garybUK
Feb 24, 06:01 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
You mean Dagenham where they make the Petrol and some of the PSA Diesel engines? Take it I have... seeing as my dad and uncle worked for Ford for >20 years ;) Funny how after knowing about fords like that neither of them would own a Ford privately (dad has a Audi A6 Estate + uncle a VW Passatt).
Take it you've never been down south where ford makes it's own engines?
You mean Dagenham where they make the Petrol and some of the PSA Diesel engines? Take it I have... seeing as my dad and uncle worked for Ford for >20 years ;) Funny how after knowing about fords like that neither of them would own a Ford privately (dad has a Audi A6 Estate + uncle a VW Passatt).
RawBert
Jun 23, 11:04 AM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually, I see OS X dying out and becoming a comapatibility mode like Classic, as iOS (which is still OS X at heart anyway) becomes the mainstream OS. But this will take a LONG time.
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you�maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard�these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only �old� Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be�and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don�t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great�I hope it ships!
I think this might be exactly where desktops are going. They will actually be desktops. :cool:
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you�maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard�these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only �old� Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be�and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don�t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great�I hope it ships!
I think this might be exactly where desktops are going. They will actually be desktops. :cool:
Takuro
Apr 3, 02:04 AM
Not sure if this is new to DP2, but if you go to System Preferences -> Appearance -> Sidebar icon size
You can now make the sidebar icons large, medium, or small.
Here's a preview of "large:"
http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/9610/40411461.png
EDIT: This setting also affects Mail.app's sidebar icon size. It seems this is meant to act as a unified systemwide setting that multiple applications, not only finder, will rely upon.
The only real complaint I have about this feature is that "small" is 0.9x the scale of "medium," and "large" is about 4.0x the scale of "medium." In other words, "small" and "medium" are about the same size, and "large" is a big jump. Apple would have been better off to have made the three sizes a little more uniformly ranged from one another so that "medium" is a bit bigger and "small" becomes what "medium" had been.
You can now make the sidebar icons large, medium, or small.
Here's a preview of "large:"
http://img577.imageshack.us/img577/9610/40411461.png
EDIT: This setting also affects Mail.app's sidebar icon size. It seems this is meant to act as a unified systemwide setting that multiple applications, not only finder, will rely upon.
The only real complaint I have about this feature is that "small" is 0.9x the scale of "medium," and "large" is about 4.0x the scale of "medium." In other words, "small" and "medium" are about the same size, and "large" is a big jump. Apple would have been better off to have made the three sizes a little more uniformly ranged from one another so that "medium" is a bit bigger and "small" becomes what "medium" had been.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 07:10 PM
Miata's are actually very good driving cars.
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
Yes, and excellent value for your dollar.
If I could afford a second car, just for sport, I would try to wedge myself into one.
But I really want an S-2000. :(
Consultant
Mar 25, 03:59 PM
Great news. And so thin!
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
iPad 1 does not support HDMI out, so I'm assuming no, it doesn't work.
Exactly.
leomac08
Apr 11, 01:57 PM
I drive a 2011 Toyota Venza, but it has the manual option to upshift and downshift, with no clutch, which is fun :D
Although I do know how to drive stick, the logic is easy once you get the hand of it....
Driving stick in traffic especially in LA is horrible!! :eek:
Although I do know how to drive stick, the logic is easy once you get the hand of it....
Driving stick in traffic especially in LA is horrible!! :eek:
popelife
Jan 2, 03:35 PM
Since Intel is releasing the 2.0 Ghz C2Q chip this week, it seems likely to find its way into an iTV and/or iMac device. That's four cores on the cheap.
Rocketman
I see where you're coming from, but I believe the processor in the current iMacs is the laptop Merom C2D, which is why the iMac tops out at 2.33GHz, and the FSB is 667MHz. TDP for most Meroms is 35W.
The Core 2 Quad is a desktop processor, with a TDP more like 80-100W. So not suitable for the iMac without a big redesign.
Do correct me if I'm wrong.
Wasn't aware there's a 2.0GHz version of C2Q...
Rocketman
I see where you're coming from, but I believe the processor in the current iMacs is the laptop Merom C2D, which is why the iMac tops out at 2.33GHz, and the FSB is 667MHz. TDP for most Meroms is 35W.
The Core 2 Quad is a desktop processor, with a TDP more like 80-100W. So not suitable for the iMac without a big redesign.
Do correct me if I'm wrong.
Wasn't aware there's a 2.0GHz version of C2Q...
Doctor Q
Nov 29, 05:18 PM
Living room, car, blah blah blah.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:I get good satellite reception in mine.
