Lollypop
Aug 7, 04:26 AM
Interesting read but im not sure about system wide Software update. It could be like opening a can of worms - although it wont smell and have soil on it, it could become a weakpoint for hackers/viruses etc. :(
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
If done the right way I dont see how it could be a problem. For one, the user has to explicitly add the 3rd party product, apple could also act as a intermediary or something, the update will only become available through software update once apple has tested it (can download it youself when released), and even though the update comes from the 3rd parties webserver the hash is stored on apples servers and the update HAS to be verified and compared to the hash.
edit: spelling
Electro Funk
Jul 18, 07:49 PM
Yeah, if it's $9.99 to rent, it's going to fail. $1.99, might be worth it. I'm sure a lot of people will be happy, then a lot of people will complain. Both with have good points, but the rest of us won't care.
i wouldnt even pay a $1.99 if the resolution is the same as the current video content on iTunes... HORRID!
i wouldnt even pay a $1.99 if the resolution is the same as the current video content on iTunes... HORRID!
lordonuthin
Dec 12, 02:36 AM
Grats! Keep at it.
LastLine
Jul 19, 05:35 PM
Where are all you "Apple is doomed" sayers now?:p :D
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
So ADOBE, release those f#$%ing universal binaries NOW!!!!
*Most critical applications will be converted by September*
Interesting...
Apples sells ~4 Million Macs per quater. That's ~16 Mio a year. Given a 4 Year Life time that's "only" ~64 Mio Mac's installed, maybe more. That should be enough to keep developers happy.
So ADOBE, release those f#$%ing universal binaries NOW!!!!
*Most critical applications will be converted by September*
Interesting...
Linito
Sep 6, 09:20 AM
so no sub 500� macmini yet?... :( although the core 2 duo line is a nice touch :cool:
ahuman7341
Jul 19, 04:29 PM
Most critical applications to be out in september? wouldnt adobe fall into this category???
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
I was thinking the same things and didn't adobe say that their stuff would be out in md 2007?
mr.suff
Feb 22, 03:51 AM
Way back in early 2008.
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/IMG_0394.jpg
24" 7,1 iMac and a base 1,1 MacBook Air
Right now. Literally just set up the Dell 27"
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/Setup.jpg
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/IMG_0394.jpg
24" 7,1 iMac and a base 1,1 MacBook Air
Right now. Literally just set up the Dell 27"
http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n81/bigguysuff/Setup.jpg
Earendil
Nov 28, 12:50 PM
true ,but you could get dual monitors slightly cheaper... oh wait no graphics card, yeah what is up with the mini? it should be the coolest piece of hardware, but it has gotten no love. wheres all the love ?:p
The Mini is for people with no imagination, cool, or love.
Apple hasn't made the device yet to entertain our inexpensive tech savvy cool project computer needs yet :(
That said, if I had the dough I'd pick up a Mini right now and use as much imagination as possible, think it was cool anyway, and love it all the same. Mostly I'd just get it so I could duel boot windows and do software dev work so I didn't actually having to bring my work PC home :D
~Tyler
The Mini is for people with no imagination, cool, or love.
Apple hasn't made the device yet to entertain our inexpensive tech savvy cool project computer needs yet :(
That said, if I had the dough I'd pick up a Mini right now and use as much imagination as possible, think it was cool anyway, and love it all the same. Mostly I'd just get it so I could duel boot windows and do software dev work so I didn't actually having to bring my work PC home :D
~Tyler
MacSween
Sep 14, 09:07 AM
I don't know of anyone having a problem with the new iphone! I know that it is possible to make the reception problem happen, but I could also "make" reception problems happen on every cell phone I've ever owned.
Spanky Deluxe
Sep 6, 10:54 AM
Thank God I sold my mini three days ago. It was a Core Duo 1.66Ghz with 1GB RAM. Luckily the buyer's already payed and I'm on my way to the post office now. Phew!!
NorCalLights
Nov 27, 11:09 PM
I'll be shocked if it doesn't have an Apple remote IR receiver and an iSight. Seems pretty logical to me.
Multimedia
Nov 15, 05:43 PM
Im really looking forwards to this, if the 8-core 2.66 Macpro its going to cost just a little more than a quad 3ghz Macpro, im going to be buying as soon as it hits the website...
