briankeith513
Apr 18, 08:23 PM
i had to activate the multi-touch gestures with "Xcode", the new 4.3.2 update doesn't activate multi-touch....
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
lordonuthin
Oct 30, 06:01 PM
cool thats probably it then, the -16.
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
Oh yeah, I remember that now, about something in dev tools, that would be really interesting to have oc tools as well.
the processor trick is with the dev tools. there's a prefpane where u can turn off individual cores, and turn off hyperthreading. too bad there's not a dev tool for overclocking ;)
Oh yeah, I remember that now, about something in dev tools, that would be really interesting to have oc tools as well.
BC2009
Apr 14, 12:18 PM
http://i1227.photobucket.com/albums/ee430/kalsta1/ixMacMarketingName-promo.jpg
I was about to ask if somebody skilled with an image editor could do a mockup promo page from Apple on the "ix.Mac.MarketingName" -- and low and behold, here it is.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You rock kalsta!
I was about to ask if somebody skilled with an image editor could do a mockup promo page from Apple on the "ix.Mac.MarketingName" -- and low and behold, here it is.
Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You rock kalsta!
kingtj
Oct 24, 09:08 AM
Yep, my thoughts too. (And again, you have to wonder why over 20 people already voted this story negative.....)
But I like my Macbook Pro 15" that I got a month or so after it came out. I still use all the time and it works for me. I didn't really see the big deal about the "lacking features" back then, and I still don't think they're a big deal now.
1. FW800? Yeah, nice to have ... but honestly, the only time I plugged anything into my MBPro's FW port, it was just a cable bridged between it and my desktop to xfer over a bunch of data one time. (My portable hard drive is USB 2.0 since I also use a Windows PC that has no firewire port on it.)
2. Dual-layer burner? Are people honestly doing much DL disc burning? I don't, because the media still costs WAY too much! I bought a total of one 15-pack of DL media once, and that was just to make backup copies of a few specific DVDs like iLife '06 that couldn't fit on a single layer DVD-R. Then, I found out that the DL discs I did make are very picky about which drives they'll read in afterwards. Plus, even the *slightest* blemish on one before you burn to it results in a disc with errors. DL media is hyper-sensitive to scratches.
3. I upgraded my MBPro to 2GB as soon as I got it. Works for me, and as more apps become universal, the need for more RAM is reduced. The real "RAM hog" is Rosetta.
IMHO--A solid upgrade. Same price point but more memory, more video ram, fw 800, dual layer burner.
I'm jealous! I have a the original Macbook Pro. But my laptop was just fine yesterday so I won't be upgrading til the next major upgrade.
But I like my Macbook Pro 15" that I got a month or so after it came out. I still use all the time and it works for me. I didn't really see the big deal about the "lacking features" back then, and I still don't think they're a big deal now.
1. FW800? Yeah, nice to have ... but honestly, the only time I plugged anything into my MBPro's FW port, it was just a cable bridged between it and my desktop to xfer over a bunch of data one time. (My portable hard drive is USB 2.0 since I also use a Windows PC that has no firewire port on it.)
2. Dual-layer burner? Are people honestly doing much DL disc burning? I don't, because the media still costs WAY too much! I bought a total of one 15-pack of DL media once, and that was just to make backup copies of a few specific DVDs like iLife '06 that couldn't fit on a single layer DVD-R. Then, I found out that the DL discs I did make are very picky about which drives they'll read in afterwards. Plus, even the *slightest* blemish on one before you burn to it results in a disc with errors. DL media is hyper-sensitive to scratches.
3. I upgraded my MBPro to 2GB as soon as I got it. Works for me, and as more apps become universal, the need for more RAM is reduced. The real "RAM hog" is Rosetta.
IMHO--A solid upgrade. Same price point but more memory, more video ram, fw 800, dual layer burner.
I'm jealous! I have a the original Macbook Pro. But my laptop was just fine yesterday so I won't be upgrading til the next major upgrade.
more...
