Bye Bye Baby
Apr 22, 01:44 PM
Been waiting to get one for a while now. :o
I do hope that the backlit keyboard comes to the 11.5 inch.:rolleyes:
Bummed about Intel's graphics. I was hoping in some kind of settlement. :(
I do hope that the backlit keyboard comes to the 11.5 inch.:rolleyes:
Bummed about Intel's graphics. I was hoping in some kind of settlement. :(
Speedy2
Mar 29, 03:42 PM
Now read through the rest of the posts after that and discover that Finder does not support Cut and Paste.
There are plugins for that. Works fine on my Mac.
God, you people pretend as if there weren't any solutions to common problems out there. It's nice if certain features are there out of the box, but people who actually miss CUT+Paste are smart enough to install a simple tool.
Personally, I like the XP+Win7 Explorer better than the Finder.
However, both of them could very well do with tabs.
But you may guess: there are plugins for that. Good ones.
I wouldn't wanna miss that feature!
There are plugins for that. Works fine on my Mac.
God, you people pretend as if there weren't any solutions to common problems out there. It's nice if certain features are there out of the box, but people who actually miss CUT+Paste are smart enough to install a simple tool.
Personally, I like the XP+Win7 Explorer better than the Finder.
However, both of them could very well do with tabs.
But you may guess: there are plugins for that. Good ones.
I wouldn't wanna miss that feature!
Object-X
Aug 28, 03:12 PM
I'll bet we see a Mini refresh tomorrow.
That would be good news for me since I just bought a mini last week. I could return it and get a new one. Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
That would be good news for me since I just bought a mini last week. I could return it and get a new one. Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
cwt1nospam
Jan 12, 09:21 AM
Thanks for reminding me to put you on ignore. I know how easy it is to identify an operating system, but if they bothered to make a message just for Mac users it stands to reason they made malware for Mac users too. Or would they just make the message for fun? We all know what funny guys malware writers are.
For anyone who might buy into the above crap:
Many "virus writers" are script kiddies. They don't necessarily know much if anything about the Mac, so they assume that the virus they're using will work the same as on a PC. That's why they'll "make a message just for Mac users" even though it won't do anything. This of course doesn't mean that there aren't ever any Trojans for the Mac. There have been a few in the past and there certainly will be some in the future. There's just no need for antivirus software to detect these until and unless one or more of them become successful AND it takes Apple significantly longer to come out with a system update than it does the AV vendors to detect the threat and create a definition for it.
Why significantly longer? Because AV software costs you time and money while it slows your system down and potentially creates new vectors for viruses to attack your system! Software updates are free, don't slow your system down or make it more vulnerable, and unless they're long delayed the odds are excellent that you will not see the attack on your system before receiving the update.
This all applies to IOS too, except that because IOS is locked down to the point where the only way to get an application is through the app store it is practically impossible to create and transmit a trojan, let a lone a virus.
For anyone who might buy into the above crap:
Many "virus writers" are script kiddies. They don't necessarily know much if anything about the Mac, so they assume that the virus they're using will work the same as on a PC. That's why they'll "make a message just for Mac users" even though it won't do anything. This of course doesn't mean that there aren't ever any Trojans for the Mac. There have been a few in the past and there certainly will be some in the future. There's just no need for antivirus software to detect these until and unless one or more of them become successful AND it takes Apple significantly longer to come out with a system update than it does the AV vendors to detect the threat and create a definition for it.
Why significantly longer? Because AV software costs you time and money while it slows your system down and potentially creates new vectors for viruses to attack your system! Software updates are free, don't slow your system down or make it more vulnerable, and unless they're long delayed the odds are excellent that you will not see the attack on your system before receiving the update.
This all applies to IOS too, except that because IOS is locked down to the point where the only way to get an application is through the app store it is practically impossible to create and transmit a trojan, let a lone a virus.
zap2
May 3, 05:21 PM
...and we like to hook up our consoles to our monitors... I really hope this deal about the failed Target Mode is some kind of misunderstanding.
Yes, this is a stupid limitation Apple has put into place. I hope with adaptors, you'll be able to hook up mini-displayports, HDMI, DVI, and what not.
But Apple has also been weird about its target display mode...putting it only on the 24'' and 27'' model. Its a neat feature, but I doubt I'd grab a 27'' just for that.
