefit.
If they were half price I wouldn't by any. Max I would pay is a third of the fee to rent.
However, I will never use the iTunes store for music either. I like hard copies, album artwork, printed cd's, how they look on a shelf. But this is being real clinical about it, hard copies mean so much more than that.
I don't want to have to turn my computer on to see my music collection.
I'm not against the purely digital medium, it will just never be for me. I remember somebody saying on here when some sales statistics got posted 'it seems people are still buying music the traditional way'. LOL Factor Ten. CD's are going nowhere. Vinyl is coming back for christs sake, let alone CD's dying. Few real bands today release a record and don't have it on vinyl.
The current movie offering will only sell on ease of purchase.
I will always want shelves full of cool stuff to flick through. It doubles as one of the, if not thee, coolest features of a room.
Right. All that and the picture isn't as good, the audio isn't as good, there's no cost benefit.
If they were half price I wouldn't by any. Max I would pay is a third of the fee to rent.
However, I will never use the iTunes store for music either. I like hard copies, album artwork, printed cd's, how they look on a shelf. But this is being real clinical about it, hard copies mean so much more than that.
I don't want to have to turn my computer on to see my music collection.
I'm not against the purely digital medium, it will just never be for me. I remember somebody saying on here when some sales statistics got posted 'it seems people are still buying music the traditional way'. LOL Factor Ten. CD's are going nowhere. Vinyl is coming back for christs sake, let alone CD's dying. Few real bands today release a record and don't have it on vinyl.
The current movie offering will only sell on ease of purchase.
I will always want shelves full of cool stuff to flick through. It doubles as one of the, if not thee, coolest features of a room.
Small White Car
Nov 13, 02:06 PM
CAREFULLY read APPLEs developers rules
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
You should try it!
They didn't break the rules.
Crawn2003
Apr 25, 02:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_0 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/532.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0.5 Mobile/8A293 Safari/6531.22.7)
Wow, your mom willingly caused a wreck, sued the guy, and you are proud of it. Man, you and your family are just pathetic.:rolleyes:
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
Unless someone uses the system against you and to their advantage, then I bet you'd lose your cool and be crying foul.
Wow, your mom willingly caused a wreck, sued the guy, and you are proud of it. Man, you and your family are just pathetic.:rolleyes:
I really don't think it is necessary to call me or any member of my family "pathetic." There's nothing wrong with manipulating the system to your advantage, if you do it for a valid purpose (such as teaching a crappy driver a lesson).
-Don
Unless someone uses the system against you and to their advantage, then I bet you'd lose your cool and be crying foul.
fblack
Sep 10, 06:11 PM
Do you really want to use a monitor from 10 years ago in everyday use? Not likely. I've a 15" CRT from about a decade ago too but it's sitting on a shelf as a spare in case my newer monitor dies.
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D
Most times I've bought a new computer, I've also bought a new monitor. A widescreen 17" monitor back when I bought my iMac was extortionately expensive. I generally figure on spending about �15-1800 every three years on a computer and about 5-6 years of useful life. It's been going up from a G3 iBook to a 17" G5 Mac to a fully kitted out 24" iMac for that money. I can't imagine what it will be in 3 - 6 years time but I guess it'll make a 24" iMac feel just as obsolete as the 500Mhz G3 iBook with a 1024x768 screen feels.
I have to conclude that people who want to use their 10 year old CRT are just incredibly cheap and don't value their screens as much as being able to claim how fast their CPU is. I've been programming for 20+ years professionally and your screen isn't something to skimp on. It's THE most important thing if you value your eyes.
I think you mistook the slant of my post. Notice the big grin face at the end of my sentence in the previous post? I meant it half in jest. It does not mean that as I type I am staring at a 14" screen. As far as my 6 yr old CRT that died it was a 19inch not a tiny screen and certainly hefty at about 60lbs. My 10yr old CRT that has been permanently retired now was in fact used as a backup monitor for my old beige G3. I've had more than one monitor go before and having a backup even if it has small screen real estate can save your bacon if you've got work to do. :p
I would love to have the budget to replace all of my equipment every 3 years like you can but I dont have that luxury. If I can have a piece of equipment last a little longer you may call it cheap from your fancy perch, but I call it frugal. Good budgeting should never be sneered at...:D
SeaFox
Apr 22, 03:43 AM
if this is as slow as iDisk... no, thank you.
^This.
I think Apple needs to forget about adding new stuff to MobileMe considering they can't even get the basics done right. I've had a MobileMe account since it was iTools and I've had more issues with the mail service than any other email provider I've had. That includes free webmail for crying out loud!
^This.
I think Apple needs to forget about adding new stuff to MobileMe considering they can't even get the basics done right. I've had a MobileMe account since it was iTools and I've had more issues with the mail service than any other email provider I've had. That includes free webmail for crying out loud!
asdf542
Apr 14, 12:23 PM
Why? All that article says is manufacturers can add TB, not that the will.
Everyone was free to add Firewire too. Look how well that went over.
Same reply as previous quote. Exactly what do you think that article is telling you?