Nobody has yet delivered a truly GOOD streaming media solution for my hot air balloon. Are you listening Apple???!!!!! :mad:I get good satellite reception in mine.
eliamx
Sep 6, 07:35 PM
I hope hope hope that iTMovieStore becomes a super success.... and I hope that Steve will force them into a $9.99-Only model and not that stupid $14.99 hierachy..... they'll have to "submit" after it becomes super successful. haha.
now seriously, movies here in new york are a blasted $10.50-10.75!!! ridiculous. I remember like "2 weeks ago" when movies were at most 8.75, but then when Star Wars Episode 1 came out and then Episode II, AMC 25 in manhattan suddenly bumped their prices up.....each time. "Oh, cause Star Wars, we must raise prices".
And, they've kept it ever since. Movies are making huge returns, and yet we have to pay a boat-load of money.. Soon it'll be $15. And you know what, Hollywood is going to pay and so will the theater chains. I hope the online model takes over at high quality. I can see it now, I'll pay $50 for a "rental" ...i won't mind........ when i have a 54" iTunes-DRM-signed code for mass-viewing (This is the future, i think) and i'll have 10 friends over.... it'll be Theater-replacement baby!! Like boxing on PPV.... pay $50 and have 10 friends over. I'd pay.... i am talking about current releases. And, when they are 3 months old... $9.99 to buy. THank you Apple. Now, Do it!
no more distribution costs. no more manufacturing costs. lower prices. right? Not if Hollywood has their way with ridiculous $19.99 prices... HELLO!! Hello!! that's DVD prices.... for a packaged DVD......!! HELLO!!! McFly!!
This is why I'm getting into Hollywood myself. I plan to be part of the revolution. Sure I like money just like any other schmoe. But, there is something wrong with everythign right now. Especially since all movies are crap these days.... formulaic and tired. And they want to keep raising the prices!
Rant over:confused:
now seriously, movies here in new york are a blasted $10.50-10.75!!! ridiculous. I remember like "2 weeks ago" when movies were at most 8.75, but then when Star Wars Episode 1 came out and then Episode II, AMC 25 in manhattan suddenly bumped their prices up.....each time. "Oh, cause Star Wars, we must raise prices".
And, they've kept it ever since. Movies are making huge returns, and yet we have to pay a boat-load of money.. Soon it'll be $15. And you know what, Hollywood is going to pay and so will the theater chains. I hope the online model takes over at high quality. I can see it now, I'll pay $50 for a "rental" ...i won't mind........ when i have a 54" iTunes-DRM-signed code for mass-viewing (This is the future, i think) and i'll have 10 friends over.... it'll be Theater-replacement baby!! Like boxing on PPV.... pay $50 and have 10 friends over. I'd pay.... i am talking about current releases. And, when they are 3 months old... $9.99 to buy. THank you Apple. Now, Do it!
no more distribution costs. no more manufacturing costs. lower prices. right? Not if Hollywood has their way with ridiculous $19.99 prices... HELLO!! Hello!! that's DVD prices.... for a packaged DVD......!! HELLO!!! McFly!!
This is why I'm getting into Hollywood myself. I plan to be part of the revolution. Sure I like money just like any other schmoe. But, there is something wrong with everythign right now. Especially since all movies are crap these days.... formulaic and tired. And they want to keep raising the prices!
Rant over:confused:
ChazUK
Apr 26, 01:58 PM
Matts Macintosh describes 1984 Mac System 1 comes with dash-board like widgets. Video:
http://obamapacman.com/2011/04/1984-mac-os-system-1-gui-apps-video/
Thanks for the video Consultant. Looks like my computing knowledge doesn't span back far enough. Are there any more videos or links that discuss the history of widgets at all?
My quick bit of searching has bought me to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desk_accessories and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widget_engine which implies that Apple may have been the precursor to modern desktop widgets.
Interesting stuff.
http://obamapacman.com/2011/04/1984-mac-os-system-1-gui-apps-video/
Thanks for the video Consultant. Looks like my computing knowledge doesn't span back far enough. Are there any more videos or links that discuss the history of widgets at all?
My quick bit of searching has bought me to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desk_accessories and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Widget_engine which implies that Apple may have been the precursor to modern desktop widgets.
Interesting stuff.
JackSYi
Jul 18, 02:14 AM
Too bad Steve couldn't cut a deal from the studios.
Earendil
Nov 27, 06:02 PM
Congratulations on starting your point with not one but two violent images... clearly, you must be a real PRO.
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
selena gomez justinbieber
Justin Bieber and Selena Gomez
justin bieber selena Is
Justin+ieber+selena+gomez
justin-ieber-selena-gomez-
andjustinbieberkissing
They are figures of speech that are quite common where I live. My apologies if they were taken the wrong way by you.
And since when did I say I was a Pro?