It might convince a few people to to for the 27'', but if the 21.5'' had it, that might convince some Mac Mini owners to go for it.
Yes, this is a stupid limitation Apple has put into place. I hope with adaptors, you'll be able to hook up mini-displayports, HDMI, DVI, and what not.
But Apple has also been weird about its target display mode...putting it only on the 24'' and 27'' model. Its a neat feature, but I doubt I'd grab a 27'' just for that.
It might convince a few people to to for the 27'', but if the 21.5'' had it, that might convince some Mac Mini owners to go for it.
musiclover137
Sep 13, 09:34 PM
this is definitely a style over functionality....how da heck do you dial a number with clickwheel?
of course, if this is a slider phone like chocolate, then this is an awesome design.
Um, read the post buddy....
of course, if this is a slider phone like chocolate, then this is an awesome design.
Um, read the post buddy....
LaazyEye
Apr 14, 02:11 PM
in all seriousness people, this thing http://snowulf.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/USB-3-Mini-B-Connector.jpg is going to scare people off...
Drag'nGT
Apr 30, 01:58 PM
I swear, this guy never seems happy about anything. I seem to recall him saying this for other product releases... $10 says he'll say it again once the MBA is released.
I have a friend who swears Apple is gonna turn the MBP into a big MBA. He's pissed and moaned about the 15" loosing the express slot and "forced" him to get the new Sandy Bridge 17" MBP... He doesn't use the slot. He says he simply wants the comfort of knowing he has it if he ever wanted to use it. :rolleyes:
His latest rage is that the next MBP won't have a DVD slot. I forgot my Macs even had a DVD slot but I guess that's the difference between us.
USB3 is dead tech. You'll never see it on a Mac. Would be VERY surprised to see eSATA, as well.
Huh? Where are you getting the idea it's "dead tech"? We just started to see USB 3 thumb drives and HDDs.
I obviously see Thunderbolt's (I hate that new name) superiority. But that doesn't mean consumers do. They eat what they are fed. That's why I said Apple and Intel have to force Thunderbolt into the light and into their computers. If Apple does it first and is noted for having the fastest stuff because they went the extra step people/companies will follow.
I have a friend who swears Apple is gonna turn the MBP into a big MBA. He's pissed and moaned about the 15" loosing the express slot and "forced" him to get the new Sandy Bridge 17" MBP... He doesn't use the slot. He says he simply wants the comfort of knowing he has it if he ever wanted to use it. :rolleyes:
His latest rage is that the next MBP won't have a DVD slot. I forgot my Macs even had a DVD slot but I guess that's the difference between us.
USB3 is dead tech. You'll never see it on a Mac. Would be VERY surprised to see eSATA, as well.
Huh? Where are you getting the idea it's "dead tech"? We just started to see USB 3 thumb drives and HDDs.
I obviously see Thunderbolt's (I hate that new name) superiority. But that doesn't mean consumers do. They eat what they are fed. That's why I said Apple and Intel have to force Thunderbolt into the light and into their computers. If Apple does it first and is noted for having the fastest stuff because they went the extra step people/companies will follow.
MacVault
Sep 19, 06:19 PM
...How do they check their email when you take the notebook on the road?
iTunes places content into that folder when you download or rip. But you can put content anywhere, just drag it into iTunes from the new location. I'd like to see them support multiple folders in the future, but you can certainly use content without having it in the folder already.
They don't care about email. They just want to watch the movies I buy from iTunes, etc.
As for where iTunes puts it's content... the original poster had a good point - how to have the content synched between the external/networked storage device and the local machine, for example an laptop, so when one is on the road they can have access to the content on their storage server at home, although limited by the laptops available hard drive space, etc.
iTunes places content into that folder when you download or rip. But you can put content anywhere, just drag it into iTunes from the new location. I'd like to see them support multiple folders in the future, but you can certainly use content without having it in the folder already.
They don't care about email. They just want to watch the movies I buy from iTunes, etc.
As for where iTunes puts it's content... the original poster had a good point - how to have the content synched between the external/networked storage device and the local machine, for example an laptop, so when one is on the road they can have access to the content on their storage server at home, although limited by the laptops available hard drive space, etc.
