Stiss
Mar 31, 03:49 PM
They are not killing iChat in favor of FaceTime? Glad to hear! I love iChat and was a little bit concerned about its future.
I need iChat on my iPad. It's the only thing missing in my eyes!
I need iChat on my iPad. It's the only thing missing in my eyes!
mac jones
Apr 28, 08:24 PM
this sounds really really insane :D
Do they weigh more? is it cream filled?
Thick creamy new iPhone!
Do they weigh more? is it cream filled?
Thick creamy new iPhone!
twoodcc
Nov 24, 08:42 PM
yeah team lexus should be in the rearview mirror soon
i hope so.
i hope so.
Brie2011
Jul 25, 06:08 PM
What was an 11 year old doing that required this app? I bet pressed download just for the thrill of it and when it started downloading he freaked out.
Yet another reason (of many) that kids should not be given expensive electronics to play with. I blame the parents for giving the kid an iPod touch in the first place. I am perfectly satisfied with my $29 MP3 player that I bought on sale last month.
Yet another reason (of many) that kids should not be given expensive electronics to play with. I blame the parents for giving the kid an iPod touch in the first place. I am perfectly satisfied with my $29 MP3 player that I bought on sale last month.
more...
alexf
Oct 18, 04:47 PM
Check the links at the top of the press release (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/oct/18results.html).
Still not sure about this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
Still not sure about this "less than half the total" figure... :confused:
ruzz1141
Apr 15, 06:17 AM
Can anyone confirm if the battery life has improved?
Unfortunately, no! My wife's 3GS lost 33% overnight after a full charge :(
I just did the normal update. Next I am going to try to just install 4.3.2 and setup as new and not restore any data and see if stock install still has issue to rule out some corrupt setting/data.
Unfortunately, no! My wife's 3GS lost 33% overnight after a full charge :(
I just did the normal update. Next I am going to try to just install 4.3.2 and setup as new and not restore any data and see if stock install still has issue to rule out some corrupt setting/data.
more...
Brien
Mar 12, 02:22 AM
Yeah. I'll be calling Brea tomorrow to vent, but I doubt that will get me anywhere.
And FWIW, most of the AT&T stores here in Fullerton/Brea didn't get any iPads. Makes you wonder how many of each model Apple actually got. Nobody seemed to be touching those Verizon iPads with a 10 foot pole.
And FWIW, most of the AT&T stores here in Fullerton/Brea didn't get any iPads. Makes you wonder how many of each model Apple actually got. Nobody seemed to be touching those Verizon iPads with a 10 foot pole.
blackstarliner
Oct 24, 08:50 AM
Heres a pic if anyone has missed it.
Check out the footnote to the Swiss site (where the text is correct)
Die Tests wurden von Apple im Mai 2006 mit Prototypen des 2 GHz MacBook und aktuellen 1,42 GHz PowerPC G4 basierten iBook G4 Computern durchgef�hrt.
Check out the footnote to the Swiss site (where the text is correct)
Die Tests wurden von Apple im Mai 2006 mit Prototypen des 2 GHz MacBook und aktuellen 1,42 GHz PowerPC G4 basierten iBook G4 Computern durchgef�hrt.
more...
MacRumors
Oct 23, 07:43 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
As first noted in a HardMac forum post (http://forum.hardmac.com/index.php?showtopic=159&st=0&p=917&#entry917), it appears Microsoft is specifying in its license agreements that the ability to operate in a virtualized environment is prohibited in Home Basic and Home Premium editions, leaving users to have to purchase either the Business or the Ultimate versions of the software to legally run in a virtualized environment.
Mac users have found virtualization solutions such as Parallels Desktop a good way to switch between Mac OS X and Windows. This latest news from Microsoft may inhibit some use of the software as Business and Ultimate editions range from $300-400 verses Home Basic's $200 price point (prices (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829093154.shtml)).
Microsoft's EULA agreements can be found here (http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/default.aspx).