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?Maybe. If Apple goes from the 80 Watt 3GHz Woody to the 120 Watt 2.66GHz Clovertown then definitely. But if Apple chooses to only offer the 80 Watt 2.33GHz Dual Clovertown, then perhaps not and we'll all be happier campers. Or perhaps Apple has other cooling schemes in mind to keep a 2.66GHz set of Clovertowns quiet via other ways. Given that the Logic board stays the same, I'd rather buy the 2.33GHz version.
As a recent Mac switcher, coming straight in with a base spec macpro(4x2.66/4gb/1750gbHDD), im now happy to invest in a more powerful machine.
My only concern is the heat... my current Macpro runs 24/7 and 95% of the time is at full load across all 4 cores... and its still silent with temps never going over 52c... will these quad core chips run much hotter, meaning the front fans have to spin faster/noisier to keep the machine cool?Maybe. If Apple goes from the 80 Watt 3GHz Woody to the 120 Watt 2.66GHz Clovertown then definitely. But if Apple chooses to only offer the 80 Watt 2.33GHz Dual Clovertown, then perhaps not and we'll all be happier campers. Or perhaps Apple has other cooling schemes in mind to keep a 2.66GHz set of Clovertowns quiet via other ways. Given that the Logic board stays the same, I'd rather buy the 2.33GHz version.
KingYaba
Aug 16, 04:17 PM
Just wait and see. I bet the only new thing we'll see is iPod Nano's getting more storage. As for the replacment of the iPod Video. Just a bigger screen.
MicroByte
Sep 12, 09:54 PM
The photos on the BestBuy and Belkin websites are pretty good as far as fit and shine, but they do show the color as way too light and much too purpley. It's much darker and much closer to midnight blue than violet. It certain light there is a very slight violet hue, but it's a very cool deep color.
Without sunlight, any photos I posted would have either been too dark (showing the case as black) or too washed out with lamp light or flash.
Understood. Thanks for the heads up and impressions, I'll be on the hunt for one now!
Without sunlight, any photos I posted would have either been too dark (showing the case as black) or too washed out with lamp light or flash.
Understood. Thanks for the heads up and impressions, I'll be on the hunt for one now!
Bubba Satori
Apr 2, 09:24 PM
your kidding right?
You're.
You're.
Evangelion
Sep 1, 12:21 PM
i don't think this rumor will come out to be true because this might take a lot of people from getting Mac Pro
so what?*What makes you think that Apple would be earning any less by selling 23" iMacs than Mac Pro's?*It doesn't really matter to Apple that do they earn X million dollars selling Mac Pro's or iMacs, as lomg as they do earn money.
As to this being a home-theater setup... sorry, not gonna fly. While 23" is a big size for a monitor, it's still a lot less than the 32 - 42" televisions people have.
so what?*What makes you think that Apple would be earning any less by selling 23" iMacs than Mac Pro's?*It doesn't really matter to Apple that do they earn X million dollars selling Mac Pro's or iMacs, as lomg as they do earn money.
As to this being a home-theater setup... sorry, not gonna fly. While 23" is a big size for a monitor, it's still a lot less than the 32 - 42" televisions people have.
jxyama
Mar 19, 05:17 PM
jxyama, I think you have something there... last nite my wife (who is computer ignorant) asks whether I have a MAC or a PC. Turns out her best friend (newbie PC user for about 1 year) has convinced her that MACs aren't as good. My wife or her friend have never even used one but they 'KNOW' they are inferior to MACs. Now if either of them were to have to make a buying decision it's not hard to imagine what they'll walk out the store with.
