rdowns
Jan 26, 08:38 AM
I was waiting for it to hit 100 pages on my end before starting a new thread. :( Oh well.
You poor boy. Will this leave a lasting scar? It wasn't 100 pages for me anyway as I view more threads per page. So there. :p
You poor boy. Will this leave a lasting scar? It wasn't 100 pages for me anyway as I view more threads per page. So there. :p
!� V �!
Apr 25, 02:30 PM
Yes. Usually from the time the launch day is announced to a month or two after it ships. In the past there has been a $10-20 media charge but if 10.7 ships via the app store I guess it will be free or some nominal amount like $1 to satisfy any accounting rules.
Ditto. :apple: Usually sets a timeframe, or Mac model that would have been released shortly before the next major OS upgrade. They do this to lure in developers to the newer version of they OS and to demonstrate to the press that the Mac community in majority have adopted the new release. Anything else is just marketing and supposed accounting. :)
Ditto. :apple: Usually sets a timeframe, or Mac model that would have been released shortly before the next major OS upgrade. They do this to lure in developers to the newer version of they OS and to demonstrate to the press that the Mac community in majority have adopted the new release. Anything else is just marketing and supposed accounting. :)
Mac Fly (film)
Aug 15, 05:18 PM
You can do that now with AcidSearch (http://www.pozytron.com/?acidsearch)...
Inquisitor (http://www.inquisitorx.com/safari/) is the best thing evar!!
Inquisitor (http://www.inquisitorx.com/safari/) is the best thing evar!!
AppleScruff1
Apr 19, 01:56 AM
lol yet some morons out there would still buy every year
Sad, but true. People would line up to buy it even if it was a hollow shell that didn't turn on.
Sad, but true. People would line up to buy it even if it was a hollow shell that didn't turn on.
ryokun6
Apr 16, 02:48 PM
QuickTime videos won't play after the update.
Anyone having the same issue?
Anyone having the same issue?
kernkraft
Oct 28, 05:27 PM
I'm a BMW fan and have thought about restoring an E30 or picking up an E36 M3. I personally would never buy a Countryman but the Cooper S and JCW appeals to me. I understand that this car may not appeal to some people but I personally dig it. It's very peppy and has soul. It does something for me and it's what matters. I've looked at a new BMW 335i...RWD...twin turbo. On paper it has everything a car guy would like but meh...too generic for me.
I actually love those E30s, that is why I wouldn't have an issue driving any example. At least I'd be driving a decent car or something that was when new.
I had all sorts of cars over the years, almost exclusively German premium ones but my biggest regret is not to get a 318is when I had the chance. I went for a practical E46 Touring (third in a row) and later I bought a 1983 SL280. That was a more special car but I still have a lot of admiration for those small BMW sport coupes. That is why actually, that I have high hopes about the 1 series coupes. The history is there, you can see the DNA, that's what BMW is very good at.
I actually love those E30s, that is why I wouldn't have an issue driving any example. At least I'd be driving a decent car or something that was when new.
I had all sorts of cars over the years, almost exclusively German premium ones but my biggest regret is not to get a 318is when I had the chance. I went for a practical E46 Touring (third in a row) and later I bought a 1983 SL280. That was a more special car but I still have a lot of admiration for those small BMW sport coupes. That is why actually, that I have high hopes about the 1 series coupes. The history is there, you can see the DNA, that's what BMW is very good at.
bluebomberman
Jul 11, 02:46 PM
Steve already knew this was going to happen. They're ready.
I hope so, but I won't say it's a given.
Supposedly, Bill Gates and other Microsoft top brass were obsessed with the decline of the big great corporations (IBM being one of the best examples). Yet Microsoft has been (arguably) slowly heading in that direction as it tends to stumble in markets where they can't exercise their monopolisitc power (as in anything not OS or Office related).
And Apple's quite familiar with monumental success and decline from past experience. So we'll see. But for once, the roles are reversed.
I hope so, but I won't say it's a given.
