Glideslope
Apr 25, 07:14 PM
Liquid-metal!!!
Unibody Liquid Metal, or a Aluminum/Liquid Metal Hybrid.
It's NOT going to be Carbon Fiber.
It's going to be "Magical". :apple:
Unibody Liquid Metal, or a Aluminum/Liquid Metal Hybrid.
It's NOT going to be Carbon Fiber.
It's going to be "Magical". :apple:
NebulaClash
Mar 30, 11:52 AM
Oooh! Grammar Nazis fighting for high stakes!
swarmster
Mar 30, 11:48 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/30/microsoft-hires-linguist-to-oppose-apples-app-store-trademark/)
Apple noted (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/01/apple-defends-against-microsoft-in-app-store-trademark-dispute/) in a prior filing that it had moved to protect its trademark by reaching out to companies it believed was using the "App Store" name improperly, but Microsoft argues that the simple fact that those companies were using the term in the first place indicates that the term is generic.
WOW! That's quite the argument Microsoft's putting forward. If that's true, they're arguing against the entire trademark system! Using someone else's trademark causes it to be generic and no longer a trademark?
Good luck with that one.
Apple noted (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/03/01/apple-defends-against-microsoft-in-app-store-trademark-dispute/) in a prior filing that it had moved to protect its trademark by reaching out to companies it believed was using the "App Store" name improperly, but Microsoft argues that the simple fact that those companies were using the term in the first place indicates that the term is generic.
WOW! That's quite the argument Microsoft's putting forward. If that's true, they're arguing against the entire trademark system! Using someone else's trademark causes it to be generic and no longer a trademark?
Good luck with that one.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 28, 04:22 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
$100B past Microsoft in 1 year is tremendous. Go AAPL!
when something jumps that quickly it tells you that value should be questions.
$100B past Microsoft in 1 year is tremendous. Go AAPL!
when something jumps that quickly it tells you that value should be questions.
winmacguy
Aug 23, 11:56 PM
A little-known company, and that was to create it's product. If apple buys one of their largest competitors, that will raise a few eyebrows.
Philips Electronics of Holland was one of the companies that turned down the offer to develop the predecessor of the iPod from its creator.
Philips Electronics of Holland was one of the companies that turned down the offer to develop the predecessor of the iPod from its creator.
Pavia
Mar 24, 05:47 PM
The USB 2.0 ports will be simply be upgraded to USB 3.0 ports - count on it once the chipsets only support USB 3.0.
ThunderPort is going to be far more expensive than USB 3.0 - USB will stay king for most devices (those needing 100 MB/sec or less). ThunderPort will be a high end special purpose connector for RAID-arrays, breakout boxes, eSATA/USB 3.0 hubs, docking stations, specialized audio/video equipment.
Just like cheap, ubiquitous USB 2.0 killed 1394a and 1394b in the marketplace (and killed FW1600 and FW3200 in the womb), USB 3.0 will be fine for the tasks that most people have.
I doubt anyone purchasing a MacBook Pro or iMac won't be able to wait a bit longer when transferring files, actually. Which makes me wonder why Apple put them in, instead of USB 3.0, if it's that cheaper, and still that fast. I do realize that I am somewhat contradicting myself now.
I am sure I won't be needed thunderbolts transferring speeds, ever.
ThunderPort is going to be far more expensive than USB 3.0 - USB will stay king for most devices (those needing 100 MB/sec or less). ThunderPort will be a high end special purpose connector for RAID-arrays, breakout boxes, eSATA/USB 3.0 hubs, docking stations, specialized audio/video equipment.
Just like cheap, ubiquitous USB 2.0 killed 1394a and 1394b in the marketplace (and killed FW1600 and FW3200 in the womb), USB 3.0 will be fine for the tasks that most people have.
