gugy
Aug 28, 01:29 PM
I do agree that the look of the current enclosure is great, and it's doubtful we'll get a change to the look of the enclosure anytime soon. However, I can see them changing the enclosure to match up more with what the regular MB allows, i.e. easy access to the HDD bay so users can swap out hard drives ease. Now that would be nice.
sure, I agree that minimal changes might happen. If it improves the experience, why not.
A total redesign case is what I doubt. It will take some time. I would say at least 1 year from now.
Same for the entire line up. Imac, MacPro, laptops, Mac Mini, displays, etc. Apple's current hardware design is very nice. Besides minor improvements, big changes will take some time IMHO.
sure, I agree that minimal changes might happen. If it improves the experience, why not.
A total redesign case is what I doubt. It will take some time. I would say at least 1 year from now.
Same for the entire line up. Imac, MacPro, laptops, Mac Mini, displays, etc. Apple's current hardware design is very nice. Besides minor improvements, big changes will take some time IMHO.
mrploddy
Sep 12, 10:45 PM
So umm yeah....w00...go Apple...new Video Ipod...living in the Uk...why should I buy???????????????
Apple doesnt have ANY TV shows or Movies in the UK to buy. Why should I bother buying a video ipod now. Yeah I know I could store my FULL music collection but I want an ipod for wearability (at least for Music) when walking to school.
The deal clincher to make me buy a video ipod would be TV shows / Movies but it's been a year of TV shows for the US but ZIP / ZILCH / NADA for the UK. C'mon Apple get talking to the BBC / ITV. I'm sure you could work something out !!!!!.
And well movies is a "we hope to go international" so well meh to that.
So considering I'm not one of those people who a) wants to wear an ipod not carry b) doesnt need my complete music collection c) lives in a country where Apple has jack in terms of content what makes the Video ipod a compelling purchase :confused:
-mrploddy
Apple doesnt have ANY TV shows or Movies in the UK to buy. Why should I bother buying a video ipod now. Yeah I know I could store my FULL music collection but I want an ipod for wearability (at least for Music) when walking to school.
The deal clincher to make me buy a video ipod would be TV shows / Movies but it's been a year of TV shows for the US but ZIP / ZILCH / NADA for the UK. C'mon Apple get talking to the BBC / ITV. I'm sure you could work something out !!!!!.
And well movies is a "we hope to go international" so well meh to that.
So considering I'm not one of those people who a) wants to wear an ipod not carry b) doesnt need my complete music collection c) lives in a country where Apple has jack in terms of content what makes the Video ipod a compelling purchase :confused:
-mrploddy
Vegasman
Mar 30, 11:57 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
Stewie
Sep 26, 08:27 AM
Yeah, this is pretty exciting news. I had already planned to call Verizon this morning to see when my contract is up.
EDIT: $175 termination fee per phone and a good while to go on the contract. Yeouch! I may just have to keep my fingers crossed that Verizon Wireless gets the iPhone late next year.
Yeah I don't think that is going to happen. I can't see Apple making a CDMA phone just for Verizon/Sprint. Making a GSM phone, especially if it is quad-band, would allow them to only make 1 phone for the world market.
EDIT: $175 termination fee per phone and a good while to go on the contract. Yeouch! I may just have to keep my fingers crossed that Verizon Wireless gets the iPhone late next year.
Yeah I don't think that is going to happen. I can't see Apple making a CDMA phone just for Verizon/Sprint. Making a GSM phone, especially if it is quad-band, would allow them to only make 1 phone for the world market.
bedifferent
Apr 22, 04:17 PM
I'm sure this has been addressed but I'm tired/wiped to read the whole thread. What about the quality of the music? If one song is stored that all users stream from, is it lossless?
Someone mentioned only having 5 authorized systems for your media. I recall a few years back that Jobs, et al stated/supported burning your iTunes media to a CD-RW then re-importing it back into iTunes, stripping any copy protection. There were scripts that ran automatically, re-writing to the same disc until the selected songs were done.
Personally, I like my media on my system and iDevice(s). I don't need all of my music on my iPhone, and I have an iPod classic 60GB in my Infiniti with all my music connected via USB. I'm more interested in MobileMe revamping.
