LittleJoe
Nov 27, 02:44 AM
http://littleemedia.com/icontrol.jpg
i was bored.
i was bored.
flopticalcube
Apr 22, 12:17 PM
good point, I suppose it would increase taxes on the poor. and of course I see no benefit to that.
Surely finding a way to exempt the poor from that would be less complicated the current system.
Also, perhaps the necessary % would be less than expected bc normal people wouldn't be able to skate around taxation.
I'm not saying that this should be a primary political focus, but I believe it would be a nice thing to consider once government spending and overreach is under control and the national debt is less scary
I have no issues with a VAT as long as it is not imposed on food, energy and shelter. Unfortunately, it no longer becomes a great revenue generator if you exempt it from what the majority spend most of their money on.
Surely finding a way to exempt the poor from that would be less complicated the current system.
Also, perhaps the necessary % would be less than expected bc normal people wouldn't be able to skate around taxation.
I'm not saying that this should be a primary political focus, but I believe it would be a nice thing to consider once government spending and overreach is under control and the national debt is less scary
I have no issues with a VAT as long as it is not imposed on food, energy and shelter. Unfortunately, it no longer becomes a great revenue generator if you exempt it from what the majority spend most of their money on.
UmaThurman
Aug 7, 02:56 PM
SO in the Paris expo is where we'll most likely see updated MBP? :confused:
clientsiman
Mar 29, 01:29 PM
Yeah :( all the meteorologists had no idea an earthquake this big could be triggered by LiPo batteries.
Meteorologist??? I guess you mean the Geologists.
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
Meteorologist??? I guess you mean the Geologists.
I hope that Japan recover fast from this terrible catastrophe.
IntelliUser
Dec 9, 10:33 AM
OK, I've had it on my MBP for about 3 weeks and I've noticed the spinning beach ball a lot more than I remember... no crashes though.
I've just taken it off; or at least tried to. I used AppDelete and it took off everything except the icon on my top bar. When I click on the icon, it says there are updates available... dooooh...
Reinstall it and use the built-in uninstaller. NEVER trust anything but official uninstallers when it comes to antivirus apps.
I've just taken it off; or at least tried to. I used AppDelete and it took off everything except the icon on my top bar. When I click on the icon, it says there are updates available... dooooh...
Reinstall it and use the built-in uninstaller. NEVER trust anything but official uninstallers when it comes to antivirus apps.
peterdevries
Mar 28, 11:10 AM
This better not happen. Seriously.
Or else what?
Or else what?
Ava's Meeshee
Apr 20, 09:28 AM
If this news is true, then there must be a total revamp of iOS. I don't mind if the look of the phone stays the same (even though a larger screen wouldn't hurt) but it's more what you can do with it. New notification system, maybe live icons, file system?
I am hyped for the iOS event rather than the new fall iPhone event.
WiFi sync is a big one. They too extensive use of their "Home Sharing Network" not to have it.
I am hyped for the iOS event rather than the new fall iPhone event.
WiFi sync is a big one. They too extensive use of their "Home Sharing Network" not to have it.
iBunny
Apr 24, 09:11 AM
I look forward to the day that Apple releases retina displays for the MBP. Something else that would set :apple: apart.
wclyffe
Dec 12, 06:35 AM
Just got a notice from BLT that their expected ETA on the TomTom Car Kit is now 12/16. We'll see, but I wouldn't count on it.
DeaconGraves
May 4, 03:59 PM
Many is not all. Let's not assume.
Just because you got this raving review today doesn't mean you have to rub it in all of our faces. :p
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/want-super-fast-broadband-try-lithuania.ars
Just because you got this raving review today doesn't mean you have to rub it in all of our faces. :p
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/want-super-fast-broadband-try-lithuania.ars
machewcoy
Apr 22, 03:35 AM
Hrm.. When I hear "Mac Pro", I think of a giant behemoth of a computer, with super internals for crazy processing power for graphics design or whatever your poison may be.. Just to be clear, I'm well aware that there are cheaper ways of building a crazy computer that would put a Mac Pro to shame, but I'm just focusing on the Mac Pro here.. When I think of something rack-mountable, I think of servers, which leads me to think of the XServe and not a smaller Mac Pro (though, having the said giant powerhouse Mac Pro act as a server would be pretty cool, but I don't know how servers work so I may be wrong).. I'm no professional at anything, just a plain college student with a basic consumer outlook on things..
karolynaz
Mar 31, 08:18 AM
Really? In what sick and twisted world are you living? What's so very different in Lion that it's "not true desktop OS"? Launchpad the end of all?
He speaks about inverted scrolling.
P.S. Lietuvos Rytas is better :P
He speaks about inverted scrolling.
P.S. Lietuvos Rytas is better :P
PlipPlop
May 6, 06:19 AM
Unless ARM suddenly make a really great range of desktop cpus within a year I cant see it happening. The switch from PPC was bad enough. Classic environment was terrible.
AidenShaw
Mar 29, 02:20 PM
In 5-10 years the iPod will become extinct. By then the touch will be hanging on a thin wire.