Eidorian
Jul 14, 08:20 PM
Is it more than a G5? I see someone posted PowerMac processor power consumption, but those were dual processors in a PowerMac. I want to see how much power the single G5 in an iMac consumed.The 970FX specifications are littered in my earlier posts in this thread and in the Woodcrest thread.
I believe it was along the lines of 80w of power with 25-47w TDP.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2608770&postcount=148
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2608968&postcount=154
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2614723&postcount=44
I believe it was along the lines of 80w of power with 25-47w TDP.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2608770&postcount=148
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2608968&postcount=154
http://forums.macrumors.com/showpost.php?p=2614723&postcount=44
TheNightPhoenix
Sep 12, 06:19 PM
Hope you get your iPod to work,
Interesting note, new videos load quicker on the most recently purchased iPod.
For now i'm off to bed.
Interesting note, new videos load quicker on the most recently purchased iPod.
For now i'm off to bed.
WisdomWolf
Apr 11, 09:21 PM
It makes me grin a little when I see posts like in this thread posted by people who obviously have no shortage of money (with their multiple mac systems) and yet dont want to hand over a little money for something thats been out for 5 years and makes the audio elements of airplay completely redundant.
A NAS, Sonos and Popcorn Hour is all you need for your cd less, dvd less, blu ray less entertainment systems. But anyway, carry on bashing your heads against the Apple system.
That's why this key is so wonderful, because now you only need the NAS and an HTPC (like an Aspire Revo). One less device = happy people. Plus, with XBMC you get all the format support that the popcorn hour has, but a much nicer interface and a centralized database.
A NAS, Sonos and Popcorn Hour is all you need for your cd less, dvd less, blu ray less entertainment systems. But anyway, carry on bashing your heads against the Apple system.
That's why this key is so wonderful, because now you only need the NAS and an HTPC (like an Aspire Revo). One less device = happy people. Plus, with XBMC you get all the format support that the popcorn hour has, but a much nicer interface and a centralized database.
samiwas
Apr 18, 04:56 PM
Of course that is ridiculous, and I totally agree there should be a line, but where do we draw it? Who gets to draw it?
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
Ummm...that was pretty much the point....:confused:
The line should be drawn by universal standard workers laws that prevent an employer from needlessly abusing their employees (timewise) without just compensation.
For instance, when I'm working on a union job (yeah, those awful unions protecting workers and stuff), anything over 8 hours a day is time+half. Anything between midnight and 6am is double-time. More than 40 hours in a 7-day period is time+half. Sunday is time+half. The employer has a right to decide when he wants his job done, and he can pay the price for it. The problem is that most employers choose ridiculous timelines and budgets, and the people working for them are stuck having to work the hours to complete something beyond their control. Without some sort of workers protection laws, this will only get worse and worse.
Of course, there are jobs that have to get done in a certain amount of time (as I referenced above), and some people may alter their speed and go slower to push into that overtime (of course this happens...I've seen it firsthand and abhor the practice). But that's no different than an employer dumping a new workload onto someone on Friday afternoon and saying "Yeeeaahh...I'm gonna need you to go ahead and come in tomorrow. Oh, and I almost forgot, I'm also gonna need you to go ahead and come in on Sunday, too, okay? We, uh, lost some people this week, and, uh, we have to sort of play catch up. Thanks!"
So, do you prefer a world where the employer has all the control and can make his employees do whatever he wants for whatever he wants to pay (or they can quit/be fired), or a world where employees have some sort of power to require fair compensation for extraordinary work periods? I know which I prefer, and I'm pretty sure I know which you prefer.
What about a hotshot stock trader making a killing working 80+ hours a week on salary. Should we be allowed to work this much without overtime?
I realize it is an obscure analogy, but it is valid nonetheless.
What does the hotshot trader making a killing have to do with anything? What if the trader is working 80 hours a week and not making a killing? Is the trader WANTING to work 80 hours, or is his firm requiring him to work 80 hours? Are they compensating him or is he just working for the man making the killing for his company but not really seeing the results for himself? I guess if someone WANTS to work 80 hours for free, you can let them...but it should never be a required part of the job.
reflex
Aug 29, 03:32 AM
They don't say Dell or HP. But who makes PC's?