You made a simple claim:
"Thunderbolt will be 'Mac only'"
It won't be, you were proven wrong, now get over it. Maybe you missed the title of this topic?
"Intel to Support Both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt in 2012 'Ivy Bridge' Platform"
Everyone was free to add Firewire too. Look how well that went over.
Same reply as previous quote. Exactly what do you think that article is telling you?
You made a simple claim:
"Thunderbolt will be 'Mac only'"
It won't be, you were proven wrong, now get over it. Maybe you missed the title of this topic?
"Intel to Support Both USB 3.0 and Thunderbolt in 2012 'Ivy Bridge' Platform"
Machead III
Aug 31, 01:18 PM
Let's face it, many people are already regularly downloading movies by nefarious means, and are perfectly happy waiting a couple of days to obtain a ~700mb file over the course of a few days.
All Apple need to do is apply the same logic as they did to music, to movies. The situation is identical. People will pay for faster download times, previews, wider selections and peace of mind. You could easily get a movie into a good-enough-quality video file of around 800mb-1gb - sure, not VIDEO_TS quality, which is why they'd have to be a bit cheaper than retail DVDs. But it'd work, I know as a film maniac I'd use it pretty regularly.
It may rely on a few extra things though. Let's say, a video iPod with a big capacity, maybe a new video file format (.avi is perfect but Apple obviously don't dig it) and IT HAS TO BE SAID bigger godamn hard drives in Apple portables.
Even with a video iPod, a Movie Store is going to interest lappy users perhaps most of all, and the current 60gb standards in MacBook just doesn't cut it for ****.
All Apple need to do is apply the same logic as they did to music, to movies. The situation is identical. People will pay for faster download times, previews, wider selections and peace of mind. You could easily get a movie into a good-enough-quality video file of around 800mb-1gb - sure, not VIDEO_TS quality, which is why they'd have to be a bit cheaper than retail DVDs. But it'd work, I know as a film maniac I'd use it pretty regularly.
It may rely on a few extra things though. Let's say, a video iPod with a big capacity, maybe a new video file format (.avi is perfect but Apple obviously don't dig it) and IT HAS TO BE SAID bigger godamn hard drives in Apple portables.
Even with a video iPod, a Movie Store is going to interest lappy users perhaps most of all, and the current 60gb standards in MacBook just doesn't cut it for ****.
cult hero
Apr 25, 06:28 PM
Maybe this MacBook Pro update will incorporate a retina display which the high resolution wallpaper in Lion hints at.
Guys... seriously. Retina displays aren't happening on anything larger than your iPhone for a while. I don't care what size icons or wallpapers have been spotted. The cost for screens of that resolution at that size would be absurd.
Guys... seriously. Retina displays aren't happening on anything larger than your iPhone for a while. I don't care what size icons or wallpapers have been spotted. The cost for screens of that resolution at that size would be absurd.
roadbloc
Mar 29, 11:40 AM
When Windows starts to come close to SL in terms of ease of use and functionality let me know ;)
You have clearly never used Windows 7.
Command Shift 4= snap selection
Command Shirt 3= full screen.
And neither have you.
Oh wait, you're the same person!
You have clearly never used Windows 7.
Command Shift 4= snap selection
Command Shirt 3= full screen.
And neither have you.
Oh wait, you're the same person!
balamw
Aug 23, 11:05 PM
1. Apple infringed on the patent
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
You forgot:
0. Once issued, even the most bogus patent has the presumption of validity.
I look forward to the recent IBM proposals to create a Wiki for reviewing patents before they issue. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/08/21/8383639/index.htm
B
2. Apple paid license for use of the patent
3. Go watch TV.. show over folks.
You forgot:
0. Once issued, even the most bogus patent has the presumption of validity.
I look forward to the recent IBM proposals to create a Wiki for reviewing patents before they issue. http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2006/08/21/8383639/index.htm
B
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:45 PM
I thought this was an FCC mandate (to track GPS information for cellphones) after 9/11. The real issue is that this is not encrypted in anyway so anybody can get the information if they have access to the file.
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
The excuse wasn't that 9/11 it was 911. There were some highly publicized cases of people dialing 911 from their cell phones and the emergency personnel being unable to find them. So of course new laws were passed. :rolleyes:
dnaida
Apr 4, 11:44 AM
Achievment unlocked!
Eidorian
May 3, 11:07 AM
Check it out.. 2x 30" Dell's connected to the 27 iMac
Image (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/05/imac-2011-05-03-600-58.jpg)
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/03/apple-imac-hands-on-with-dual-30-inch-displays-video/Needs more Eyefinity.
Image (http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/05/imac-2011-05-03-600-58.jpg)
http://www.engadget.com/2011/05/03/apple-imac-hands-on-with-dual-30-inch-displays-video/Needs more Eyefinity.
econgeek
Apr 14, 12:21 PM
We really should be hoping that Thunderbolt succeeds and USB 3 fails. USB has always been a hack for lowest common denominator PCs and PC manufacturers who were not interested in investing in quality external communication.
USB is a poorly designed protocol, and rather than fix it, they have just extended it with USB3, and pretend like it is faster.
In real world use, USB3 is more like 2.5Gbps-- one way.
