HecubusPro
Aug 28, 10:13 PM
This was one of the things I was afraid would happen with the Intel switch--a new processor every eight minutes. At least with the PPCs, there were predictable, manageable gaps between bumps.
The only thing wrong with frequent updates is that us tech geeks tend to want the latest and greatest. In all actuality though, it allows us more choice as consumers. Sure, I'm going to buy a new C2D MBP as soon as they're available, but it's going to be my first new computer in over 3 years (I'm normally on a two-year plan :).) I'm hoping that I'll be good for another two to four years after that.
Of course, that's not going to keep me from wanting to upgrade whenever the newest iteration of whatever comes out, but most likely I'll be envious of everyone on here who does get that new system, and be content with what I have for the time being. When I'm really ready to actually upgrade, I know that Apple will probably be keeping up with the Joneses frequently enough so that I won't have to wait too long for their next computer/update/upgrade.
For me, Apple moving to Intel chips has allowed me to seriously become a full-fledged mac person again. I couldn't be happier. Keep those updates coming and make sure they're frequent! :D
The only thing wrong with frequent updates is that us tech geeks tend to want the latest and greatest. In all actuality though, it allows us more choice as consumers. Sure, I'm going to buy a new C2D MBP as soon as they're available, but it's going to be my first new computer in over 3 years (I'm normally on a two-year plan :).) I'm hoping that I'll be good for another two to four years after that.
Of course, that's not going to keep me from wanting to upgrade whenever the newest iteration of whatever comes out, but most likely I'll be envious of everyone on here who does get that new system, and be content with what I have for the time being. When I'm really ready to actually upgrade, I know that Apple will probably be keeping up with the Joneses frequently enough so that I won't have to wait too long for their next computer/update/upgrade.
For me, Apple moving to Intel chips has allowed me to seriously become a full-fledged mac person again. I couldn't be happier. Keep those updates coming and make sure they're frequent! :D
daneoni
Apr 25, 01:12 PM
Guessing it'll just be a lot thinner. Maybe SSD's or Flash storage instead of HD's. Perhaps we can kiss the Superdrive goodbye? Either way, curious to see what they have in store :) Bringing back the blackbook would be pretty cool too.
They already have that product...it's called the MacBook Air.
They already have that product...it's called the MacBook Air.
Tommyg117
Sep 4, 09:26 PM
Cool, but I'd rather have a more powerful faster airport extreme.
Spanky Deluxe
May 3, 10:32 AM
Wow, the dual screen output is what could some day push me over the edge. A 27" display + 2 27" Apple screens either side sounds pretty nice. Still not enough to make me part with my 30" ACD right now though.
cleric
Apr 11, 06:52 AM
This is pretty awesome unfortunately my FreeBSD Server sits right next to an Airport Express :rolleyes:
Ommid
Apr 25, 12:56 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
But they have an i7, 13 inch machine. :confused:
:rolleyes:
But they have an i7, 13 inch machine. :confused:
bdj21ya
Sep 15, 07:01 PM
The biggest reason phones suck today is because the interfaces are horrible (SE's being the best of them all). Motorola's phones are nice but their UI's are awful. What I am expecting from Apple is an easy to use phone that looks great and has, nothing less than, an excellent UI. Of course it'll work with iSync ... that's just obvious.
Hear hear! It bugs me no end that every time I use my Motorola phone's user interface I see obvious ways it could have been better, if anyone had bothered to put 5 minutes of thought into it. For example, menus should be able to be controlled by numbers. That way you can memorize a code to get to functions you use frequently, and you don't have to look at the screen or click up and down arrows all day long. (This is how my Samsung phone was)
Hear hear! It bugs me no end that every time I use my Motorola phone's user interface I see obvious ways it could have been better, if anyone had bothered to put 5 minutes of thought into it. For example, menus should be able to be controlled by numbers. That way you can memorize a code to get to functions you use frequently, and you don't have to look at the screen or click up and down arrows all day long. (This is how my Samsung phone was)
funkyT80
Mar 22, 03:07 PM
wait, since when did apple make computers? :rolleyes:
Sean7512
Sep 12, 02:19 PM
Do the "older 5G" ipods support the new tv shows (640x480) and movies???? I don't care about the new search and such...Im just wondering about the movies and games.