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
How could any new user have a different opinion unless they happen to know a MAC user. Only 2% use MACs so they're unlikely to be exposed to one, PC users (98%) will bad mouth a MAC, and Apples advertising, while award winning does very little to enlighten people about the product.
i agree with you.
the problem with the current computer market is that it's dominated by two kind of uses, neither of which apple excels at: enterprise and gaming.
for enterprise users, innovation and usability (beyond certain degree) are secondary. what they need is computers to get the job done for as cheap as possible - because computer is purely a commodity tool. as far as corporations are concerned, there is no reason to step away from windows because it has been getting the job done and it is the cheapest options available. now, this is changing slightly recently because of the onslaught of malicious windows virus. some corporations are starting to realize that the cost of hiring windows admin and lost productivity due to these virus are starting to make windows more expensive. because they have absolutely no brand attachment, corporations that deem Macs to be more cost effective overall than windows PCs will have absolutely no problem switching. (however, they will have no problem pursuing other options if something better than Macs come out too.)
because many people work for corporations, them and their families will be most familiar with windows PCs. Macs are seen as some abnormality, and expensive. ("there's only so much a computer can do and windows does it fine, so why bother paying more for Macs?")
what they fail to see (IMO) is that Macs can do a lot more, far more easily. but it will take time for those people to be convinced that computers can really do more than what they've seen windows PCs do and it really is worth more $$$.
gaming - this is tough for apple. in this segment, user base is everything. because it's so technologically driven, R&D money is much better spent on improving the technology rather than adapting them to work on Macs...
shawnce
Jul 19, 10:36 PM
...but it sucks compared to Tiger and Leopard.
I don't fully agree with that ... and as I said I use it often.
I don't fully agree with that ... and as I said I use it often.
Compile 'em all
Jan 6, 05:52 AM
11.05 New kernel for Mac OS X. Mac OS X high level subsystems built upon Windows. New operating system. "Mac OS W". Leopard is Mac OS W 11.0.
11.08 "Best of Apple, Best of Microsoft, everything will 'just work' from now on"
WTF!
11.08 "Best of Apple, Best of Microsoft, everything will 'just work' from now on"
WTF!
alust2013
Apr 11, 10:15 AM
But I really want an S-2000. :(
YES. I want one of those so bad, especially an '03 or slightly older, before they changed them. Although the newer ones did look better.
YES. I want one of those so bad, especially an '03 or slightly older, before they changed them. Although the newer ones did look better.
hulugu
May 2, 12:06 AM
latin is dead ! Long live Apple
Deader than the hobnails on a centurian's boot, but actually much of English grammar is derived, sometimes mistakely, from Latin forms so it's not a complete waste of time.
Okay maybe it it, but now I know what ergo sum propter means and that quid pro quo is actually gibberish.
Deader than the hobnails on a centurian's boot, but actually much of English grammar is derived, sometimes mistakely, from Latin forms so it's not a complete waste of time.
Okay maybe it it, but now I know what ergo sum propter means and that quid pro quo is actually gibberish.
poppe
Jul 14, 12:25 PM
It was originally made by Philips, but the CD we know today is a Philips/Sony Co-Op.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
On betamax. Your very right it is very succesful in a production studios for broadcasting and what not. But now even those are being replaced by DVC Pro (which I think is sony is it not?).
But I was more talking about the format war that keeps getting mentioned. It was one vs. the other in the consumer market. Who won? VHS. Thats all I meant.
And, regarding the BetaMax... It was actually quite succesfull. Yes, it failed in consumer-space, but it's still being used in television-productions.
Is it REALLY that bad? BetaMax wasn 't really a failure, since it's widely used even today. It's just not used by consumers. Sony was very important in creating the CD. They do have to misses that can't be denied: Memory Stick and MiniDisk.
Other companies might have less misses in these things, but we must acknowledge that none of them has been as active in coming up with alternatives. I haven't really seen Matsushita (for example) try to come up with new stuff. Sony has tried to come up with new stuff. Some of the succeeded, some of them failed.
On betamax. Your very right it is very succesful in a production studios for broadcasting and what not. But now even those are being replaced by DVC Pro (which I think is sony is it not?).
But I was more talking about the format war that keeps getting mentioned. It was one vs. the other in the consumer market. Who won? VHS. Thats all I meant.
Wild-Bill
Jan 12, 02:17 PM
"Macbook Air" is an awful, awful name.
islanders
Dec 30, 11:25 AM
People would complain about not being able to drive it in hot weather and having to buy expensive Apple iWax.
no it would run on methane gas, would only be able to turn to the left, and you couldn't roll down the windows :eek:
no it would run on methane gas, would only be able to turn to the left, and you couldn't roll down the windows :eek: