AP_piano295
May 6, 01:43 AM
My so soon, I'm already excited to start waiting for the powerbook which will finally get an "ARM 5" processor :).
SLCentral
Aug 2, 06:20 PM
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Unorthodox
Aug 2, 12:09 PM
What time is the QT stream likely to be uploaded at Apple.com?
BTW I know its not a live feed!
2 hours after the keynote.
OK, I just made that up. Now that I have stated an incorrect fact, this post should get flooded with replies toting the correct answer.
I can't be avoided, watch as they fall prey to my cunning trap.
Baw ha ha.
w00t! 4 days 23 hours 51 minuets! w00t! w00!
BTW I know its not a live feed!
2 hours after the keynote.
OK, I just made that up. Now that I have stated an incorrect fact, this post should get flooded with replies toting the correct answer.
I can't be avoided, watch as they fall prey to my cunning trap.
Baw ha ha.
w00t! 4 days 23 hours 51 minuets! w00t! w00!
Frobozz
May 4, 03:31 PM
I wish all software was handled through a single entry point, like the App Store. That way updates are handled through it, instead of a series of unrelated and often annoying separate updaters. Never understood why this wasn't more of a priority 5+ years ago, even.
rdrr
Sep 15, 06:32 PM
One other feature I would like to see in MBP would be an embedded evdo chip. That most likely won't happen but would be really nice.
wordoflife
Mar 28, 09:56 AM
On second thought, I don't believe it. I think someone was just over analyzing this.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
cactus33
Apr 23, 10:31 PM
Although I'd absolutely love this, I highly doubt it'll be here for a while.
I think the first step would be increasing displays to like 1800x1080 on the 13", and 1900x1200 on the 15" and 2400x1440 on the 17" - while keeping the same user interface size. That would be awesome.
Then in the next 5-10 years, I'd expect full retina.
I doubt it would be a full jump from 1440x900 --> 3200x2000 on a 15" or something like that.
I think the first step would be increasing displays to like 1800x1080 on the 13", and 1900x1200 on the 15" and 2400x1440 on the 17" - while keeping the same user interface size. That would be awesome.
Then in the next 5-10 years, I'd expect full retina.
I doubt it would be a full jump from 1440x900 --> 3200x2000 on a 15" or something like that.
mdriftmeyer
Apr 5, 04:31 PM
Android is still open... They are just going to be much more tighter on what Products qualify to get the google Logo and the android name.
much more tighter? Seriously? Can't you take the time to get a sentence correctly formed?
Either it's much tighter or much more tight, not much more tighter. And no, for all the Jailbreak folks, Jailbreak legally does not extend to corporate relationships.
much more tighter? Seriously? Can't you take the time to get a sentence correctly formed?
Either it's much tighter or much more tight, not much more tighter. And no, for all the Jailbreak folks, Jailbreak legally does not extend to corporate relationships.
adbe
Mar 29, 02:29 PM
Note that MS is dropping the standalone Zune hardware, and moving the Zune interface into Windows Phone 7.
The Zune was a market flop though, and MS need to focus their efforts if only tp stop the shareholders from getting antsy.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
Because there will always be cases where for whatever reason one might not want or need a phone.
The Zune was a market flop though, and MS need to focus their efforts if only tp stop the shareholders from getting antsy.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?
Because there will always be cases where for whatever reason one might not want or need a phone.
Don't panic
May 3, 12:09 PM
so, counting plutonius, mscriv and aggie we are 8!
markcres
Apr 25, 11:13 AM
Jobs is spinning his BS again as usual. Even when there is overwheming evidence to the contrary...he still insults the intelligence of his customers who he clearly regards as beneath him.
Apple is:
http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg
Apple is:
http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg
McGiord
Apr 10, 07:03 PM
Here is the outcome in Numbers.
d0minick
Mar 31, 08:12 AM
I've been using the inverted scrolling for a few weeks. At first, it was very weird and found myself scrolling the wrong way often. However, after a few day, I started to "get" the metaphor and it became natural. Now when I go to work and use their computers, I feel the scrolling on XP is the opposite of what feels natural.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
LMAO, come on man!