JRoDDz
Apr 4, 12:28 PM
The robbers got iShot.
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 01:59 PM
I'd gladly wait overnight for a solid 1080p movie that played in quicktime. Don't need the DVD features (or frickin' ads). Just give me the movie.
I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
I would be exstatic to get a 720p movie, and like you, I would certainly have no problem waiting the time it would take to download it. I just want HD downloadable content from iTMS, which is why the iTV has me so excited. I may hold off on getting that HD-DVD player until I learn more about it.
AppleScruff1
Apr 28, 08:55 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
It's very, very telling. MS is riding the coattails of their universal licensing racket while Apple keeps changing the face of consumer tech. This day was bound to come.
This is the post-PC era and we'll see MS in decline.
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
bearcatrp
Apr 20, 10:10 AM
This is total BS. We should have been informed of this and a way to turn it off or delete the file on our own. As for the poster above who stated it only goes to your computer, I highly doubt it. This is another big brother tracking honest citizens. Hope a class action does happen. I will definitely sign on!
Macnoviz
Sep 19, 02:54 PM
Yeah it already lets you watch while downloading and frankly I think that this is a very important feature that is not often discussed. People bash it saying that it takes 1.5 hours to download a movie. Well if the movie is 1.5 hours long than wait 5 minutes and start watching. It is close to instant. I know that on my computer it only took 70 minutes to download which means I can start watching it right away. With Verizon rolling out their Fios internet with speeds of up to 30mbs even 1080p will soon be no problem. I am not sure just how big a 1080p movie is but I am hoping that within a year it will be do able for more people.
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
Don't forget that Apple servers will be the weakest link here. Amazon servers were overcrowded the first days, leading to downloads of 8+ hours (and you can only rent them for 24 hours (or buy them, of course))
They will have to build/purchase a data center or two
rtdunham
Mar 23, 06:10 PM
... Honestly, do you think someone who is Drunk is going to be checking the app for the checkpoints? Its just an excuse to get rid of these apps from the store and increase revenue (by ticketing more DUI drivers)....
Your argument's inconsistent: If drunk drivers won't be checking the app, then they'd be ticketed at the checkpoint whether or not the apps exist, so pulling the apps neither increases or decreases revenue, does it? Your argument (revenue generation) ONLY works if it increases the number of drivers ticketed because those drivers use the apps.
Now, IF some drivers do check the app, it increases the likelihood they can avoid the checkpoint and being taken off the road. Remember, most drunks don't think they are. So they might use the app to avoid what they think is an unfair stop. But if the stop shows they are over the particular state's alcohol content level, then the system's sorted them out and done a favor for the rest of us, no?
Your argument's inconsistent: If drunk drivers won't be checking the app, then they'd be ticketed at the checkpoint whether or not the apps exist, so pulling the apps neither increases or decreases revenue, does it? Your argument (revenue generation) ONLY works if it increases the number of drivers ticketed because those drivers use the apps.
Now, IF some drivers do check the app, it increases the likelihood they can avoid the checkpoint and being taken off the road. Remember, most drunks don't think they are. So they might use the app to avoid what they think is an unfair stop. But if the stop shows they are over the particular state's alcohol content level, then the system's sorted them out and done a favor for the rest of us, no?
ChazUK
Apr 19, 01:29 PM
From Nilay's post:
The first four seem flimsy in light this..
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/392/algoq.jpg
Wow. That does look like an early Galaxy S (dark chrome bezel to boot!). Interesting find.
The first four seem flimsy in light this..
http://img685.imageshack.us/img685/392/algoq.jpg
Wow. That does look like an early Galaxy S (dark chrome bezel to boot!). Interesting find.
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 02:17 PM
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
JAT
Apr 29, 03:56 PM
that was in 2005 when it first came out. by now they are on a revision that costs a lot less to make and they have sold a lot of games and XBL subs to make up for it. back when the 360 first came out it had an attach rate of 8 games, higher than Sony. figure at $10 licensing per game that's $80 per console on average plus XBL. so i don't know if the isuppli numbers are accurate.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
a lot of companies in the console market have been doing it like this for years. take a loss the first year or two, sell break even or small profit later in the cycle and make it up on the games. except for nintendo which is doing the opposite. make money early in the cycle and start losing money at the end of the cycle.