I doubt anyone purchasing a MacBook Pro or iMac won't be able to wait a bit longer when transferring files, actually. Which makes me wonder why Apple put them in, instead of USB 3.0, if it's that cheaper, and still that fast. I do realize that I am somewhat contradicting myself now.
I am sure I won't be needed thunderbolts transferring speeds, ever.
iEvolution
Apr 22, 03:29 PM
apple is not the first ones to do this so not sure about your last comment. if you USE itunes, do you REALLY own anything???
why is there a limit to how many computers you can play a song on? hmmm yeah u don't really own it now do you?
Look at netflix and hulu plus. if you can get access to TONS of content through a subscription what is the point of owning an actual physical copy if you can watch it from your queue online on your device?
This isn't the content of music on iTunes isn't DRM protected, furthermore I still own the content (even the DRM) as I can do exactly what I want with it. I can back it up, move it between devices, and have absolutely no dependence on sustainable bandwidth, company's servers, and policy changes revolving around the use of the server.
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
why is there a limit to how many computers you can play a song on? hmmm yeah u don't really own it now do you?
Look at netflix and hulu plus. if you can get access to TONS of content through a subscription what is the point of owning an actual physical copy if you can watch it from your queue online on your device?
This isn't the content of music on iTunes isn't DRM protected, furthermore I still own the content (even the DRM) as I can do exactly what I want with it. I can back it up, move it between devices, and have absolutely no dependence on sustainable bandwidth, company's servers, and policy changes revolving around the use of the server.
As for your netflix comment, there have been plenty of times that Netflix has removed content from their servers that was previously available, if I actually own the content I don't even have to worry about the company removing availability of item <x>.
Streaming content is inferior to downloaded content, it depends on a reliable connection, it depends on your bandwidth not being capped or being regulated to a lower setting because you went over (it'd be pretty easy to stream videos and go over your limit especially in HD).
With the recent iPhone privacy fiasco, APPLE would be the LAST company on earth that I would want to depend on.
As a backup option I think its great, as a primary service that eliminates the concept of downloading and owning your content, its complete bull. I'm not paying money for content that essentially stays in someone else's computer that they could do what they want with it at ANY time. Forget it.
speed, quality and reliability through internet connections is absolutely INFERIOR than when it is run from a hard drive (avg transfer for a hard drive in 2007 was 1030 MBits (128MB/sec) or flash memory (even the lowest class runs at 2MB/sec, which is more than most people can get in their internet connection).
If it goes further to where computers start using cloud services just to run and store their computer it becomes a) a privacy issue, b) a security issue. People like their privacy and like to own stuff they pay for.
HecubusPro
Aug 28, 10:13 PM
This was one of the things I was afraid would happen with the Intel switch--a new processor every eight minutes. At least with the PPCs, there were predictable, manageable gaps between bumps.
The only thing wrong with frequent updates is that us tech geeks tend to want the latest and greatest. In all actuality though, it allows us more choice as consumers. Sure, I'm going to buy a new C2D MBP as soon as they're available, but it's going to be my first new computer in over 3 years (I'm normally on a two-year plan :).) I'm hoping that I'll be good for another two to four years after that.
Of course, that's not going to keep me from wanting to upgrade whenever the newest iteration of whatever comes out, but most likely I'll be envious of everyone on here who does get that new system, and be content with what I have for the time being. When I'm really ready to actually upgrade, I know that Apple will probably be keeping up with the Joneses frequently enough so that I won't have to wait too long for their next computer/update/upgrade.
For me, Apple moving to Intel chips has allowed me to seriously become a full-fledged mac person again. I couldn't be happier. Keep those updates coming and make sure they're frequent! :D
The only thing wrong with frequent updates is that us tech geeks tend to want the latest and greatest. In all actuality though, it allows us more choice as consumers. Sure, I'm going to buy a new C2D MBP as soon as they're available, but it's going to be my first new computer in over 3 years (I'm normally on a two-year plan :).) I'm hoping that I'll be good for another two to four years after that.
Of course, that's not going to keep me from wanting to upgrade whenever the newest iteration of whatever comes out, but most likely I'll be envious of everyone on here who does get that new system, and be content with what I have for the time being. When I'm really ready to actually upgrade, I know that Apple will probably be keeping up with the Joneses frequently enough so that I won't have to wait too long for their next computer/update/upgrade.
For me, Apple moving to Intel chips has allowed me to seriously become a full-fledged mac person again. I couldn't be happier. Keep those updates coming and make sure they're frequent! :D
![annette bening warren beatty. Warren Beatty [amp; Wife];Annette](http://cache3.asset-cache.net/xc/50381433.jpg%3Fv%3D1%26c%3DIWSAsset%26k%3D2%26d%3DE41C9FE5C4AA0A14089574A928D4C226CB11042438AD72B1B96CE085173EA4AEB01E70F2B3269972 "Warren Beatty [amp; Wife];Annette")
room237
Mar 30, 12:49 PM
It depends on what the meaning of the word "is" is.
If "is" means is and never has been, that is not--- that is one thing.
If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.
If "is" means is and never has been, that is not--- that is one thing.
If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement.
![annette bening warren beatty. Warren Beatty [amp; Wife];Annette](http://cache1.asset-cache.net/xc/50732484.jpg%3Fv%3D1%26c%3DIWSAsset%26k%3D2%26d%3DE41C9FE5C4AA0A147FF90CC0B6C43E7A1D87D44CC999B4EF8B41DFF6D1269110B01E70F2B3269972 "Warren Beatty [amp; Wife];Annette")
dr_lha
Sep 26, 03:49 PM
I for one in disappointed they went with GSM
Well it makes sense, most of the world uses GSM, it's a much larger market for Apple to aim at, combined with the much lower cost of only having to develop one phone.
Plus Verizon are coonts.
HERE ARE THE PICTURES:
You're joking right? You realise these are pipe-dream mock ups right?
Well it makes sense, most of the world uses GSM, it's a much larger market for Apple to aim at, combined with the much lower cost of only having to develop one phone.
Plus Verizon are coonts.
HERE ARE THE PICTURES:
You're joking right? You realise these are pipe-dream mock ups right?
Eidorian
Jul 20, 01:22 PM
I hope nobody's brought this up because I skipped a few pages of the thread, but...
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.You're the first one to bring this up. Conroe is well worth the money for its processing power. Getting a higher output power supply for the iMac shouldn't be to hard. So, I really do hope Apple somehow puts a Conroe in the iMac. :D
Oh and no underclocking please. :p
I've noticed some things with regards to pricing.
The current 1.86 GHz Yonah in the 17" iMac costs $294.
The new 2 GHz Merom costs $294.
A 2.16 GHz Merom costs $423.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe costs $224.
A 2.16 GHz Conroe is a full $70 cheaper than the 1.86 GHz Yonah in the iMac today and $70 cheaper than the 2 GHz Merom Apple would use if they went with Merom. This would allow either higher profit margins or a price drop (or they could put the extra money into something else).
If there is a power supply problem- I'm sure it won't cost $70 to increase the power supply capacity a little.
If, instead, there is both a heat and power issue- a 2.16 GHz Conroe underclocked to 2 GHz is still $70 cheaper than a 2 GHz Merom and probably outperforms it, and can be advertised as a desktop processor and completes Apple's lineup.
I'm strongly hoping for Conroe in an iMac. I also hope the iMac gets updated at WWDC. I really don't want to wait anylonger to make the purchase, and the back to school deal expires in September two days after MacExpo Paris.
From what's been said, it looks like Conroe doesn't run too hot, it just sucks too much power. However, it still saves a lot of money to use, a little which can be put in to increasing the power supply, and the rest is pure profit for Apple. It also provides a huge leap in performance.