Just about everyone and their dog? :)
Just about everyone and their dog? :)
inkswamp
Nov 13, 06:13 PM
Why does Apple think it's okay to continually alienate and turn away developers?? :confused: Why do fanboys continue to excuse such incidences? Why aren't people SICK of this kind of behavior from Apple? :mad:
I guess I would turn that around to you and ask why are people making such a huge deal out of a handful of incidents in a pool of 100K+ apps? It's bound to happen, especially considering that this is a whole new approach to delivering apps to a device and there are bound to be misunderstandings and missteps along the way.
Obviously, I think this is a ridiculous situation and I hope someone higher-up at Apple gets involved and smoothes this over and ensures it doesn't happen again. However, attitudes like yours are basically advocating throwing the baby out with the bath-water.
I guess I would turn that around to you and ask why are people making such a huge deal out of a handful of incidents in a pool of 100K+ apps? It's bound to happen, especially considering that this is a whole new approach to delivering apps to a device and there are bound to be misunderstandings and missteps along the way.
Obviously, I think this is a ridiculous situation and I hope someone higher-up at Apple gets involved and smoothes this over and ensures it doesn't happen again. However, attitudes like yours are basically advocating throwing the baby out with the bath-water.
rtdunham
Aug 23, 08:29 PM
They still can. Apple can turn around tomorrow and buy Creative for what it's worth and would have in essence paid itself the $100M. :D
in a corporate acquisition, there's a purchase price, and at settlement the buyer pays the purchase price plus the value of assets such as cash, so the scenario you describe, while possible, is not likely the way it would unfold. imho.
in a corporate acquisition, there's a purchase price, and at settlement the buyer pays the purchase price plus the value of assets such as cash, so the scenario you describe, while possible, is not likely the way it would unfold. imho.
toddybody
May 3, 11:10 AM
Needs more Eyefinity.
I need more Eyefinity
http://thewebsite.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/cowbell_skit.jpg?w=347&h=312
I need more Eyefinity
http://thewebsite.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/cowbell_skit.jpg?w=347&h=312
Old Smuggler
Sep 13, 09:42 PM
i agree its got to compete with my treo
ill admit palm OS garnet blows but its not as bad as windows
ill just wait for OS X Mobile
ill admit palm OS garnet blows but its not as bad as windows
ill just wait for OS X Mobile
stainlessliquid
Oct 27, 02:59 PM
Considering that Apple doesnt make jack inside their computers, maybe they should be going after the other companies that provide Apple parts? I think that would embarass Apple more since I dont think Apple likes people to know that inside every Mac is abunch of PC parts.
They could blame Apple for going with those companies, that would put pressure on Apple to switch to a greener company and would put pressure on those companies to be greener themselves so they please Apple.
And yes a computer will never been totally environmentally friendly but people are managing to COMPLETELY miss the point of what they want. Other companies like Dell have stopped using parts that have certain very harmful "ingredients" since there are more than enough substitutes that work just as well and dont harm the environment. The only thing stopping other companies is cost and laziness, and considering the premium people pay on macs its actually rather absurd that Apple refuses to use environmentally friendly parts. They arent asking for the impossible and if it looks like they are singling out Apple then its because Apple is literally one of the last major companies to adopt a policy of not buying parts or recycle the things that contain these things. If Dell and pretty much every other major PC maker can use these parts and recycle then I would love to see someone try to explain why Apple is somehow incapable of doing the same. Its like if people bitched about cars polluting less but getting the same performance and having virtually the same price, do some people just like to screw the environemnt?
They could blame Apple for going with those companies, that would put pressure on Apple to switch to a greener company and would put pressure on those companies to be greener themselves so they please Apple.