In real world use, Thunderbolt is 20Gbps-- both directions. (two 10Gbps channels)
This means Thunderbolt is effectively 20 times faster than USB3 -- if you maxed it out. Right now the two are competitive only because we don't have external devices capable of maxing out the bandwidth... but eventually we will.
I'll have to seriously considering delaying getting a new iMac until 2012 now. I don't want to be caught having to buy more expensive Thunderbolt external drives. Thunderbolt is great only if the drives are no more expensive than USB 3.0 drives.
What will be cheaper is whatever is the more popular. Thus we want Intel to delay support for USB3 and give thunderbolt time to be adopted widely. We really need to avoid another Firewire situation here, lest the entire world be held back by a crappy, second rate technology that is ubiquitous.
Look at the price difference of a USB 2 hard drive vs. Firewire- that is purely due to the USB market being bigger, it has no technological reason.
Think about the millions of people copying large files onto 1 or 2TB USB drives and how long they have to wait.... with no advantages of USB over Firewire.
USB2 is not even as fast as Firewire 400, let alone Firewire 800.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :( Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Those have been announced already at this weeks NAB. Apple will likely include USB3 in their laptops, though.
USB is a poorly designed protocol, and rather than fix it, they have just extended it with USB3, and pretend like it is faster.
In real world use, USB3 is more like 2.5Gbps-- one way.
In real world use, Thunderbolt is 20Gbps-- both directions. (two 10Gbps channels)
This means Thunderbolt is effectively 20 times faster than USB3 -- if you maxed it out. Right now the two are competitive only because we don't have external devices capable of maxing out the bandwidth... but eventually we will.
I'll have to seriously considering delaying getting a new iMac until 2012 now. I don't want to be caught having to buy more expensive Thunderbolt external drives. Thunderbolt is great only if the drives are no more expensive than USB 3.0 drives.
What will be cheaper is whatever is the more popular. Thus we want Intel to delay support for USB3 and give thunderbolt time to be adopted widely. We really need to avoid another Firewire situation here, lest the entire world be held back by a crappy, second rate technology that is ubiquitous.
Look at the price difference of a USB 2 hard drive vs. Firewire- that is purely due to the USB market being bigger, it has no technological reason.
Think about the millions of people copying large files onto 1 or 2TB USB drives and how long they have to wait.... with no advantages of USB over Firewire.
USB2 is not even as fast as Firewire 400, let alone Firewire 800.
Drat, I just bought a MBP, first laptop upgrade in 4 years :( Hopefully we get a Thunderbolt-to-USB3 connector.
Those have been announced already at this weeks NAB. Apple will likely include USB3 in their laptops, though.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 02:52 PM
Seems like the application developers could add a link to such a feature in their code so the user could just assign core volume in each application prefs that would tell the system what amount to assign to that process. Maybe even have the system do that automatically to all applicaiton preferences so the choice appears in all general preference panes of each application.I don't know if it's up to Apple or the program developers to allow CPU/core assignment.
Could you get on an IM? I'd like to talk about the Guide we were talking about.
Could you get on an IM? I'd like to talk about the Guide we were talking about.
richard.mac
Apr 22, 01:56 AM
…store songs they’ve purchased from its iTunes store, as well as others songs stored on their hard drives, and listen to them on multiple devices
yes! was hoping it would not be only songs purchased from the iTunes Store. will probably be a subscription service with Mobile Me, but if it was only iTunes purchased songs then that would be a deal breaker.
streaming original masters of the song to prevent uploading is very smart, but will probably be only for iTunes purchased songs.
yes! was hoping it would not be only songs purchased from the iTunes Store. will probably be a subscription service with Mobile Me, but if it was only iTunes purchased songs then that would be a deal breaker.
streaming original masters of the song to prevent uploading is very smart, but will probably be only for iTunes purchased songs.
Howardchief
Mar 23, 05:47 PM
Do a poll macrumors.... Us 6 want them pulled Now!!... the others not quoted want them to stay on the App Store for no real good or beneficial reason
I haven't decided either way.. but I also want a poll! Polls are fun.
I haven't decided either way.. but I also want a poll! Polls are fun.
mdntcallr
Sep 14, 12:38 AM
sounds like a nice starter level phone/ipod.
but what I and many other people want is a smart phone, for:
Treo/Blackberry like functionality
Camera with decent megapixel, maybe 3 megapixels (settle for 1.3) that moves.
so you can have "isight" built in. also ichatav with video.
Ipod, with 80 gb hard drive.
Video capability, both from itunes, and even with streamed cellular broadband via slingbox or from more
oh well... to dream
but what I and many other people want is a smart phone, for:
Treo/Blackberry like functionality
Camera with decent megapixel, maybe 3 megapixels (settle for 1.3) that moves.
so you can have "isight" built in. also ichatav with video.
Ipod, with 80 gb hard drive.
Video capability, both from itunes, and even with streamed cellular broadband via slingbox or from more
oh well... to dream
spazzcat
Mar 29, 12:50 PM
Here were their illuminating predictions in Jan 2010. :rolleyes:
Reacent Post
0 comments:
Post a Comment