Someone mentioned only having 5 authorized systems for your media. I recall a few years back that Jobs, et al stated/supported burning your iTunes media to a CD-RW then re-importing it back into iTunes, stripping any copy protection. There were scripts that ran automatically, re-writing to the same disc until the selected songs were done.
Personally, I like my media on my system and iDevice(s). I don't need all of my music on my iPhone, and I have an iPod classic 60GB in my Infiniti with all my music connected via USB. I'm more interested in MobileMe revamping.
Cameront9
Aug 24, 12:35 AM
Not Hierarchial File System! Hierarchial MENU System!
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
Now, we can freely discuss the "merits" of this patent, but fact is that Apple lost, fair 'n square. If Apple thought that Creatives patent was bogus, they would have NOT paid. 100 million dollars is a lot of cash, no matter how you slice it. If the patent was bogus, and they still paid, Apple would be sending other companies a message that said "Want some cash? Sue us with bogus patents, we'll gladly pay!". No, Apple paid because they felt that they were really infringing and that if they had proceedd with the lawsuit, they would have lost a lot more than 100 million.
If it's a BS patent, why did Apple pay? Clearly, it was NOT a BS patent. True, the patent-system might be screwed up, but that is not the point of this discussion.
Alright, Menu system. But it's the same thing. You select songs (files) through groups of albums/artists/etc (folders/directories).
Of COURSE Apple was infringing on the patent if you assume it was a valid patent. I'm saying the patent never should have been granted because it's not something you can patent. I have a feeling that Apple possibly could have won this lawsuit, but it would have taken years of red tape, legal fees, etc, and they would be taking a gamble. Apple's taken gambles in the legal process before and lost (see: Microsoft GUI case). Steve doesn't want to go through that again, so he pays off Creative. Then, being Steve, he somehow uses his RDF to get Creative to join the licensing program, which has the potential to MAKE APPLE MONEY off of this deal.
Did Apple "win" this? Of course not. They're still out 100 million. But they also came out with some interesting deals that make this not a total loss.
And finally, to answer your statement in the first paragraph: This is EXACTLY why the patent system IS messed up. Because it DOES send a message of "hey we filed this patent for something blatantly obvious, give us some money" In most cases, it will be cheaper to settle. Thus companies end up using Patents, rather than products, as a money-maker.
whatever
Oct 12, 02:31 PM
"Empathy" is a four-letter word in America, sadly.
I must be wearing my RED-WHITE-Blue boxers today or something, but how can you make a comment like that.
The noun meaning for empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
Do you honestly believe that Americans do not practice this.
Are we a perfect people. No, but who is. I think at the end of the day we do more good than bad.
I must be wearing my RED-WHITE-Blue boxers today or something, but how can you make a comment like that.
The noun meaning for empathy is the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.
Do you honestly believe that Americans do not practice this.
Are we a perfect people. No, but who is. I think at the end of the day we do more good than bad.
macsmurf
Apr 11, 04:20 AM
Want an un-encrypted copy of that iTMS rental movie? Stream it to an airplay-ripper you've downloaded off the 'net, and it'll be re-compressed in non-DRM form for you to play back whenever you wish.
Can't you just do this anyway with some other kind of ripper?
Can't you just do this anyway with some other kind of ripper?
nick004
Oct 27, 11:04 AM
Apple is from California too though! And were not all hippies over here, for the record.
Sorry, I like to perpetuate stereotypes
Sorry, I like to perpetuate stereotypes
Peace
Sep 5, 05:25 PM
Did you read the post? iTunes doesn't do that, right now apple doesn't have an airport with *video* output. And look at the picture again, that mockup has a remote that talks to the airport, you don't have to leave the room.
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
Milo.I have my MacBook sitting next to and connected via S-Video to my TV and use iTunes sharing via Airport to watch videos almost every day..
The key to good quality over iTunes sharing is to make the movie hinted.
And it streams just fine..
You miss the whole point of this. Why would you want to have an expensive box next to the TV when you could just have a tiny airport, and let your computer do the heavy lifting from another room?