This thread is about the possible introduction of a 17" monitor to possibly complement the Mac Mini, Apple's only headless consumer desktop.
Go Apple if they want to make a consumer monitor to compete with Dell. I'm all for it, as consumer monitors are all I have ever bought. I've already said that though, and I am not at all against Apple doing so, if you think I was, please go re-read my posts, as you might have missed my real point.
My point is that introducing a new size will do little to plug the consumer-sized hole in Apple's monitor line-up. If Apple can squeeze extra money out of some egotists who like to think of themselves as prosumers, fine, but the overwhelming majority of users aren't going to get anal about some supposed color-accuracy issues: they want a good-quality, good-looking reliable monitor and if Apple can't provide that at a decent price, Apple loses them to someone who can..
See, that is what my counter point was to. Yes, the thread is about Apple's possible entry into Consumer level LCDs. However by claiming that only "egotists" with a hankering for "supposed" statistics are the ones that buy Apple displays is just insulting. And when your comparison is with a Dell monitor, it just shows ignorance of what the Apple monitors provide.
You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor :cool:
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in backlighting and change incolor based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benafits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level montior for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
Apple could, of course, bring out two lines of monitors, one for print professionals and one to compete directly with Dell but, of course, they won't because it wouldn't take long for people to realize that there isn't really that much difference.
I think your conclusion is correct, but I think it is for different reasons. Those that buy Apple monitors either have the money to burn, or actually do want what the monitor provides over Dell. I think the reason they may not is the same reason they don't make cheap computers. Apple afaik has had quality certified monitors for a long time running. It might be confusing if they offer both, as anyone that knows that Apple only sells quality monitors may buy the new less expensive monitor and find out it doesn't do what they think it should.
However I think that it would be worth it in sales. And worth it for me :D
evoluzione
Aug 6, 09:27 PM
anyone have any clues to whether the Apple retail stores are goig to be showing the keynote???
nicksoper
Oct 23, 11:03 AM
I've been waiting for my 17 inch macbook pro for months now, and it's finnaly due to arrive on Monday. (Getting it from UK to South Africa without it getting stolen is a big problem I've had)
So I'll be gutted if they release new one, but I'm working on the old 1ghz G4 powerbook, so I'm going to be flying anyway! With or without the extra odd 20% speed of the core2 duo.....
Perhaps there will be the case re-design though, that would be nice.
So I'll be gutted if they release new one, but I'm working on the old 1ghz G4 powerbook, so I'm going to be flying anyway! With or without the extra odd 20% speed of the core2 duo.....
Perhaps there will be the case re-design though, that would be nice.
iJohnHenry
Mar 21, 07:28 PM
... however that may not happen if he tries to all of a sudden play ball a bit.
Simple posturing.
His time has come.
He had his time in the Sun, now it's time to switch the lights off.
Simple posturing.
His time has come.
He had his time in the Sun, now it's time to switch the lights off.
Peace
Jul 19, 05:39 PM
I'm about ready to buy a 20" iMac but I want the new OS. How long do I have to wait?
not as long as Vista customers will have to wait :D
not as long as Vista customers will have to wait :D
sminman
Jan 11, 06:10 PM
I don't see the benefit of a MacBook Slim.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Raska
Apr 1, 09:41 AM
Two *major* bugs:
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
I haven't experienced either of those issues in either dev preview.
1) TextEdit crashes on launch (tried trashing the prefs file - nothing)
2) cmd+left/right no longer goes to the start/end of the line :O wtf!
Anyone else experiencing these?
I haven't experienced either of those issues in either dev preview.
angelwatt
Jul 13, 10:28 PM
Well I hope it doesn't come too soon. Blu-ray is just too expensive right now and it would jack up Mac cost significantly. It's also better to see how the Blu-ray vs HD DVD thing works out as well just to make sure Apple doesn't back a dead horse.
Gump
Dec 29, 03:17 AM
Why doesn't Apple just team up with Nintendo and release an iTV/iTunes channel for the Wii?
The Wii already has internal WiFi built in capable of streaming. To top it off, a SD memory card slot as an additional source for playing movies....seriously, releasing an iTV when people already have a cable box, Tivo, DVD player, & video game machine.........pointless.
The Wii already has internal WiFi built in capable of streaming. To top it off, a SD memory card slot as an additional source for playing movies....seriously, releasing an iTV when people already have a cable box, Tivo, DVD player, & video game machine.........pointless.
dubels
Jan 10, 08:12 PM
BTCC and V8 Supercars are the most exciting series left.
Lollypop
Aug 16, 07:50 AM
I wish whoever posted this would get it straight - Microsoft is coming out with zune to compete with iPod. They are the one with the new product that will inevitably suck.