You changed your ways to suit the OS? I'd understand if you were use to inverted but the OP is correct. It should not be defaulted inverted.
I bet you were also "holding it wrong". I love my apple gadgets, but thats a bit borderline ridiculous.
If it only took me a few days to reverse over a decade of training and muscle memory, then maybe it's not that a stupid setting.
LMAO, come on man!
You changed your ways to suit the OS? I'd understand if you were use to inverted but the OP is correct. It should not be defaulted inverted.
I bet you were also "holding it wrong". I love my apple gadgets, but thats a bit borderline ridiculous.
Daveoc64
May 4, 02:57 PM
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
ChrisNM
Apr 25, 09:25 AM
This whole thing is stupid. Of course the iPhone will track what cell towers and wi-fi access points are around it. It needs this information to be able to make phone calls and access the internet. It makes sense that this info be stored so that it does not have to gather in info every time (basic cacheing). What Apple did not anticipate was that someone would find this database and would start screaming about an "invasion of privacy". It is probably something that Apple could have foreseen and they should have encrypted this info, but until someone proves that this info is actually being transmitted back to Apple, it's just a bunch of crap.
Thank you - this is the first post I read where someone provided a simple and easy to understand reason why this information needs to be on the phone. I am not saying the information is right, because I am not a techie.
I understand that the information doesn't go anywhere, but it would be nice to know why the phone collects it in the first place. If the explanation above is accurate, then I get it. If it is not accurate, then perhaps someone else can provide an explanation as to why it is needed.
I think this is a much more rational discourse than all the fanboy versus troll responses.
Thank you - this is the first post I read where someone provided a simple and easy to understand reason why this information needs to be on the phone. I am not saying the information is right, because I am not a techie.
I understand that the information doesn't go anywhere, but it would be nice to know why the phone collects it in the first place. If the explanation above is accurate, then I get it. If it is not accurate, then perhaps someone else can provide an explanation as to why it is needed.
I think this is a much more rational discourse than all the fanboy versus troll responses.
balamw
Apr 14, 11:17 AM
I want line items on every single thing spent.
This is my favorite visualization of the budget. http://wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
However it sounds like you might just want to read the budget itself. It's only ~200 pages long: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/index.html http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget.pdf
Unless that's not enough detail for you.
B
This is my favorite visualization of the budget. http://wallstats.com/deathandtaxes/
However it sounds like you might just want to read the budget itself. It's only ~200 pages long: http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/index.html http://www.gpoaccess.gov/usbudget/fy11/pdf/budget.pdf
Unless that's not enough detail for you.
B
arcite
Apr 7, 10:40 AM
By now you should know that Apple is a greedy company, just wanting to hurt others and bankrupt several in the process.. its corporate america at its best.. hopefully NOT FOR TOO LONG.
You should really direct your anger at the giant Chinese state owned and supported mega-corporations that readily copy and steal intellectual data, employ slave labor, and otherwise follow no rules other than the wills of their government.
You should really direct your anger at the giant Chinese state owned and supported mega-corporations that readily copy and steal intellectual data, employ slave labor, and otherwise follow no rules other than the wills of their government.
teiresias
Apr 4, 03:42 PM
Only for a year. Fill up that 20 Gigs and a year later you can either empty it down to the free 5, or pony up.
Not if you buy your music from Amazon and have it saved to your cloud storage be default. All mp3 purchases from Amazon (so long as cloud storage is set as your default when purchasing) are stored free in the cloud and don't count against your storage limit. You can download it to your Mac/PC later (while leaving it in the Amazon cloud) and add it into your iTunes library on your local storage if you'd like.
This is actually a much better thing for me, as if I'm away from my home computer, I can still buy music, have it go to the cloud by default, and immediately have it available to both any computer that runs the cloud player and my phone without having to wait to go home and purchase through iTunes and sync a device.
Not if you buy your music from Amazon and have it saved to your cloud storage be default. All mp3 purchases from Amazon (so long as cloud storage is set as your default when purchasing) are stored free in the cloud and don't count against your storage limit. You can download it to your Mac/PC later (while leaving it in the Amazon cloud) and add it into your iTunes library on your local storage if you'd like.
This is actually a much better thing for me, as if I'm away from my home computer, I can still buy music, have it go to the cloud by default, and immediately have it available to both any computer that runs the cloud player and my phone without having to wait to go home and purchase through iTunes and sync a device.
milo
Sep 11, 11:36 AM
Except that under NetFlix, theortically (and I know people do this) you could get the DVDs, rip them, and send them back same day. Under a d/l scheme, you can only view the movies with a license. You only get, say 3 licenses. So you'd have to physically watch the movie, if you wanted to see it, before getting more. That would act as a brake on how many d/ls an avg. customer would make a month because most people only have time to watch 2-5 DVDs a month...if that. As for those who abuse the system, nothing to stop Apple from cutting people off just like Netflix does.
Even if you rip the DVD's from netflix (or just watch them immediately and send them back), you're still limited by the speed of the post office. With unlimited downloads, you could watch three or four movies a day if you had time (I doubt most Netflix users are only watching 2-5 DVD's a month, if they do they might be better off renting normally). The "brake" allows much fewer with Netflix. And if you really promise "unlimited", watching a ton isn't really abusing the system, is it? Apple would have to either have a monthly cap or raise prices.
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
That was before the invites were sent. They won't be at the event, but they'll show up in the next week or so.
Even if you rip the DVD's from netflix (or just watch them immediately and send them back), you're still limited by the speed of the post office. With unlimited downloads, you could watch three or four movies a day if you had time (I doubt most Netflix users are only watching 2-5 DVD's a month, if they do they might be better off renting normally). The "brake" allows much fewer with Netflix. And if you really promise "unlimited", watching a ton isn't really abusing the system, is it? Apple would have to either have a monthly cap or raise prices.
Not to add onto the whining about merom notebooks, but I thought people a little while back were saying they'd be coming on the apple event on the 12th...:confused:
That was before the invites were sent. They won't be at the event, but they'll show up in the next week or so.
Applespider
Sep 11, 03:36 AM
this event is going to be simulcast in LONDON. Does this mean that movies will be able to be purchased by folks in the UK???
Nope, it's just that Apple Europe have big offices in London and it's easier to get the Euro journalists to fly to London to cover an Apple event than fly em to California - and more effective than just sending the press release.
The last few Jobsnotes/events have been shown in London to a select audience (although used to be out at the BBC) but it's no guarantee that we'll get the services that are being pushed.
Nope, it's just that Apple Europe have big offices in London and it's easier to get the Euro journalists to fly to London to cover an Apple event than fly em to California - and more effective than just sending the press release.
The last few Jobsnotes/events have been shown in London to a select audience (although used to be out at the BBC) but it's no guarantee that we'll get the services that are being pushed.
Moyank24
May 5, 01:52 AM
I'm going to go wayyyyyy out on the proverbial limb here and suggest that since mscriv knows the full map at the outset of the game, that he's going to pretty much lay traps or monsters in each or every other room we enter- especially the ones where there is only one door for us to enter into another room.
Perhaps we should reconsider the splitting up or else we will be picked off one at a time.
Thoughts? I'm just musing out loud. I'm sure my darling Beatrice will correct me or tell me what my thoughts should be anyhow. :p
The only trepidation I have against splitting up so soon is that we'll be weaker apart. But, on the other hand the longer we wait the chances of the monsters being stronger are better.
And my darling husband, I'm just in it for the alimony. ;)
Perhaps we should reconsider the splitting up or else we will be picked off one at a time.
Thoughts? I'm just musing out loud. I'm sure my darling Beatrice will correct me or tell me what my thoughts should be anyhow. :p
The only trepidation I have against splitting up so soon is that we'll be weaker apart. But, on the other hand the longer we wait the chances of the monsters being stronger are better.
And my darling husband, I'm just in it for the alimony. ;)
marvel2
Jan 14, 11:51 AM
So I solved my problem. Erased the TomTom kit from the iPhones BT memory and repaired the two devices. Now the iPhone automatically pairs when I dock it in the TomTom kit.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
One thing I think the kit can improve on is the voice volume of a call conversation. It could be a bit louder.
JackSYi
Jul 21, 02:17 PM
I really should of waited. *sigh
No comments:
Post a Comment