Timothy
Oct 18, 10:40 PM
AlexF...you seem to just be digging yourself into a deeper hole. You should just drop it, because your point is pointless. The iPod is the single greatest thing to happen to the "mac" in the history of Apple. And I've been here for the entirety of that history.
Anyone who thinks that the iPod is detracting from the value of macs is clueless.
Anyone who thinks that the iPod is detracting from the value of macs is clueless.
Legion93
Apr 14, 04:48 AM
If there were so many problems with the white iPhone 4, how come Stephen Fry has had one (and used it) from the beginning?
:rolleyes:
Lol Stephen Fry... He's a techno geek, I've seen him queue up on iPad's day of launch, he's also the most educated and formal man I've ever come across.
:rolleyes:
Lol Stephen Fry... He's a techno geek, I've seen him queue up on iPad's day of launch, he's also the most educated and formal man I've ever come across.
more...
rhett7660
Mar 8, 08:41 AM
My understanding is they are considering Rob Lowe as a replacement
Hmmm... Really. That would be interesting but he doesn't have the same feel as a Charlie Sheen IMHO. That might be interesting thou.
Hmmm... Really. That would be interesting but he doesn't have the same feel as a Charlie Sheen IMHO. That might be interesting thou.
RBR2
Apr 13, 11:58 AM
Do you trust Wikipedia? :) In fact the line above this one on Wikipedia says:
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
more...
SuperCachetes
Dec 30, 01:54 PM
Just like quitting smoking is dead easy for some people but really difficult for others? My gran after 50+ years of chain smoking just simply stopped. She says she had no problem, just didn't feel like spending to money anymore. I smoke about 5 cigs a day since the age of 13 and still struggling to quit.
IMHO it is all about desire and willpower. I, too, smoked from the time I was 13, and did it for 25 years. I tried to quit many times, and mostly just got hooked on nicotine gum/lozenges instead for a few months at a time. Finally, a few years ago, the motivation and environment matched up and I said "screw this." Smoke-free ever since, and while I will probably always be super-sensitive to the smell of a nice burning tobacco leaf, I really am done with it. Good luck with your own battle.
Similar to the situation with the 30,000 calorie lady, I don't care if people smoke or not. You know it's unhealthy; it's your right to be that way. It's none of my business... until it starts affecting me, via pitching in for your eventual treatment or having butts thrown at me or onto my property.
IMHO it is all about desire and willpower. I, too, smoked from the time I was 13, and did it for 25 years. I tried to quit many times, and mostly just got hooked on nicotine gum/lozenges instead for a few months at a time. Finally, a few years ago, the motivation and environment matched up and I said "screw this." Smoke-free ever since, and while I will probably always be super-sensitive to the smell of a nice burning tobacco leaf, I really am done with it. Good luck with your own battle.
Similar to the situation with the 30,000 calorie lady, I don't care if people smoke or not. You know it's unhealthy; it's your right to be that way. It's none of my business... until it starts affecting me, via pitching in for your eventual treatment or having butts thrown at me or onto my property.
KeareB
Oct 18, 06:18 PM
"Q on Mac Pro demand. A: Very positive reaction to Mac Pro. Still feel there is a delay in purchasing related to Creative Suite (Universal)"
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
They said the same thing about pro desktop sales when we were waiting on a carbon version from Adobe. Then, it was released and Pro sales didn't increase. Too bad you can't put Xeon in a MBP :P
I think this is different. Our company is not buying any Intel-based macs until Adobe releases Universal CS, and I don't know why anyone would spend $$ on new hardwre now only to take a performance hit, vs. a performance increase and better hardware bang for the buck by waiting 6-9 months.
more...
jicon
Jul 24, 10:12 PM
My brain is still trying to fathom using such an interface on an ipod.