You're assuming they won't up the resolution when they start doing movies. What makes you so sure they'll do that?
Milo.I have my MacBook sitting next to and connected via S-Video to my TV and use iTunes sharing via Airport to watch videos almost every day..
The key to good quality over iTunes sharing is to make the movie hinted.
And it streams just fine..
MisterMe
Dec 30, 04:16 PM
It makes sense. iProducts are increasingly becoming ubiquitous, therefore they will become more profitable for malware developers to attack. It's not a McAfee sales pitch so much as it's stating the obvious. Same with Android.No, it is the same nonsense that Microsoft and its apologists have been saying for the past decade. It isn't any truer today than it was a decade ago.
afrowq
Mar 23, 04:45 PM
The diehard Windows apologists have a hard time seeing beyond the monitor in front of them.
I have a hard time seeing past any imac with those awful glossy screens.
I have a hard time seeing past any imac with those awful glossy screens.
HaiRy
Apr 25, 01:00 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
That's just idiotic. I upgraded from a 2006 MB to a 2011 15" i7, to say I'm satisfied is an understatement. Hideous it is not even near - I've played with the new designs before but nothing comes close to it sitting on your desk.
You're getting all pissy over something that's just a rumour and you don't even know if you're going to like it or not!
:rolleyes:
That's just idiotic. I upgraded from a 2006 MB to a 2011 15" i7, to say I'm satisfied is an understatement. Hideous it is not even near - I've played with the new designs before but nothing comes close to it sitting on your desk.
You're getting all pissy over something that's just a rumour and you don't even know if you're going to like it or not!
Mac-Addict
Aug 31, 07:00 PM
Yes i think i will sell my smelly PSP :) This post has been edited over 24 times due to smelling pistakes
**Spelling mistakes
**Spelling mistakes
THX1139
Jul 20, 05:15 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.
I didn't mean to suggest the Conroe as a replacement for the G5 Quad. I was thinking more in line with replacing the duals. At this time, the only thing that would come close to replacing the current Quad would be Woodcrest and that's why I mentioned a possiblity for a 3GHZ Woodie in the lineup. I do see a need for a Woodcrest Quad as a professional work station, now and in the future... I just don't see why they would need to put Woodcrest in the complete line-up. Not sure how Kentsfield would play into the long term plan. However, I see nothing wrong with using Conroe in the middle and bottom (non Quad) machines if those are going to continue. Yea, everyone seems to want Quad across the board, but for some people that would be overkill and overly expensive. If you are a web developer or motion graphics designer working at web resolutions, do you need a Woodcrest Quad? Once the currently shipping duals are gone, are we going to be forced with choosing between Woodcrest in a tower... or an iMac or mini?
Maybe it all boils down to the need for Apple to split the lineup as been suggested in other threads. They should have a couple medium towers with Conroe (call them Macs) and then 2 or 3 high-end workstations that are priced accordingly for the Macpro line. I would love to get a Quad Woodcrest, but for the most part, it would be over-kill. Most professional work I do can be done on a single chip / dual core.
It's going to be interesting to see what direction Apple reveals next month. I still think it's strange that Apple hasn't announced Woodcrest if they are indeed going with that solution. Why wait for WWDC if the chips are ready?
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.
I didn't mean to suggest the Conroe as a replacement for the G5 Quad. I was thinking more in line with replacing the duals. At this time, the only thing that would come close to replacing the current Quad would be Woodcrest and that's why I mentioned a possiblity for a 3GHZ Woodie in the lineup. I do see a need for a Woodcrest Quad as a professional work station, now and in the future... I just don't see why they would need to put Woodcrest in the complete line-up. Not sure how Kentsfield would play into the long term plan. However, I see nothing wrong with using Conroe in the middle and bottom (non Quad) machines if those are going to continue. Yea, everyone seems to want Quad across the board, but for some people that would be overkill and overly expensive. If you are a web developer or motion graphics designer working at web resolutions, do you need a Woodcrest Quad? Once the currently shipping duals are gone, are we going to be forced with choosing between Woodcrest in a tower... or an iMac or mini?