I don't understand why this post says that Apple is coming out with wireless capabilities to compete with zune - if nobody has wireless out yet, then there is not much a competition. And it certainly isn't Apple hoping to be the ones to catch up.
The post says apple is going to compete with Zune because everyone knows almost everything about zune, with the exception of having a physical zune apple can at least stay on top by brining in inovative features before zune has them.
I don't understand why this post says that Apple is coming out with wireless capabilities to compete with zune - if nobody has wireless out yet, then there is not much a competition. And it certainly isn't Apple hoping to be the ones to catch up.
The post says apple is going to compete with Zune because everyone knows almost everything about zune, with the exception of having a physical zune apple can at least stay on top by brining in inovative features before zune has them.
apb3
Aug 16, 01:14 PM
No your missing my first point. Sharing in my mind in this context is the listening but not the distribution of music. Synching is the distribution.
Hence why i was saying my method would allow you to share your library's but not sync them to more than one pod thus eliminating the piracy factor.
We are obviously talking about different things
I guess so. edit: but the original story mentions wireless purchasing. That brings us back to my point(s) as to why this is not likely. end edit
But do you really think that being able to share with one iPod is worth the costs? I already argued that point. If that's the only unique new feature - no go. Even if this came from a more reputable source, I still say there's NO WAY this passes the smell test.
The only way this would do anything for anyone is to drive sales of "shared" songs one pod to the other. Your friend lets you listen, you go home and buy (or buy on your iPod wirelessly but that brings me back to my original point doesn't it?) Word of mouth works just as well if not better and doesn't take away sales from other products, add to the cost of the unit, drain my battery and make Apple look like it's playing catch up.
Hence why i was saying my method would allow you to share your library's but not sync them to more than one pod thus eliminating the piracy factor.
We are obviously talking about different things
I guess so. edit: but the original story mentions wireless purchasing. That brings us back to my point(s) as to why this is not likely. end edit
But do you really think that being able to share with one iPod is worth the costs? I already argued that point. If that's the only unique new feature - no go. Even if this came from a more reputable source, I still say there's NO WAY this passes the smell test.
The only way this would do anything for anyone is to drive sales of "shared" songs one pod to the other. Your friend lets you listen, you go home and buy (or buy on your iPod wirelessly but that brings me back to my original point doesn't it?) Word of mouth works just as well if not better and doesn't take away sales from other products, add to the cost of the unit, drain my battery and make Apple look like it's playing catch up.
Yankee617
Apr 21, 12:41 PM
If someone breaks into my home and hacks into my Mac (using the OS X DVD to do a password reset), I have a lot more worries than whether they know how to find out what neighborhoods� cell towers I�ve used! Luckily, encrypting your iPhone backup is simple, automatic, and unbreakable; and has the added benefit that then your iPhone�s keychain gets included in the backup. (Otherwise it doesn�t, with good reason.)
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
So somebody sues you for (insert nefarious activity of your choice) and you deny it saying you were nowhere near Location-X at the time. Then, under rules of disclosure, they subpeona your iPhone/iPad/MBP/TC to obtain your data. The data shows you were at least in the vicinity of Location-X and so had the opportunity to perform (aforesaid nefarious activity). They win their case and you are required to pay $250K in damages, not to mention the $50K you already spent in legal fees. Did you do it? Maybe not... but it doesn't matter, they won and you lost.
I agree that the location data should be dumped... every few hours... so the files contain minimal information. Backups should exclude all this location data. I cannot imagine why any application needs to know my location from more than a few hours ago.
BTW> Is this location data collected on "Wi-Fi Only" iPads? I understand that such iPads do have/use location services, only its not as accurate.
If, on the other hand, they steal my phone, they�re unlikely to stop me from remotely shredding it so fast their head spins :)
That said, dumping the old cached data is good practice, and Apple really needs to do so. I�d be surprised if they didn�t patch it to do just that. So: good catch! (Of course, this was noticed months ago.)
So somebody sues you for (insert nefarious activity of your choice) and you deny it saying you were nowhere near Location-X at the time. Then, under rules of disclosure, they subpeona your iPhone/iPad/MBP/TC to obtain your data. The data shows you were at least in the vicinity of Location-X and so had the opportunity to perform (aforesaid nefarious activity). They win their case and you are required to pay $250K in damages, not to mention the $50K you already spent in legal fees. Did you do it? Maybe not... but it doesn't matter, they won and you lost.
I agree that the location data should be dumped... every few hours... so the files contain minimal information. Backups should exclude all this location data. I cannot imagine why any application needs to know my location from more than a few hours ago.
BTW> Is this location data collected on "Wi-Fi Only" iPads? I understand that such iPads do have/use location services, only its not as accurate.