This concept seems better suited for FrontRow, taking a page out of Gyration's gyroscope and/or laser mouse.
www.gyration.com
This concept seems better suited for FrontRow, taking a page out of Gyration's gyroscope and/or laser mouse.
www.gyration.com
boncellis
Jul 24, 04:22 PM
I really hope that this mouse can better distinguish between a right and left click than the wired MM.
Amen to that. I've been less than impressed with the wired version so far. I think Apple should break down and put two buttons on it.
I love my BT mouse, I don't mind hitting the CTRL button that much.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/07/mighty_mouse_bt.jpg
Amen to that. I've been less than impressed with the wired version so far. I think Apple should break down and put two buttons on it.
I love my BT mouse, I don't mind hitting the CTRL button that much.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/07/mighty_mouse_bt.jpg
more...
DCJ001
Apr 15, 01:52 PM
With the update notice officially stating When Lion ships this summer What are the chances the iMac refresh will happen at the same time? or will it be in the Fall instead?
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
dba7dba
Apr 13, 03:13 PM
I don't want to join in the bandwagon of naysayers who think they know Apple very well because none of us actually do.
Instead, I'll look at how it can possibly be true.
First point: The iPhone was released amidst a sea of dumb smartphones but did this fact stop Apple from dominating and changing the market, so I a crowded market a deterrent to Apple to re-introduce TV to the world? NO
Second point: The way TV is done by current competitors and Apple themselves, is that the focus is being heavily shifted to go through the web, which of course traditional media firms don't like. But what if you have an appliance that connects the way it did to traditional networks but once contents gets in you can control it the way you want. Apple is about user experience, maybe they have developed a way to make traditional TV more fun and interactive to use.
Third point: Apple is an electronic appliance company now more than ever and have been eyeing on capturing the living room for a while now. The TV is the center of the living room and instead of plugging in on to one why not make an actual set, that way you cut out competition from more established appliance manufacturers?
Fourth point: Apple already has a game console which is considered the hub of home entertainment, it's called iPad.
So is it still impossible for Apple to bring out a TV? NO. So let's just wait for new information to come.
Pls look at post #94. Numbers speak for themselves and they tell me Apple won't get into TV business. Who's going to pay 2k every 2 - 3 years for a TV?
Instead, I'll look at how it can possibly be true.
First point: The iPhone was released amidst a sea of dumb smartphones but did this fact stop Apple from dominating and changing the market, so I a crowded market a deterrent to Apple to re-introduce TV to the world? NO
Second point: The way TV is done by current competitors and Apple themselves, is that the focus is being heavily shifted to go through the web, which of course traditional media firms don't like. But what if you have an appliance that connects the way it did to traditional networks but once contents gets in you can control it the way you want. Apple is about user experience, maybe they have developed a way to make traditional TV more fun and interactive to use.
Third point: Apple is an electronic appliance company now more than ever and have been eyeing on capturing the living room for a while now. The TV is the center of the living room and instead of plugging in on to one why not make an actual set, that way you cut out competition from more established appliance manufacturers?
Fourth point: Apple already has a game console which is considered the hub of home entertainment, it's called iPad.
So is it still impossible for Apple to bring out a TV? NO. So let's just wait for new information to come.
Pls look at post #94. Numbers speak for themselves and they tell me Apple won't get into TV business. Who's going to pay 2k every 2 - 3 years for a TV?
more...
MacQuest
Oct 18, 06:39 PM
Where are these figures?
Aaaand in 3 ... 2 ... 1:
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
Aaaand in 3 ... 2 ... 1:
REALITY CHECK.
This is why I posted my comment correcting your innaccurate assumption that "the iPod is still Apple's cash cow".
The funny part is that I was in no way "defending" the iPod, since I don't have one at the moment and was just as annoyed at Apple as everyone else that Macs were not centerstage... in '04 and '05.
We're rounding out '06 and that argument hasn't held water since last year.