Maybe it all boils down to the need for Apple to split the lineup as been suggested in other threads. They should have a couple medium towers with Conroe (call them Macs) and then 2 or 3 high-end workstations that are priced accordingly for the Macpro line. I would love to get a Quad Woodcrest, but for the most part, it would be over-kill. Most professional work I do can be done on a single chip / dual core.
It's going to be interesting to see what direction Apple reveals next month. I still think it's strange that Apple hasn't announced Woodcrest if they are indeed going with that solution. Why wait for WWDC if the chips are ready?
MacsRgr8
Sep 9, 05:08 AM
Too bad the old Quad G5 wasn't put in there.
kresh
Sep 6, 05:33 AM
although i dont know enough about the bittorrent protocol to fully understand the effects of prioritizing consecutive pieces.
I think you just hit on why you can't watching streaming video with Bittorrent.
I think you just hit on why you can't watching streaming video with Bittorrent.
Eidorian
Jul 17, 08:16 AM
I wouldn't give you good odds for WWDC, but you should have your update within less than a month from it.
Merom isn't out at the time of WWDC- it won't be until later in August. It is possible they may let apple take pre-orders if steve wants to really make it a massive attack at WWDC on all parts of the line charging ahead into the next generation, but you never know with him.
Of course the way things are going, for all we know there may really be PB G5s at WWDC, who knows nowadays :rolleyes:Unless Apple gets some special early treatment from Intel, I agree with preorders.
Merom isn't out at the time of WWDC- it won't be until later in August. It is possible they may let apple take pre-orders if steve wants to really make it a massive attack at WWDC on all parts of the line charging ahead into the next generation, but you never know with him.
Of course the way things are going, for all we know there may really be PB G5s at WWDC, who knows nowadays :rolleyes:Unless Apple gets some special early treatment from Intel, I agree with preorders.
pcbjr
May 3, 05:01 PM
My iMacs have 2 Firewire ports (a 27" and a 24") which I use for TM and a SD clone external. The new iMacs only have one FW port - with 4 USB connections. Seems like a slower way to have to back up, and I see no externals out there that run Thunderbolt.
Am I missing something? :confused:
Am I missing something? :confused:
Mr_Ed
Mar 30, 11:24 AM
I don't claim to know a thing about trademark law, but looking at this simply I find it difficult to understand how the term "Windows" can become a trademark but "App Store" cannot.
shawnce
Jul 14, 12:03 PM
It's not a huge redesign, they'll just need a motherboard of the same form factor with a different socket. :eek:
Yeah mother boards are easy to make =P
Yeah mother boards are easy to make =P
rdowns
Apr 25, 07:59 AM
EDIT: @adk - yes I am 16, however in this situation my mother was in the car and actually encouraged me to cut the idiot off. So it's not just an age based thing.
-Don
♬ It's a family affair...
-Don
♬ It's a family affair...
awr
Apr 4, 12:52 PM
sorry but if i'm a mall security guard and i got 3 thugs poppin off at me - i'm doing headshots all day.
some of you bleeding hearts want to be all noble - try having any mindset other than "survive" when low-lifes with nothing to lose are pointing guns at you.
some of you bleeding hearts want to be all noble - try having any mindset other than "survive" when low-lifes with nothing to lose are pointing guns at you.
MrFirework
Oct 27, 12:24 PM
...Uh, Internet law 2001-B... because he's the international scapegoat of this decade. He must be blamed for all unfortunate and tragic events, no matter when, where, how or why they occured. Including and not limited to natural disasters, "acts of God", actions by foreign powers and anything else that blame could possibly (no matter how illogically) be assigned to. Because, dammit, if there were anyone else sitting in that oval office, the world would have progressed into a virtual utopia by now. :rolleyes:
My predictions for the next presidency: A variation of the same old ****, completely different guy.
Well spoken.
P.S. Where's all the news stories about how G.W.B. STOPPED the influx of hurricaines he CAUSED last year?
My predictions for the next presidency: A variation of the same old ****, completely different guy.
Well spoken.
P.S. Where's all the news stories about how G.W.B. STOPPED the influx of hurricaines he CAUSED last year?
0 comments:
Post a Comment