As first noted in a HardMac forum post (http://forum.hardmac.com/index.php?showtopic=159&st=0&p=917&#entry917), it appears Microsoft is specifying in its license agreements that the ability to operate in a virtualized environment is prohibited in Home Basic and Home Premium editions, leaving users to have to purchase either the Business or the Ultimate versions of the software to legally run in a virtualized environment.
Mac users have found virtualization solutions such as Parallels Desktop a good way to switch between Mac OS X and Windows. This latest news from Microsoft may inhibit some use of the software as Business and Ultimate editions range from $300-400 verses Home Basic's $200 price point (prices (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/08/20060829093154.shtml)).
Microsoft's EULA agreements can be found here (http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/useterms/default.aspx).
Westside guy
Dec 1, 04:34 PM
Windows Vista is NOT Windows XP.
Hey, somewhat going off on a tangent here but...
Vista is just now coming out. Are you old enough to remember that, when XP came out, it was lauded as "the most secure Windows ever"? It's silly to pay any attention to what MS says - until Vista has a track record, we won't know how its security stacks up.
Love or hate Steve Gibson, but he's pointed out some extremely stupid holes in Vista's security during the beta process. Stuff that was fixed in Windows back in the days of 95/98. They've got a totally new network stack in Vista, and frankly Microsoft has very little experience writing core network code (remember much or most of their previous stack was shown to have been pulled from BSD).
Now back to the Mac side. I'm glad to see this thread isn't filled with Apple apologists. :) Apple certainly has work ahead of them, but I think all in all they've been pretty responsive to most vulnerability reports over the past couple years. But Mac people need to shed this false air of invulnerability that's far too common on this forum and elsewhere. In the end, common sense will go far to protect you - don't run day to day as an admin account, use a strong password, don't use the same password everywhere. If you have a home network, use NAT (by default you probably will be). Don't try to download a "free" version of Microsoft Office off Gnutella. :D
Hey, somewhat going off on a tangent here but...
Vista is just now coming out. Are you old enough to remember that, when XP came out, it was lauded as "the most secure Windows ever"? It's silly to pay any attention to what MS says - until Vista has a track record, we won't know how its security stacks up.
Love or hate Steve Gibson, but he's pointed out some extremely stupid holes in Vista's security during the beta process. Stuff that was fixed in Windows back in the days of 95/98. They've got a totally new network stack in Vista, and frankly Microsoft has very little experience writing core network code (remember much or most of their previous stack was shown to have been pulled from BSD).
Now back to the Mac side. I'm glad to see this thread isn't filled with Apple apologists. :) Apple certainly has work ahead of them, but I think all in all they've been pretty responsive to most vulnerability reports over the past couple years. But Mac people need to shed this false air of invulnerability that's far too common on this forum and elsewhere. In the end, common sense will go far to protect you - don't run day to day as an admin account, use a strong password, don't use the same password everywhere. If you have a home network, use NAT (by default you probably will be). Don't try to download a "free" version of Microsoft Office off Gnutella. :D
more...
mrkgoo
Jul 24, 07:55 PM
I bought a Mighty Mouse when it first came out.
Personally, I love it. I do have clicking issues, but not the same as others - where others fins it accidentally left clicks when they try to right-click, I used to get right clicks when I tried left - but after a long time of use, I have learnt to use it as I need.
The scroll ball is awesome, but does seem to fail occasionally...a bit of dampness ont eh ball fixes this though.
Personally, I love it. I do have clicking issues, but not the same as others - where others fins it accidentally left clicks when they try to right-click, I used to get right clicks when I tried left - but after a long time of use, I have learnt to use it as I need.
The scroll ball is awesome, but does seem to fail occasionally...a bit of dampness ont eh ball fixes this though.
spritelyjim
Mar 31, 11:47 AM
I actually kind of like it. I think those of you complaining about the new look are forgetting some things.
Yes, there is a need to make apps look and function similarly, so that the user can find his/her way around, and iCal does that. All the buttons are similar, and they reside in similar, if not exactly the same positions as before.
BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE ALL PROGRAMS LOOK IDENTICAL!!! Why? because then you get confused as to which freaking program you're looking at! Remember when iTunes started looking exactly like Finder? That was crazy confusing. People who understand GUI creation know that to be efficient, your eye needs nicely defined targets, and if that nicely defined target happens to be a leather-textured header bar rather than the same freaking gray as every other program, then so be it.
And gosh, it actually a pretty good texture. It's not harkening back to the crappy jpeggy/giffy textures of Windows 3.1. (Though as an aside, I find it strange that Apple is trying to push the "full-screen" apps ala EVERY SINGLE WINDOWS INCARNATION as some sort of innovation.)
Edit: Though true to some comments, a nice, real looking, darker leather would be better than orange.
Yes, there is a need to make apps look and function similarly, so that the user can find his/her way around, and iCal does that. All the buttons are similar, and they reside in similar, if not exactly the same positions as before.
BUT YOU CAN'T MAKE ALL PROGRAMS LOOK IDENTICAL!!! Why? because then you get confused as to which freaking program you're looking at! Remember when iTunes started looking exactly like Finder? That was crazy confusing. People who understand GUI creation know that to be efficient, your eye needs nicely defined targets, and if that nicely defined target happens to be a leather-textured header bar rather than the same freaking gray as every other program, then so be it.
And gosh, it actually a pretty good texture. It's not harkening back to the crappy jpeggy/giffy textures of Windows 3.1. (Though as an aside, I find it strange that Apple is trying to push the "full-screen" apps ala EVERY SINGLE WINDOWS INCARNATION as some sort of innovation.)
Edit: Though true to some comments, a nice, real looking, darker leather would be better than orange.
more...
gramirez2012
Apr 26, 12:37 PM
$20/year is only $1.66/month. :rolleyes: Can't be any more reasonable, if you ask me.
AmpSkillz
Apr 28, 09:42 AM
"Mobile Phone Track" survey ???
Ahhh they are tracking us
seriously though this is not a surprise
i imagine the next iphone will be on all networks and the iphone 4 sales will still be strong as well at a lower price
should even the game a little with Android
Ahhh they are tracking us
seriously though this is not a surprise
i imagine the next iphone will be on all networks and the iphone 4 sales will still be strong as well at a lower price
should even the game a little with Android
more...
extraextra
Oct 18, 07:30 PM
so what will we see in 2007?
arnold schwarzenegger 2011
more...
Arnold Schwarzenegger
schwarzenegger movies.
arnold schwarzenegger 2011
Consultant
Apr 14, 12:27 PM
At this rate jailbreakers will never catch up.
more...
blondepianist
Mar 31, 03:16 PM
Apple, we all know the mouse is dead... stop wasting time coding mac apps to look like iPad apps and coding mac os to operate like iOS, just do the obvious: ditch the mac platform all together! Make larger iOS devices that allow for the manipulation of iOS apps in windowed form and there you go, desktop operating environment with iOS.
touch input > mouse input
Steve has made it clear that Mac is staying to do the heavy computing, while iOS will stay focused on lighter applications. I think Apple does want to move OS X toward touch, which is why they've done iLife and now Address Book and iCal to look like iOS applications. It's much easier to reskin a Mac app for touch than it is to introduce yet another form factor for iOS, so the way they're doing this makes sense.
Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we did see the launch of a MacPad alongside Lion this summer.
touch input > mouse input
Steve has made it clear that Mac is staying to do the heavy computing, while iOS will stay focused on lighter applications. I think Apple does want to move OS X toward touch, which is why they've done iLife and now Address Book and iCal to look like iOS applications. It's much easier to reskin a Mac app for touch than it is to introduce yet another form factor for iOS, so the way they're doing this makes sense.