2011 the division will probably turn a profit of $3 to $4 billion or so due to kinect. 2010 was also profitable. if the Nokia partnership works out 2012 will be even better.
You do understand that 2008 minus 2001 plus development time is more than 1 or 2, right? That's 7, maybe 9 years of losses.
My original comment was that this is a poor way to do it, from a finance perspective. There was no guarantee, and if Sony and M$ didn't have profit elsewhere, these wouldn't even exist. Nintendo made money on the Wii almost immediately, as you've claimed M$ did. It sounds like you are talking about Nintendo.
twostep665
Apr 4, 12:23 PM
I'm amazed that so many people are basing their judgment of the "head shot" on 3rd person shooter games and CSI. In the real world, anyone with training will always be aiming for the center of mass, and where he actually hits depends more on luck than anything else.
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
THANK YOU! It is hard enough making a head shot from 15 yards on the pistol range!
In other words, just because the criminal was hit in the head, doesn't mean that the security guard was aiming for his head. A mall security guard with a pistol shooting at a moving target during a gunfight doesn't have the accuracy of a Marine sniper shooting a sniper rifle at a stationary target.
THANK YOU! It is hard enough making a head shot from 15 yards on the pistol range!
nagromme
Mar 23, 04:45 PM
From apps like this to radar detectors, I can�t believe it�s legal to release products designed to circumvent laws, resulting in preventable deaths.
If you think it should be legal to speed, or to drive drunk, that change THAT law, don�t make it legal to circumvent the existing law. It makes no sense.
If you think it should be legal to speed, or to drive drunk, that change THAT law, don�t make it legal to circumvent the existing law. It makes no sense.
Eraserhead
Nov 13, 03:48 PM
Again, as I have said previously, the way these images/icons came about was USING OS X APIs.
That's how they're wrong.
w00master
Exactly. Losing the maker of the Facebook app and Rouge Amoeba in one day is really bad.
That's how they're wrong.
w00master
Exactly. Losing the maker of the Facebook app and Rouge Amoeba in one day is really bad.
bshort
Sep 14, 10:00 AM
New version of Aperture!.. Saweeet
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
or more likely a new Apple iSLR
16 Megapixels
full frame sensor
Adaptive lens mount supports all Canon and Nikon Lenses
60gb removeable 1.8" hard drive
3" OLED screen
Anti-Dust
Anti-shake
Shoots in a new Apple RAW format
eye tracking for focus
Spot metering
1/8000 shutter with 150,000 shutter life
Full weather sealing
Magnesium body
6fps (up to 25 raw frames)
Depth of Field Preview
Pop up flash
802.11 Wifi
GPS built in
Optional Battery Grip
Scrollwheel navigation for menu system
Apple iScreen Digital Image processor
64 Segment Metering and Spot Metering
Supports Compact Flash
You had me up until the magnesium body.
It would have to be made out of aluminium.
-B
Vegasman
Apr 28, 11:06 PM
I've always wondered what Windows's market share comes from pirated copies of Windows. There's a lot of pirated copies out there.. a lot..
And they still managed to sell 350 million licenses of Windows 7 in 18 months. That's insane! I am telling you... I would like to sit in that room in either Redmond or Cupertino where you see the profit tote board being updated every second, or every minute or whatever. It must just make someone dizzy. It's like 45,000$ a minute. Of profit! Ridicurous. :)
And they still managed to sell 350 million licenses of Windows 7 in 18 months. That's insane! I am telling you... I would like to sit in that room in either Redmond or Cupertino where you see the profit tote board being updated every second, or every minute or whatever. It must just make someone dizzy. It's like 45,000$ a minute. Of profit! Ridicurous. :)
-Garry-
Oct 12, 06:03 PM
This will be part of the (RED) campaign.
More information over here at MySpace ... http://www.myspace.com/joinred
More information over here at MySpace ... http://www.myspace.com/joinred