It's been ALL about Mac in '06
Stevesbodyguard
Apr 28, 03:51 PM
I held one earlier today and it felt .0001 oz. heavier. Perhaps it is just my super human ability to weigh things instantly that told me this....but still....:cool:
more...
ThugZilla
Apr 24, 10:26 AM
I was planning to replace my Vibant on Tmobile with a Samsung Galaxy SII, but the iPhone will certainly change my mind.
Stella
Apr 13, 01:57 PM
No thanks, I don't want to have to jailbreak my TV to make it useful.
These TV rumours are bogus IMO. I think the rumour will turn out to be related to the AppleTV box we have today, rather than a TV.
These TV rumours are bogus IMO. I think the rumour will turn out to be related to the AppleTV box we have today, rather than a TV.
SchneiderMan
Jan 28, 02:11 AM
You wont like the sound of it..
They don't sound bad but they are of course, overpriced cheap plastics.
They don't sound bad but they are of course, overpriced cheap plastics.
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
RBR2
Apr 11, 06:08 PM
Sucks that there will be no PCIe option for Mac Pro owners. I just bought a new 6-Core system. However, "Light Peak" will be better with full system fiber optic integration driving everything from drives to displays, making for less internal parts for one universal control system (as I understand it).
Perhaps in the 2012 Mac Pro's (this would be hugely beneficial in portables and iMacs as well as they could benefit from less hardware with a streamlined "Light Peak/Thunderbolt" system).
Intel says that direct connection to both PCIe and the graphics processor is required for Thunderbolt, but I wonder just why it would not be possible to use a PCIe card for a "data only" connection to external TB storage devices and leave the video to the existing connections? It seems to me that there should be a sufficiently large market for such a card to warrant third party development. I don't think that anyone would be upset at having a second connector for their display...seeing as how they have one now...and would be very happy to have a data connection quicker than FW 800.
Intel denies that Apple have an exclusive use of Thunderbolt, but it does not seem as though the PC motherboard manufacturers are making much of an effort to let people know that they will be offering Thunderbolt native motherboards anytime soon. In fact, the only thing I keep hearing is "late this year or early next year" which is not likely to build a base within the PC community which, IMO, is necessary for Thunderbolt to avoid becoming the next Firewire...not a complete failure, but not exactly a success either.
The NAB may tell the tale.
Perhaps in the 2012 Mac Pro's (this would be hugely beneficial in portables and iMacs as well as they could benefit from less hardware with a streamlined "Light Peak/Thunderbolt" system).
Intel says that direct connection to both PCIe and the graphics processor is required for Thunderbolt, but I wonder just why it would not be possible to use a PCIe card for a "data only" connection to external TB storage devices and leave the video to the existing connections? It seems to me that there should be a sufficiently large market for such a card to warrant third party development. I don't think that anyone would be upset at having a second connector for their display...seeing as how they have one now...and would be very happy to have a data connection quicker than FW 800.
Intel denies that Apple have an exclusive use of Thunderbolt, but it does not seem as though the PC motherboard manufacturers are making much of an effort to let people know that they will be offering Thunderbolt native motherboards anytime soon. In fact, the only thing I keep hearing is "late this year or early next year" which is not likely to build a base within the PC community which, IMO, is necessary for Thunderbolt to avoid becoming the next Firewire...not a complete failure, but not exactly a success either.
The NAB may tell the tale.
swarmster
Apr 22, 04:32 PM
I would potentially like the idea of a little gesture area around the home button. Makes more sense than taking over 4-figure gestures to do app switching. Just slide your finger left or right over the home button and change apps without having to click it.
rjheys
May 3, 07:49 AM
So with two thunderbolt ports can the 27" iMac now have two external displays?
PeterQVenkman
Apr 13, 08:15 PM
Anyone actually planning on buying this? Especially with a refresh right around the corner?
I dunno, September announcement and probably October for real availability seems a long time to wait.
The white one looks hot.
I dunno, September announcement and probably October for real availability seems a long time to wait.
The white one looks hot.