ferrous
May 8, 12:16 AM
I don't mind paying family mobileme account, but only one of my friends has mobileme and frankly I NEVER use iChat or other services to network because nobody is on mobileme... at least not my friends.
Multimedia
Aug 7, 06:18 PM
SO in the Paris expo is where we'll most likely see updated MBP?They don't need a special event for what will most likely just be an updated processor.I am one who thinks the Merom MBP will be a new design including user installable HD like on the MB. :) So I am still thinking Paris Apple Expo. Apple loves the French. ;)
thefunkymunky
Aug 4, 04:35 AM
So. Errm. I have a question.
I have a MBP as in my sig. Actually that is the second one I have. First one got damaged by Apple, this second one is currently with Apple and has been for the last 4 weeks. It only went in to repair the fried BT.
Anyway. Since buying my first MBP in February and receiving the replacement in June which is now back with Apple. I have only had around 4 weeks usuage out of my machine and to this date I am still not using my MBP I originally purchased in February. Every time I call Apple to ask where my machine is they tell me that it will be with me the following week.
So what are the chances of Apple upgrading me to a new Merom MBP eh. What you think?:confused:
I have a MBP as in my sig. Actually that is the second one I have. First one got damaged by Apple, this second one is currently with Apple and has been for the last 4 weeks. It only went in to repair the fried BT.
Anyway. Since buying my first MBP in February and receiving the replacement in June which is now back with Apple. I have only had around 4 weeks usuage out of my machine and to this date I am still not using my MBP I originally purchased in February. Every time I call Apple to ask where my machine is they tell me that it will be with me the following week.
So what are the chances of Apple upgrading me to a new Merom MBP eh. What you think?:confused:
Don't panic
May 4, 05:12 PM
Rhon, Wilmer and Rosius are completely made up. I also didn't come up with 'villian'. ravenvii is the mastermind behind that one.
i had figured Rohn was from the Lair game (which I never played)
i had figured Rohn was from the Lair game (which I never played)
Stevamundo
Dec 14, 12:39 PM
No, we do NOT have any responsibility to protect Windows users from viruses. It is each computer user's responsibility to protect themselves. Even if every Mac ran antivirus, Windows users are still at a much greater risk from other sources of malware. The common sense approach is for every Windows user to run their own antivirus to protect themselves from malware, whether that malware comes from a Mac user or another source. Mac users do not have a responsibility to burden their computers with AV apps, just because some Windows users may be careless enough to run without AV protection.
It's ALL of our responsibility to try to contain viruses the best we can. I don't want to spread any viruses to my PC friends. That's called politeness.
However I agree, if you are a Windows user and you don't have any AV protection then you're just asking for it.
It's ALL of our responsibility to try to contain viruses the best we can. I don't want to spread any viruses to my PC friends. That's called politeness.
However I agree, if you are a Windows user and you don't have any AV protection then you're just asking for it.
Shivetya
May 6, 05:22 AM
WOW.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
First step to a totally closed system. Pretty soon all our applications we want will have to come through the App store for our Macs. The day I see that is the day I turn my Mac OFF.
I will go back to Windows in a heart beat if I am forced to buy my applications and such through Apple.
Bibulous
Sep 10, 11:04 PM
$3-4.99 rentals of brand new movies would be awesome. Otherwise, "meh"
I can't get to excited about this, it will take me 10 hours to download 2GB :eek:
I can't get to excited about this, it will take me 10 hours to download 2GB :eek:
WillEH
May 2, 11:13 PM
Yes please, love things like it :)
sineplex
Apr 20, 02:03 AM
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger.
If they make the screen edge to edge it will become 4 inches without any changes to the physical phone dimension.
If they make the screen edge to edge it will become 4 inches without any changes to the physical phone dimension.