Note that MS is dropping the standalone Zune hardware, and moving the Zune interface into Windows Phone 7.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
Note that MS is dropping the standalone Zune hardware, and moving the Zune interface into Windows Phone 7.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
ECUpirate44
Mar 28, 09:37 AM
Glad to read about Mac.
No so happy to read about the lack of iPhone hardware till possibly Sept :rolleyes:. I think if their going to wait until September, then we really need to consider the possibility of an LTE iPhone.
No so happy to read about the lack of iPhone hardware till possibly Sept :rolleyes:. I think if their going to wait until September, then we really need to consider the possibility of an LTE iPhone.
xPismo
Jul 21, 05:24 PM
If Intel really can start shipping merom by early August...WWDC would be a perfectly fine place to introduce new MacBook Pros. But I doubt they'll be ready that early.
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually...
True, but I like my Alu book look - I'd have no problem with a intel powered version. Although marketing being marketing, I'd like to see something new fresh, and awesome too.
BTW ebuc, your sig is nearly exactly what I'm planning on having. Looking at a cube 450 for a home server, and I already have a 20gb iPod. Cubes, insanely great.
Personally, I think its about time we have a major case revision. The aluminum PowerBooks have been out for almost three years (september '03 I believe). Don't get me wrong; current design is great: its functional and elegant, but change has to come eventually...
True, but I like my Alu book look - I'd have no problem with a intel powered version. Although marketing being marketing, I'd like to see something new fresh, and awesome too.
BTW ebuc, your sig is nearly exactly what I'm planning on having. Looking at a cube 450 for a home server, and I already have a 20gb iPod. Cubes, insanely great.
bhtooefr
Apr 30, 10:56 PM
OK, so a few things about this that I'm seeing...
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
3200x2000 background: A bit odd choice of resolution, but I think they're making a 16:10 resolution that they'll crop to 16:9 for the machine with an actually 3200px wide display.
But, that does indicate a few things.
3200x1800 makes sense if you're pixel quadrupling a 1600x900 display, which is what a 15.6" 16:9 MBP at current pixel densities would be. But, it DOESN'T make sense for pixel quadrupling the 17" MBP, or any of the desktop displays.
If the 15.6" or 15.4" MBP gets this, and the 17" doesn't... that means that (and this is pure conjecture here) the 17" isn't long for the world. How well do they sell, anyway?
As for display technology supporting a pixel-quadrupled iMac, we've had the technology for a pixel-quadrupled 21.5" iMac since 2001. The IBM T221, a 3840x2400 22.2" monitor, is the same density as that theoretical display. It was $18,000 when it came out, and by the time IBM pulled the plug on IDTech, a Viewsonic-branded version of the T221, the VP2290b, was in the $4000 ballpark in 2005. So, had the T221 followed a curve influenced more by technology improvements than by the market getting saturated with unusable monitors, we'd be seeing these panels in the $2000 range nowadays, as a standalone monitor, I think.
Now, to look at all the machines that Apple has. Keep in mind that I think that only pro hardware will get this, and Apple likes to stick to around 100-110 PPI for desktops, and 110-130 PPI for laptops.
I'll go ahead and speculate on theoretical 16:9 variants of existing models, too.
MacBook Air 11.6": Currently 1366x768, 135 ppi, retina at 25.4" - would be 2732x1536, 270 ppi, retina at 12.7"
MacBook Air 13.3": Currently 1440x900, 128 ppi, retina at 26.9" - would be 2880x1800, 255 ppi, retina at 13.5"
MacBook and MacBook Pro 13.3": Currently 1280x800, 113 ppi, retina at 30.3" - would be 2560x1600, 227 ppi, retina at 15.1"
MacBook Pro 15.4" low-res: Currently 1440x900, 110 ppi, retina at 31.2" - would be 2880x1800, 221 ppi, retina at 15.6"
MacBook Pro 15.4" high-res: Currently 1680x1050, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3360x2100, 257 ppi, retina at 13.4"
MacBook Pro 17.0": Currently 1920x1200, 133 ppi, retina at 25.8" - would be 3840x2400, 266 ppi, retina at 12.9"
iMac 21.5": Currently 1920x1080, 102 ppi, retina at 33.6" - would be 3840x2160, 205 ppi, retina at 16.8"
iMac/Cinema Display 27": Currently 2560x1440, 109 ppi, retina at 31.6" - would be 5120x2880, 218 ppi, retina at 15.8"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 low-res: 1366x768, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 2732x1536, 236 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 13.3" 16:9 high-res: 1600x900, 138 ppi, retina at 24.9" - would be 3200x1800, 276 ppi, retina at 12.4"
Theoretical 15.6" 16:9: 1600x900, 118 ppi, retina at 29.2" - would be 3200x1800, 235 ppi, retina at 14.6"
Theoretical 17.1" 16:9: 1920x1080, 129 ppi, retina at 26.7" - would be 3840x2160, 258 ppi, retina at 13.3"
Hrm. I am noticing a problem here for getting consistent resolutions when getting 16:9 into the mix... and, interestingly, Apple stayed on 16:10 for the 13.3" MBA. So, I wonder if this could even be a red herring of some kind? Because 3200x2000 doesn't really match up with any expected 16:10 resolution...