And yes a computer will never been totally environmentally friendly but people are managing to COMPLETELY miss the point of what they want. Other companies like Dell have stopped using parts that have certain very harmful "ingredients" since there are more than enough substitutes that work just as well and dont harm the environment. The only thing stopping other companies is cost and laziness, and considering the premium people pay on macs its actually rather absurd that Apple refuses to use environmentally friendly parts. They arent asking for the impossible and if it looks like they are singling out Apple then its because Apple is literally one of the last major companies to adopt a policy of not buying parts or recycle the things that contain these things. If Dell and pretty much every other major PC maker can use these parts and recycle then I would love to see someone try to explain why Apple is somehow incapable of doing the same. Its like if people bitched about cars polluting less but getting the same performance and having virtually the same price, do some people just like to screw the environemnt?
peharri
Sep 18, 07:52 AM
I'm sure I late getting into the argument, and that fanboyism depending on what network youre own will not change, but I really think GSM does have better voice quality than any other network.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
(Before I begin, quick terminology comment: I'm going to avoid "CDMA" and use the term "IS-95" instead - I try to avoid using terms like "CDMA" and "TDMA" because it generally confuses people. Many think the next version of GSM, UMTS, is actually IS95, because it incorporates a CDMA air interface called W-CDMA, for instance. Others think GSM is the same thing as the D-AMPS/IS-136 system used by (the various phone companies that became) Cingular until they started moving to GSM because both have a "TDMA" air interface and IS-136 is usually called "TDMA".) In practice, UMTS and IS95 have almost nothing in common, UMTS is a revision of GSM, and GSM has almost nothing in common with IS-136. )
There's no way to compare the two. Both IS-95 and GSM implement a variety of different codecs that are provided differently by different operators. In the area I live, Cingular (GSM) tries to force many phones to use something called AMR-HR, which has "acceptable" voice quality when you have good reception, and drops to barely incomprehensable with any deterioration in signal strength. T-Mobile (GSM) clearly doesn't, and I can talk and listen to someone with both of us sounding like we're on a landline with one bar of signal. On the same phone.
Likewise, Verizon (IS-95) uses some awful bitrate codec for its network where I live (I believe they're heavily oversubscribed here) where pretty much everyone sounds like they're dying from some serious lung problem, and Sprint PCS (IS-95 too) doesn't and generally the call quality, at medium to good reception, seems pretty much ok. Sub-landline, but not seriously so.
With the variety of voice codecs the operators use, you can't really make a fair judgement merely on the basis of network technology. Either the operator's cheap, or it isn't. IS-95 was chosen by many networks on the basis that it's spectrum efficient (ie it's cheap), but on the other hand Sprint PCS was always content with call drops when I used it to handle network overloading rather than seriously compromising on call quality. Cingular's move to GSM has caused problems in that it's using a significantly less spectrum efficient technology than the technology it replaced, so Cingular's had to, in many places, hopefully temporarily, use the crappy half-rate codecs to boost capacity until it can get more towers online.
I wouldn't use voice quality as a way to judge the technologies.
eNcrypTioN
Feb 24, 10:06 AM
People still use McAfee lol... :eek: Apple is smart, I doubt anything bad will come of this.
Machead III
Aug 31, 02:08 PM
There will are not relay organized at AppleExpo
LMFAO! http://www.starshipbuilder.com/forums/images/smilies/laugh.gif
LMFAO! http://www.starshipbuilder.com/forums/images/smilies/laugh.gif
Mal67
Apr 22, 08:44 PM
C'mon Apple give us some new machines to actually talk about - like SB mini; like SB imac; like SB air.
scoobydoo99
Apr 20, 10:07 AM
Will be interesting to see Apple's response to this. I don't necessarily mind the data being collected for things like find my iPhone and forensics but I'd like it to be very well secured.
Not sure what you are saying. You don't mind it being collected for forensics, yet you want it to be secured???
Forensics is the collection of data/information for legal purposes. This often entails surreptitious surveillance or electronic eavesdropping. By definition, the forensic investigation of your personal activities will NOT be "secured." On the contrary, a forensic investigation will seek to either covertly or directly obtain every available piece of personal information stored about you. Whether you are accused of a crime or just being surveilled and whether you are guilty or innocent is irrelevant. The point is, the information is available for anyone to obtain.
Not sure what you are saying. You don't mind it being collected for forensics, yet you want it to be secured???
Forensics is the collection of data/information for legal purposes. This often entails surreptitious surveillance or electronic eavesdropping. By definition, the forensic investigation of your personal activities will NOT be "secured." On the contrary, a forensic investigation will seek to either covertly or directly obtain every available piece of personal information stored about you. Whether you are accused of a crime or just being surveilled and whether you are guilty or innocent is irrelevant. The point is, the information is available for anyone to obtain.