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
![Bikini Atoll Bomb. [Sinking at Bikini Atoll].](https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/blogger_img_proxy/AEn0k_t0xNM1EJouC9afnWUhObemFHyIb-222KysQ6CNElRaba3J3lKhEeFMMS7Eo3r3nScwJ-1WHYMYoQ5sjaaPQC9lQVNOspeI612G2PJnQnBrNv2FSrZWLxpyfCqLfvK0HNE=s0-d "[Sinking at Bikini Atoll].")
AZREOSpecialist
Apr 18, 03:21 PM
Ooop. Apple already so afraid? No wonder when a phone OS (Galaxy tab with Android 2.2) takes almost 20% marketshare in less than 3 months in the tablet market...
What is your source for this information?
What is your source for this information?
Hildron101010
Mar 30, 08:20 PM
Yes they did. Did you even try it before replying anything?
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
Yes I did, it was still grayed out.
bohbot16
Nov 4, 08:01 PM
I've made only one phone call so far, which worked fine, but the phone uses the mount's speaker even when you're plugged into the car stereo (music and/or Tomtom app voice stops in the car speakers, and then the phone call comes out of the mount speaker). I could hear the phone call fine driving around town, but I'm a little worried about how well I'll be able to hear phone calls at freeway speeds in my noisy little car (a Honda Fit).
By any chance do you have a bluetooth headset to test with? I'm wondering if the iPhone can be connected to this kit for the improved GPS while using another bluetooth device for the handsfree calling.
By any chance do you have a bluetooth headset to test with? I'm wondering if the iPhone can be connected to this kit for the improved GPS while using another bluetooth device for the handsfree calling.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 11:10 AM
I'll only add to what mcrain wrote by saying that what you're describing is a race to the bottom. If capital gains taxes were so corrosive, every government should logically keep them at 0%. Is that really the logical conclusion you'd like to make with this line of reasoning?
Investors have already been investing in Asian markets for decades, and it has nothing to do with taxes; it has everything to do with how rapidly those markets have been growing over the past 40 years.
Keep in mind I'm not saying what things should be (I believe everything moves in cycles which cannot be avoided). I'm just saying the presumed benefits and consequences of higher taxes are misunderstood. It is always a race to the bottom/race to the top (depending on your perspective; "bottom" carries with it a negative connotation. if someone were arguing for a "race to the bottom" he has already lost rhetorically). Why has America had a history of immigrants coming to seek prosperity? Every rising nation has a wild west phase.
To answer your question, any country that genuinely wants to improve their economy, as well as the lives of its citizens, would have 0% taxes on capital gains, income, and corporations. Most countries don't do this, not because it isn't true, but because it isn't human nature. Politicians seek power, approval, legacy, etc., all of which require taking money and spending it.
Now, I finally get to use the phrase "beg the question" in its correct meaning (a pet peeve of mine; Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien always use it incorrectly). Saying that investors are investing in Asia because of growth and nothing to do with taxes, is merely begging the question. Didn't I mention in my previous post that taxes hamper growth? China was a communist country, in effect, a 100% tax. Call me crazy, but I think the change in that tax rate has contributed significantly to China's growth. Hong Kong was one of the first regions in Asia to grow. Let me give you one guess why Hong Kong has been an economic powerhouse for several decades now.
Investors have already been investing in Asian markets for decades, and it has nothing to do with taxes; it has everything to do with how rapidly those markets have been growing over the past 40 years.
Keep in mind I'm not saying what things should be (I believe everything moves in cycles which cannot be avoided). I'm just saying the presumed benefits and consequences of higher taxes are misunderstood. It is always a race to the bottom/race to the top (depending on your perspective; "bottom" carries with it a negative connotation. if someone were arguing for a "race to the bottom" he has already lost rhetorically). Why has America had a history of immigrants coming to seek prosperity? Every rising nation has a wild west phase.
To answer your question, any country that genuinely wants to improve their economy, as well as the lives of its citizens, would have 0% taxes on capital gains, income, and corporations. Most countries don't do this, not because it isn't true, but because it isn't human nature. Politicians seek power, approval, legacy, etc., all of which require taking money and spending it.
Now, I finally get to use the phrase "beg the question" in its correct meaning (a pet peeve of mine; Jon Stewart and Conan O'Brien always use it incorrectly). Saying that investors are investing in Asia because of growth and nothing to do with taxes, is merely begging the question. Didn't I mention in my previous post that taxes hamper growth? China was a communist country, in effect, a 100% tax. Call me crazy, but I think the change in that tax rate has contributed significantly to China's growth. Hong Kong was one of the first regions in Asia to grow. Let me give you one guess why Hong Kong has been an economic powerhouse for several decades now.
Multimedia
Sep 11, 01:27 PM
We'll find out tomorrow
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point. :cool:Top Merom is 2.33GHz and should be standard on both top 15" and 17" models - def the 17". Bottom of Merom is 1.66GHz and 1.83GHz with a 2MB shared L2 cache. 2GHz, 2.16GHz and 2.33GHz models have a 4MB shared L2 cache.
That's why the 2GHz Merom MacBook will be such a strategicly positioned superior product for the money and why the mini will still be crippled even when it switches to C2D at the same speeds. 2.33GHz is only 16.5% faster - not so much that you would even notice most of the time.
Only reason Merom MBP may not be announced tomorrow is for marketing reasons - not because it isn't ready. While they continue to manufacture them and build up a large inventory, we may have to endure these other product announcements so Apple can get all the heat focused on them until later this month when they can have the new MBP deployed worldwide in large quantities and be able to say "on sale today." and "Let the feeding frenzy begin."
On the other hand, because of Apple-Expo Paris, I think the MBP still has a better than 50% chance of being introduced tomorrow. Three years ago they introduced the revoluitonary Aluminium 15" PowerMac G4's @1.25GHz with USB 2 and FW 800 for the first time in a mobile Mac. I bought one a month later when Panther was introduced.
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point. :cool:Top Merom is 2.33GHz and should be standard on both top 15" and 17" models - def the 17". Bottom of Merom is 1.66GHz and 1.83GHz with a 2MB shared L2 cache. 2GHz, 2.16GHz and 2.33GHz models have a 4MB shared L2 cache.
That's why the 2GHz Merom MacBook will be such a strategicly positioned superior product for the money and why the mini will still be crippled even when it switches to C2D at the same speeds. 2.33GHz is only 16.5% faster - not so much that you would even notice most of the time.
Only reason Merom MBP may not be announced tomorrow is for marketing reasons - not because it isn't ready. While they continue to manufacture them and build up a large inventory, we may have to endure these other product announcements so Apple can get all the heat focused on them until later this month when they can have the new MBP deployed worldwide in large quantities and be able to say "on sale today." and "Let the feeding frenzy begin."
On the other hand, because of Apple-Expo Paris, I think the MBP still has a better than 50% chance of being introduced tomorrow. Three years ago they introduced the revoluitonary Aluminium 15" PowerMac G4's @1.25GHz with USB 2 and FW 800 for the first time in a mobile Mac. I bought one a month later when Panther was introduced.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 06:39 PM
I don't know where you get your statement than the "iPhone had a higher resolution than macs"
Resolution is a function of both pixel count and screen size. While there were less pixels on the iPhone screen, it had "higher resolution" in the form of higher DPI ;)
However, the person you are replying to is still wrong. The math behind the "retina" display (as explained here (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/10/resolving-the-iphone-resolution/)) is that indeed, 300 PPI is the magic number at the viewing distance you usually hold a phone away from your eye in order for pixels to not be distinguishable.
As such, the older 320x480 iPhones did indeed have quite visible pixels (and yes, I can see the pixels on my 3GS just fine).