(Current lineup can do 255-270 ppi, which is fairly tight, ignoring the 13.3" MB(P) and the low-res 15.4" MBP, but going to 16:9, either desktop area would shrink for many users (and even then, the 11.6" and 17.1" wouldn't fit in well), or there would be a wide variance in ppi.)
Another thing to consider is the $3.9 billion that Apple pumped into LCD makers... possibly to secure a supply of retina panels?
(In case you can't tell, I'm SERIOUS about my high ppi displays. Looking at a IDTech IAQX10N, a 2048x1536 15.0" 171 ppi IPS display right now, and I'm stuck on a 5 year old machine because of it. Whoever makes something roughly equivalent or better gets my business, unless they're Sony.)
kainjow
Nov 26, 10:27 AM
If I could just have a Mac tablet that I could type and write notes on for class, I'd be in heaven :)
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 12:39 PM
You got it wrong. If you can't have cameras.. you CAN'T HAVE CAMERAS even if they're NOT being used. I work at a place where you can't have cellphones with cameras on the premises (i.e., the parking lot) let alone inside. Many companies with such policies will not buy displays because of such.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
I think this is an oversight (we can call it oSight) by Apple. If you want to gain market share, especially for people who want high powered equipment. I worked in a small research for a while, like the above poster, there were NO cameras allowed including camera phones. This was a blanket policy for the whole facillity even if you had no security clearence. In this case it was required becasue they did a lot DoD research.
So, right off these new computers (iMac, MB, MBP) are not options for a facility like this to use. Additionally, anyone who works there and ever wants to bring his/her personal laptop to work is sunk too.
If was still working there I probably would have to opt for a differnt laptop.
Compared to other computer brands Macs give their customers fewer add-on options. I don't know why. I guess it makes it easier for them. But, in this case I think not making the built in iSight an option (even if it is free, like the glossy screen in the MBP) is a mistake.
dmunz
Apr 25, 09:44 AM
He has come down from the mountain, he has spoken. Please return to your huts.
Hmm, if this is such a security hole why doesn't some smart guy break into Steve's phone and figure out just where he is?
FWIW
DLM
Hmm, if this is such a security hole why doesn't some smart guy break into Steve's phone and figure out just where he is?
FWIW
DLM
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 7, 02:23 PM
Hmmmmm....
It really seems like a good time to retire my old MDD. Still, $5400 is a lot of money. (what you have to pay here in sweden with edu discount for a 2.66 MP, X1900 XT, 500Gb + 23'')
Hmmmmm... tempted, very very tempted.
Side note: I have actually considered buying it in US and sneak it back to Sweden if I just could figure out how to transport it....
It really seems like a good time to retire my old MDD. Still, $5400 is a lot of money. (what you have to pay here in sweden with edu discount for a 2.66 MP, X1900 XT, 500Gb + 23'')
Hmmmmm... tempted, very very tempted.
Side note: I have actually considered buying it in US and sneak it back to Sweden if I just could figure out how to transport it....
BlizzardBomb
Jul 23, 12:47 PM
Why not? Conroe will have availability by WWDC, IIRC, and Merom won't be far behind- they could announce a MBP with Merom, shipping in two weeks after WWDC.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pros with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBooks with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
Just because something is available doesn't mean it will be updated.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pros with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBooks with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
Just because something is available doesn't mean it will be updated.
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 02:12 AM
I didn't quite read the whole thread, and I've seen people trying to present definitive answers representing multiple possible answers. While I don't claim to be an end all source, math is one thing that I can do and do understand.
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
I was tempted not to post, but, I think understanding the order of operations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Order_of_operations)/etc is something that is relatively important.
Multiple people have quoted the order : P(arenthes) E(xponents) M(ultiplication) D(ivision) A(ddition) S(ubtraction).
As stated, that is NOT totally accurate. Multiplication and division are the same operation, as are addition and subtraction. Thus, the order between them can be flipped. That is, P E D M A S is true, as is P E D M S A, as is P E M D S A.
If multiplication and division both appear you go from LEFT to RIGHT.
Parenthesis are implied multiplication.
So, first, in the parenthesis we have 12, so, 48/2(12). As that is written, one does 48/2=24*12. So, as the problem is written, the answer is 288. While the method of writing the problem is certainly not the best, the problem does, to my knowledge, only have one true answer.
An important note: not all calculators correctly apply the orders of operations. Any scientific calculator form the last 5 years or so should, and if it is outputting anything other then 288 I would be interested in knowing. Some pocket calulators with + - x � just go left to right.
Wolfram is, as usual, right. (http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29)
ciTiger
May 4, 02:51 PM
Another stone in the OD's grave...
I would prefer USB sticks...
I would prefer USB sticks...