Apple can bump the iMac from 1.86/2 GHz to 2.16/2.4 GHz. The 2.4 GHz Conroe costs $107 less than the 2 GHz Yonah in the current 20" iMac, which could even spell a price drop, additional features, or just a huge Apple profit margin.You're the first one to bring this up. Conroe is well worth the money for its processing power. Getting a higher output power supply for the iMac shouldn't be to hard. So, I really do hope Apple somehow puts a Conroe in the iMac. :D
Oh and no underclocking please. :p
MarcelV
Aug 31, 03:09 PM
Iand who has been feverishly building bandwidth and capability to deliver full length full resolution movies...Google has.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Google is buying up Dark Fiber. That means no end points into homes like Verizons FIOS has. The bottleneck for full length high resolution movies will be from decentralized distribution centers to the homes. Dark Fiber is helping, but not by much.
Hattig
Aug 24, 06:54 AM
No win situation to continue with the lawsuits.
The patent could be invalidated I'm certain.
However look at the speed that the patent office displayed in dealing with the NTP patents that Blackberry infringed upon. Glacial. That cost RIM $450m, plus the lawyer fees, that's the cost of staying in business for them, a halt to sales and service would have killed them.
By the time the patent office would have invalidated the patents (2010 say), Creative would have won the court case (previous look and feel cases notwithstanding) and the damages could have been a lot higher. A small payment (for Apple) and the problem is gone, the worry is gone, the lawyer fees for a court case won't happen, no uncertaintly, and I'm sure that the deal also includes a 'no more lawsuits' condition. It probably is the best deal in terms of shareholder value. Instead the final deal does appear to be a win/win situation for both companies.
Chalk up another win for the broken patent system though.
The patent could be invalidated I'm certain.
However look at the speed that the patent office displayed in dealing with the NTP patents that Blackberry infringed upon. Glacial. That cost RIM $450m, plus the lawyer fees, that's the cost of staying in business for them, a halt to sales and service would have killed them.
By the time the patent office would have invalidated the patents (2010 say), Creative would have won the court case (previous look and feel cases notwithstanding) and the damages could have been a lot higher. A small payment (for Apple) and the problem is gone, the worry is gone, the lawyer fees for a court case won't happen, no uncertaintly, and I'm sure that the deal also includes a 'no more lawsuits' condition. It probably is the best deal in terms of shareholder value. Instead the final deal does appear to be a win/win situation for both companies.
Chalk up another win for the broken patent system though.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 14, 03:29 PM
Amd has been supporting 3.0 for a while now. My motherboard has it and it was made in march of last year
Pravius
Apr 22, 09:40 AM
Man, stop it with the cloud service already. :rolleyes: You can't rely on the internet availability for listening to music. It's unreliable. Plus, the streaming will probably be low resolution, drain battery life, eat into data caps, not display lyrics, and generally be a crappy experience. If I wanted to stream, I can do it from my home computer where my music already resides with one of the 100 apps already available and not have to fight through all the bandwidth issues that are probably gonna result from Apple's side. What's the point? I can do this now.
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
I don't think anyone here is arguing the fact that they are going to use the cloud service as a replacement for streaming from home, however having an option is nice.
For me personally and I think that most people here are on the same page.
1. It's a great way to backup your music library knowing it will never get erased, expire, etc.
2. When we are on the move and do not have the option to turn on our computers to listen to music we have the option of going to the cloud.
3. Saves hard drive space and also does not require me to fill my iPhone full of music and nothing else. At this point my iTunes library is nearly 30 gigs. That is twice the size of my iPhone storage.
For me it will not be a replacement (yet). I have been using the Amazon clous service and it has been very reliable. Sure it takes awhile to upload but once you have everything uploaded then you are good to go. I have been streaming since it went live and have not yet had one issue, and yes I am using the computer and my iPhone (iCab and change the browser type to something other than Safari (iPhone).