Resolution is a function of both pixel count and screen size. While there were less pixels on the iPhone screen, it had "higher resolution" in the form of higher DPI ;)
However, the person you are replying to is still wrong. The math behind the "retina" display (as explained here (http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2010/06/10/resolving-the-iphone-resolution/)) is that indeed, 300 PPI is the magic number at the viewing distance you usually hold a phone away from your eye in order for pixels to not be distinguishable.
As such, the older 320x480 iPhones did indeed have quite visible pixels (and yes, I can see the pixels on my 3GS just fine).
Aldyn
Aug 4, 09:07 AM
ug, i just really hope that the imac is updated soon. i've waited all summer for the imac to be updated, and it still hasnt -- i have no computer for school this year as of now, and i'm just praying apple updates the imac before mid august. so i can have one ordered and at my house before school starts. :mad:
bedifferent
Apr 23, 05:58 PM
Instead of pixel based images that are just bigger, why not simply ship vector based icons/wallpapers ?
Good point! I was wondering the same myself.
Good point! I was wondering the same myself.
iMacZealot
Jul 31, 01:50 AM
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That's why I'm switching from VZW to T-Mobile!
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That's why I'm switching from VZW to T-Mobile!
iScott428
Mar 29, 03:39 PM
http://moneywatch.bnet.com/economic-news/article/made-in-usa-10-great-products-still-made-here-slide-1-of-10/441087/This is a link to a CBS Money Watch report. I have found 3 Relevant products out of 10. Weber Grill, Best grill you can buy; Viking rage, great Kitchen equip, and A Ecgg Machine. The rest of the items are nonsense. Cars and Tech just happen to be my specialty. And the US car makers are getting much much much better.
rock6079
Nov 26, 03:15 PM
bah! how many times do we have to hear these tablet rumors! one day they will come out with a tablet and one of these rumors will be right, untill then...
bigandy
Jul 21, 02:09 PM
oh dear, i seem to be drooling....
GuitarDTO
Mar 28, 10:58 AM
I think 2012 makes perfect sense for the iPhone 5. The 4 is still amazing and doesnt need a processor bump at the moment. Plus, I think the biggest thing, Apple wants to include 4G/LTE in the device. There is no point in releasing a 5 with just a processor bump unless it includes 4G, and my guess is they need a little more time polishing up the 4G device. The next iPhone could very well be a big change similar to 3GS to 4.
DTphonehome
Jul 30, 09:28 AM
Verizon was reliable, although their network has been terrible. As I've said, I never get 3 bars or above, and I live in Denver! The service will constantly go out whenever I'm in NYC.
Dude, you need to hit *228 when you travel to update your roam list. And I live in Midtown Manhattan and with my Treo650, I've never had a dropped call and the only time I don't have service is in the basement of a massive building. I've lived in NYC all my life and have had a phone with literally every provider here, and VZV trumps them ALL in terms of network reliability. The phones are crap, the data is overpriced, and they cripple bluetooth, but the service is the most important feature for me, so I stay with them.
Amp'd is actually owned by Verizon, adnd Boost is owned by SprintNextel, using the same chirping technology as Nextel. Forgot the deal about Virgin.
None of those companies are "owned" by the major carriers...they are MVNOs who buy bandwidth from the majors to set up their own virtual network. They are independent from the majors.
Dude, you need to hit *228 when you travel to update your roam list. And I live in Midtown Manhattan and with my Treo650, I've never had a dropped call and the only time I don't have service is in the basement of a massive building. I've lived in NYC all my life and have had a phone with literally every provider here, and VZV trumps them ALL in terms of network reliability. The phones are crap, the data is overpriced, and they cripple bluetooth, but the service is the most important feature for me, so I stay with them.
Amp'd is actually owned by Verizon, adnd Boost is owned by SprintNextel, using the same chirping technology as Nextel. Forgot the deal about Virgin.
None of those companies are "owned" by the major carriers...they are MVNOs who buy bandwidth from the majors to set up their own virtual network. They are independent from the majors.
No comments:
Post a Comment