Personally, I wouldn't be surprised if we did see the launch of a MacPad alongside Lion this summer.
coolbreeze
Apr 28, 03:56 PM
First, the volume switch issue, then this. I feel sorry for case manufacturers. What a nightmare.
twoodcc
Nov 25, 10:10 PM
I lost a bigadv unit too. I think they will credit it back but it will take time.
i hope they do. we'll see.
in the meantime, i'm thinking about putting a few video cards in my 2006 mac pro to fold with - since it's only getting like 3500 ppd running the smp client. i know i'll have to run windows to do the GPU2 client for now, but it might be worth it.
does anyone know if this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133304) card will work? and could i put 2 or 3 or 4 in there?
i hope they do. we'll see.
in the meantime, i'm thinking about putting a few video cards in my 2006 mac pro to fold with - since it's only getting like 3500 ppd running the smp client. i know i'll have to run windows to do the GPU2 client for now, but it might be worth it.
does anyone know if this (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16814133304) card will work? and could i put 2 or 3 or 4 in there?
Surely
Apr 28, 07:19 PM
.
Hey, Jonny I've for CEO!!!! Not.
Looks like his brain went to England but he left his body behind to do some last minute 'designs'. Nice attention to detail, all you had to do was change the color, genius. :rolleyes:
Yes, that's all they had to do. It was that simple......that's why it came out so quickly.:rolleyes:
I've ≠ Ive.
Hey, Jonny I've for CEO!!!! Not.
Looks like his brain went to England but he left his body behind to do some last minute 'designs'. Nice attention to detail, all you had to do was change the color, genius. :rolleyes:
Yes, that's all they had to do. It was that simple......that's why it came out so quickly.:rolleyes:
I've ≠ Ive.
BlackMax
Apr 18, 04:37 PM
I'm a little confused. People want to play games on this?
Would not be my first choice for gaming (not that I play games, but I did do flight sims once)
Is there anything else I should be concerned about? Maybe external monitor resolution? Movies?....I don't think so.
Big problem for intensive video stuff perhaps? but then again; an Air?
:confused:
I have a 11" MBA. I did not buy it to play games, but for work and ease of travel. BUT... I enjoy having the *option* to play the occasional game if the mood strikes me. :)
With my Black MacBook gaming was never an option because of the integrated Intel graphics.
I believe many MBA owners are like me and want a MBA that provides them with as many options as possible. Thus it is just a tad disconcerting when there is a good possibility the next generation MBA might reduce the number of options it provides to its owners. Then it again, it might not. Only time will tell. That is part of the fun of speculating on MacRumors.
Would not be my first choice for gaming (not that I play games, but I did do flight sims once)
Is there anything else I should be concerned about? Maybe external monitor resolution? Movies?....I don't think so.
Big problem for intensive video stuff perhaps? but then again; an Air?
:confused:
I have a 11" MBA. I did not buy it to play games, but for work and ease of travel. BUT... I enjoy having the *option* to play the occasional game if the mood strikes me. :)
With my Black MacBook gaming was never an option because of the integrated Intel graphics.
I believe many MBA owners are like me and want a MBA that provides them with as many options as possible. Thus it is just a tad disconcerting when there is a good possibility the next generation MBA might reduce the number of options it provides to its owners. Then it again, it might not. Only time will tell. That is part of the fun of speculating on MacRumors.
twoodcc
Oct 30, 08:15 PM
-16 is better for Intel processors.
oh ok. well -16 then. and let us know how it goes.
also, whiterabbit, are you using -8 with your i7 on the bigadv units?
oh ok. well -16 then. and let us know how it goes.
also, whiterabbit, are you using -8 with your i7 on the bigadv units?
inkswamp
Apr 15, 02:16 AM
I believe that it isn't suggesting anything at all. When you go to list the devices that your application is compatible with, that is likely just an exposed extra field for if you wanted to include another device that is capable. It is in my opinion, nothing but a little bug. (Though emulating iOS apps om my Mac would be cool :P)
That's what I'm thinking. I bet the code that generates that list of devices was just cut and pasted from somewhere else and someone got an extra one in there with this mysterious ix.Mac... thing in place as boilerplate code. I bet it means nothing.