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
I don't think anyone here is arguing the fact that they are going to use the cloud service as a replacement for streaming from home, however having an option is nice.
For me personally and I think that most people here are on the same page.
1. It's a great way to backup your music library knowing it will never get erased, expire, etc.
2. When we are on the move and do not have the option to turn on our computers to listen to music we have the option of going to the cloud.
3. Saves hard drive space and also does not require me to fill my iPhone full of music and nothing else. At this point my iTunes library is nearly 30 gigs. That is twice the size of my iPhone storage.
For me it will not be a replacement (yet). I have been using the Amazon clous service and it has been very reliable. Sure it takes awhile to upload but once you have everything uploaded then you are good to go. I have been streaming since it went live and have not yet had one issue, and yes I am using the computer and my iPhone (iCab and change the browser type to something other than Safari (iPhone).
pingin
Sep 12, 05:47 PM
Kind of a huge gap, don'cha think? For an extra $100 I can nearly TRIPLE the capacity? Why would I even consider a 30 GB model?
Actually $100 is a lot of money. Especially if you don't need the capacity.
The main thing for me though is size. The difference in width is only a few tenths of an inch but the 30G is definitely slim and it feels pretty light in the hand. I'm not sure that's really the case with the 60G/80G. The iPod is primarily a portable device afterall.
Actually $100 is a lot of money. Especially if you don't need the capacity.
The main thing for me though is size. The difference in width is only a few tenths of an inch but the 30G is definitely slim and it feels pretty light in the hand. I'm not sure that's really the case with the 60G/80G. The iPod is primarily a portable device afterall.
Torrijos
Apr 25, 06:34 PM
Here begins the age of LiquidMetal :cool:
ready2switch
Aug 28, 04:06 PM
ah yes. just like they did with the eMac back in the day. that was popular... you know, not having a product to ship for weeks.
Isn't that how they introduced the MBP in January? Announced at MWSF and then not shipped until sometime in February? (I think the iMacs shipped right away, which could be a good "hint" that they could get conroe....if you like that sort of a parallel.)
Isn't that how they introduced the MBP in January? Announced at MWSF and then not shipped until sometime in February? (I think the iMacs shipped right away, which could be a good "hint" that they could get conroe....if you like that sort of a parallel.)
kasei
Sep 19, 06:35 PM
This is great news. I guess the more we buy the faster we will see other studios with better movies. I guess I will take the plung and buy a movie today.
LegendKillerUK
Apr 19, 07:38 AM
Did anyone else notice that the iPhone picture is actually a 3G running iOS 2.x?
Silly Apple.
Silly Apple.
Freg3000
Aug 23, 04:57 PM
What I find most interesting is that fact the Creative is joining the Made for iPod program and will be producing its own iPod accessories.
Spanky Deluxe
Sep 5, 12:05 PM
This sure does look interesting. I doubt an Airport replacement will be released just yet, not until the draft gets approved. Although it could explain the delayed Airport Express chips for the Mac Pros. An iTunes Movie service has been a definite since the big data centre was built a few months ago imo.
spicyapple
Sep 26, 08:06 AM
Any idea what kind of "top-secret" features Leopard could support for iPhone?
Let your imaginiations run wild!
Automatic calendar and address book syncing.
Let your imaginiations run wild!
Automatic calendar and address book syncing.
HitchHykr
Apr 20, 12:50 PM
Unless you decide to work for Google (which from your comment, I presume your aren't), or if you get famous, then I'd say that the chance that anyone at Google would decide to look at any data they collected about you is abysmal. This goes for any information Apple collects too. Obviously, there's a risqu� for security breaches, but the chance that your info then would be accessed or used is also rather small.
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)
Not that it's not a problem.
This is different. The information is made accessible to people around you. So, while an iPhone owner is away from the house, someone else, who will be a lot more interested in him or her, can access the log in their backup.
If your behavior is risqu� then the risk of a security breach is very important. :)