Supposedly, Bill Gates and other Microsoft top brass were obsessed with the decline of the big great corporations (IBM being one of the best examples). Yet Microsoft has been (arguably) slowly heading in that direction as it tends to stumble in markets where they can't exercise their monopolisitc power (as in anything not OS or Office related).
And Apple's quite familiar with monumental success and decline from past experience. So we'll see. But for once, the roles are reversed.
woolfgang
Jul 25, 10:21 AM
I tried the MM that came with my last computer, and I thought it sucked. Steve Jobs is brilliant, but also stubborn. He didn't want to make a 2 button mouse, so he found a way to make a mouse that didn't actually have 2 buttons, but could work like it did. I have a Logictech that works amazingly. It's comfortable, and I can do everything really fast and easy. I think most people that do/will buy the MM, do so because it's Apple.
BenK01
Aug 15, 02:41 PM
But I stand by Apple for now, that they do have some "bigger" features they just aren't showing us....
What's the next logical step in a computer interface? I used to say "Computer, show me the money" to open Quicken back in pre-OS X days. More of a gimmick than anything else, but imagine if the Finder and maybe even other apps became "speakable."
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
What's the next logical step in a computer interface? I used to say "Computer, show me the money" to open Quicken back in pre-OS X days. More of a gimmick than anything else, but imagine if the Finder and maybe even other apps became "speakable."
Me: "Check mail"
Computer: "You have nine new messages. Would you like me to read them?"
Me: "No, thanks."
(clicks on an email, reads message)
Me: "Reply to this message"
Computer: "Type or speak?
Me: "Type"
type-type-type
Me: "Computer, I'd like to add a photo of the kids to this email."
Computer: "iphoto has 6,813 pictures of the kids, which one would you like?"
Me: "One from the birthday party last week."
Computer: (a strip from iphoto appears) "Here are 23 from last week. I've highlighted the one where your wife fixed the red eye. Is that the one you want?"
Me: "Yes, that will be fine."
Computer adds the picture to stationery in the email, other pictures go away.
Me: "Send the email"
Me: "...and order me a pizza."
This kind of thing can't be too far off. A 75 mhz Performa could do it in a rudimentary way. Imagine what a modern Mac may be able to do. "Speakeasy" has a nice ring to it.
iMeowbot
Dec 1, 03:00 PM
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Sure you can. What you can't do is grab stuff and assume that it does the right thing without checking it for yourself. That's equally true for software developed in house, or developed by subcontractors or commercial partners. It has little at all to do with public vs. private source code.
Sure you can. What you can't do is grab stuff and assume that it does the right thing without checking it for yourself. That's equally true for software developed in house, or developed by subcontractors or commercial partners. It has little at all to do with public vs. private source code.
Chundles
Jul 25, 10:08 AM
look at the bottom of http://www.apple.com/mightymouse
what's this?
Mighty Mouse � Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved.
i thought apple made them :S
Never heard of the cartoon character Mighty Mouse (Here he comes to save the daaaaaaayyyyyyyyy!!!!!). Apple had to license the name from Viacom.
what's this?
Mighty Mouse � Viacom International Inc. All Rights Reserved.
i thought apple made them :S
Never heard of the cartoon character Mighty Mouse (Here he comes to save the daaaaaaayyyyyyyyy!!!!!). Apple had to license the name from Viacom.
BRLawyer
Dec 2, 05:48 AM
I agree with the few others that are concerned about this.
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
Ben Dixon
Sep 17, 05:37 AM
I'm all set for Gran Turismo 5 now :D
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae198/Ben_Dixon/003.jpg
Don't worry, your vision is fine. One of the wheels is for a friend at university.
http://i971.photobucket.com/albums/ae198/Ben_Dixon/003.jpg
Don't worry, your vision is fine. One of the wheels is for a friend at university.
apple101
Jun 6, 10:08 AM
there is a way to return apps in the itunes store. its simple. and you get a store credit after words.
eawmp1
Apr 25, 10:46 AM
She is NOT a woman
She's a MANfor crying out loud :mad:
In all ways except plumbing, she's a woman.
Are you mad enough to join in the beat down?
She's a MANfor crying out loud :mad:
In all ways except plumbing, she's a woman.
Are you mad enough to join in the beat down?
diamond.g
Apr 12, 10:01 AM
Boo! I didn't know it "required" a connection between the GPU and PCIe. I don't see the reasoning behind a direct connection to the GPU, anyone (not an engineer here)? I also agree, that for the sake of data connectivity, a PCIe card would be a realistic expectation. I certainly wouldn't be bothered with another connection, especially if that connection would eventually be the primary connection to my external devices ("Light Peak"/"ThunderBolt" does allow for daisy chaining?).
Because it uses mDP for the connection. It would be confusing to users to have a data only port that looks like their video port (of course this really only affect Macs since most PC's come with DVI/HDMI...)
Because it uses mDP for the connection. It would be confusing to users to have a data only port that looks like their video port (of course this really only affect Macs since most PC's come with DVI/HDMI...)
Buckeyes1995
Apr 22, 05:43 AM
I am not a gamer but still will not buy an MBA with an i series chip if it means I have to suffer Intel's woefully weak integrated graphics processor. I bought an early 13 inch Ultimate in October and plan to keep it for at least three years. It handles everything I throw at it easily so until and unless it won't do that anymore I don't plan to replace it.
I'm the same boat.. at first I was pretty P.O.ed that Apple would be downgrading the GPU.. but then realized 'hey dummy, you just bought your MBA 13 Ultimate.. you won't be replacing it for 2-3 years anyways".. by that time hopefully Intel will have a better chipset.. or perhaps Apple will figure out how to put a true graphics board in the MBA :)
The ONLY thing that concerns me.. if two years from now my MBA fails and has to be replaced and not repaired.. I assume Apple would give me a new one under Apple Care.. which would be a downgrade for me, as I do some gaming.
I'm the same boat.. at first I was pretty P.O.ed that Apple would be downgrading the GPU.. but then realized 'hey dummy, you just bought your MBA 13 Ultimate.. you won't be replacing it for 2-3 years anyways".. by that time hopefully Intel will have a better chipset.. or perhaps Apple will figure out how to put a true graphics board in the MBA :)
The ONLY thing that concerns me.. if two years from now my MBA fails and has to be replaced and not repaired.. I assume Apple would give me a new one under Apple Care.. which would be a downgrade for me, as I do some gaming.
pound4pound30
Sep 13, 12:13 PM
I got the 16gb "iWatch" two days ago. Another two weeks or I will be back at the store to get the new Apple TV.
thereubster
Oct 24, 08:30 AM
802.11n isn't due for ratification until 2008. There is a "Draft N v 2.0" due out next year that is supposedly close to what 802.11n will be but there's no guarantee anything will work until the final spec is released in 2008.
I think he means that the wireless card in the new MBP may be the same as in the new iMac, which is apparently 802.11n draft compliant
I think he means that the wireless card in the new MBP may be the same as in the new iMac, which is apparently 802.11n draft compliant
QCassidy352
Jul 11, 02:37 PM
its about time apple is forced to compete with others for the best device again
agreed. We haven't seen any ipod updates in a long, long time. The shuffle is over a year old, the nano is approaching a year, and even the 5G is no spring chicken any more. I certainly don't want to see MS cut too much in to apple's marketshare, but if a little competition means pushing apple a little more, that sounds good to me.
agreed. We haven't seen any ipod updates in a long, long time. The shuffle is over a year old, the nano is approaching a year, and even the 5G is no spring chicken any more. I certainly don't want to see MS cut too much in to apple's marketshare, but if a little competition means pushing apple a little more, that sounds good to me.
Snowy_River
Jul 26, 06:08 PM
Just touching it is not tactile feedback. That would be like saying a piece of paper provides feedback if you touch it. Feedback means a signal is sent back to the user to acknowledge the the pressing of the control. The 3G iPod buttons gave an audio click - that is aural feedback. They also showed things on the screen - that is visual feedback. But they didn't spring, or have a physical barrier that you push through, so there was no tactile feedback (i.e. nothing that can be physically felt) to let you know that you pressed the button.
tactile |?taktl; ?tak?t?l|
adjective
� of or connected with the sense of touch
� perceptible by touch or apparently so; tangible
� designed to be perceived by touch
Tactile means that you touch it! If you touch something you get a tactile feedback from it, unless your finger is numb. Thus, if you're waving you hand over control, you get no tactile feedback. Whereas, even if the control doesn't push in, the simple act of touching a control does give tactile feedback. (Perhaps less tactile feedback than a control that does push in, but it still gives tactile feedback.)
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
Irrelevant. If you push a key on the keyboard of a dead computer it behaves the same as pressing the key on the keyboard of a working computer. So, by your logic, these keys that press down give no tactile feedback.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
My point was not to say that your suggestion was not possible, just that it was a small step above what already exists, as opposed to a revolutionary leap forward based on the description in the patent. Of course, for anyone who knows a little bit about patent writing and patent law, what's written in the patent is probably the broadest possible applications that Apple can think of to include in their patent.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
And if a better material were easily available, don't you think they'd be using it? :rolleyes:
tactile |?taktl; ?tak?t?l|
adjective
� of or connected with the sense of touch
� perceptible by touch or apparently so; tangible
� designed to be perceived by touch
Tactile means that you touch it! If you touch something you get a tactile feedback from it, unless your finger is numb. Thus, if you're waving you hand over control, you get no tactile feedback. Whereas, even if the control doesn't push in, the simple act of touching a control does give tactile feedback. (Perhaps less tactile feedback than a control that does push in, but it still gives tactile feedback.)
When you press a button on a dead iPod, it does nothing, and it feels exactly the same as pressing a button on a working iPod - no tactile feedback.
Irrelevant. If you push a key on the keyboard of a dead computer it behaves the same as pressing the key on the keyboard of a working computer. So, by your logic, these keys that press down give no tactile feedback.
Who said it was revolutionary? And it could consitute a none-touch interface. It depends on if the patent is describing the control or the entire iPod. If there is a cover, you are not touching the control (the screen underneath), but the cover over it - hence none-touch.
My point was not to say that your suggestion was not possible, just that it was a small step above what already exists, as opposed to a revolutionary leap forward based on the description in the patent. Of course, for anyone who knows a little bit about patent writing and patent law, what's written in the patent is probably the broadest possible applications that Apple can think of to include in their patent.
A better (i.e. more scratch-proof) cover would be better. Who cares about fingerprints? You can clean those off. I don't want to hover my finger over something to control it - I'd always have to be careful not to touch the screen (unless it was durable). Not very good when on a bus, train etc., where the vehicle is shaking.
And if a better material were easily available, don't you think they'd be using it? :rolleyes:
pmz
Apr 22, 05:32 PM
Yep, a touch sensitive home button is the way to go. Will act as the unlock button too. It was about time we got rid of that nasty plastic which breaks very easily.
Um no, they do not break very easily. Maybe a gorilla might break it easily.
Um no, they do not break very easily. Maybe a gorilla might break it easily.
gwangung
Oct 18, 05:28 PM
Well, first of all, when I say iPod, I am including all things music/movies, iTV, etc. To put it very simply, I wish Apple would use more of the innovative spirit that is going into their "entertainment" branch and put it back into their computers.
The computers that are just finishing a CPU conversion, but are still rated as being good buys by non-Mac publications?
Perspective, my young padawan, perspective....
The computers that are just finishing a CPU conversion, but are still rated as being good buys by non-Mac publications?
Perspective, my young padawan, perspective....
notabadname
Apr 22, 12:12 PM
Ok with me. I wouldn't pay for the 4G upgrade from a provider anyway until it was as common nationally as 3G is today. Doing it right is a good plan.
No comments:
Post a Comment