However, if I were told it was indeed a new device and had to take a guess, I'd say it's becoming more and more likely that Apple is going to try to leverage the popularity of iOS to sell more laptops. Imagine a laptop with a touch screen that somehow could lay down flat and switch into an iOS mode, not emulated, but the real thing. Basically, it would be a laptop that could convert into an iPad. I can imagine a lot of interest in a single device that can run both OS X and iOS.
That's what I'm thinking. I bet the code that generates that list of devices was just cut and pasted from somewhere else and someone got an extra one in there with this mysterious ix.Mac... thing in place as boilerplate code. I bet it means nothing.
However, if I were told it was indeed a new device and had to take a guess, I'd say it's becoming more and more likely that Apple is going to try to leverage the popularity of iOS to sell more laptops. Imagine a laptop with a touch screen that somehow could lay down flat and switch into an iOS mode, not emulated, but the real thing. Basically, it would be a laptop that could convert into an iPad. I can imagine a lot of interest in a single device that can run both OS X and iOS.
timinbovey
Apr 26, 07:01 PM
I'm curious to know exactly WHAT "cloud" they're going to store my music in? There IS no CLOUD! Cripes, people, it's the same darn internet it always was. Piles of servers and hard drives, all connected by cables and wires and fiber optics, et. al. right here on EARTH. There's NO CLOUD. Why the HECK they had to start calling it that is what? Basically a Microsoft marketing term, right? So, lets get past that BS right now.
Of COURSE they're going to charge for it. Do you think for a moment that Apple, or anyone else can provide storage for all the songs, videos., etc that users have on their individual devices, AND provide bandwidth for that much streaming, AND maintain it, etc for free? Be real people.
Remembeer, the record labels are DEMANDING that EACH song by EVERY user be uploaded and kept seperate. So if 126,577 people have the SAME exact song on their device, it will have to be uploaded 126,577 times so each has their own secure copy to access. Which also makes me wonder, will Apple (or anyone else) be allowed to have backups available? Or will hundreds of thousands of users and their files have to be re-uploaded when there's a failure?
Basically, this is the SAME THING as uploading your very own music files to your own server, or the server of your choice and accessing them as you choose. In effect, having your own "cloud". I have a web site. As part of the deal, I get unlimited server space and bandwidth. Presently have probably 80 gigs of mp3's there (all of my own creation, no music company stuff) but I could easily upload hundreds of gigs of music there, and have access whenever and where ever I want it, at no cost to me. Of course I don't have a spiffy user interface to facilitate easy retrieval and organizing like iTunes, etc. But still, I could do it easily enough. So could all of you.
This is just another way to get you to pay to listen to music you already own. Except for very specialized situations, I just don't see a need for it.
Of COURSE they're going to charge for it. Do you think for a moment that Apple, or anyone else can provide storage for all the songs, videos., etc that users have on their individual devices, AND provide bandwidth for that much streaming, AND maintain it, etc for free? Be real people.
Remembeer, the record labels are DEMANDING that EACH song by EVERY user be uploaded and kept seperate. So if 126,577 people have the SAME exact song on their device, it will have to be uploaded 126,577 times so each has their own secure copy to access. Which also makes me wonder, will Apple (or anyone else) be allowed to have backups available? Or will hundreds of thousands of users and their files have to be re-uploaded when there's a failure?
Basically, this is the SAME THING as uploading your very own music files to your own server, or the server of your choice and accessing them as you choose. In effect, having your own "cloud". I have a web site. As part of the deal, I get unlimited server space and bandwidth. Presently have probably 80 gigs of mp3's there (all of my own creation, no music company stuff) but I could easily upload hundreds of gigs of music there, and have access whenever and where ever I want it, at no cost to me. Of course I don't have a spiffy user interface to facilitate easy retrieval and organizing like iTunes, etc. But still, I could do it easily enough. So could all of you.
This is just another way to get you to pay to listen to music you already own. Except for very specialized situations, I just don't see a need for it.
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét