FleurDuMal
Jan 1, 06:02 PM
Pfft...they shamefully overlooked my rumour :rolleyes:
twoodcc
Feb 13, 11:43 PM
Looks like there is a problem with 6.29 client (at least for mac) where if you get an a1 unit after an a3 one, something goes wrong.
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
dang. well all my computers are down back at my apartment, so my production will be very little. i just started folding on my mbp with an a3 unit, so we'll see how it goes
idunn
Apr 21, 05:47 PM
;) Of the nine specific questions Senator Al Franken posed to Mr. Jobs, the ninth may prove the most revealing:
'To whom, if anyone, including Apple, has this data been disclosed? When and why were these disclosures made?'
'To whom, if anyone, including Apple, has this data been disclosed? When and why were these disclosures made?'
ju5tin81
Oct 24, 06:19 AM
Bring on the MacBooks...
Can't afford a pro :(
Can't afford a pro :(
LOLaMac
Mar 25, 10:31 PM
It's pretty astounding, little more than a year later, that this is even possible on a tablet device, and to this degree of ease and sophistication. Compare the growth and advancement from January 2010 to March 2011.
You're not getting the point.
The iPad is (sort of) good for playing two minute time wasters....as a "real" gaming machine, it's pretty sub-par. Crappy specs, no controller of any sort (sorry, but touch screen input is horrible in almost all cases). The ability to hook it up to my TV, when I already have a dedicated, much more powerful machine, with a much greater selection of games, a greater selection of more complex, games, is underwhelming, to say the least.
One day, maybe. But for right now, color me unimpressed.
You're not getting the point.
The iPad is (sort of) good for playing two minute time wasters....as a "real" gaming machine, it's pretty sub-par. Crappy specs, no controller of any sort (sorry, but touch screen input is horrible in almost all cases). The ability to hook it up to my TV, when I already have a dedicated, much more powerful machine, with a much greater selection of games, a greater selection of more complex, games, is underwhelming, to say the least.
One day, maybe. But for right now, color me unimpressed.
peharri
Jan 1, 06:30 PM
....Steve gets another call 5 mintues later...
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
I find it hard to believe they'll get that excited about a Cisco Wifi phone, especially if a Motorola iTunes phone doesn't do the job...
I guess we'll see more of Leopard.
We might see more of iTV. I think, contrary to what some insist upon here, that iTV will be a standalone box, requiring no additional Mac to work. There's little point in it having storage if it isn't going to be, and a consumer device requiring a computer is something I think Apple wants to get away from. At the same time, what I've seen so far is Apple seperating the media business from the computer business, and wouldn't be surprised if they actually avoid showing iTV (and iPod enhancements) at MWSF.
iPod Phone (or whatever it's called) is a no-no. I'm not ruling out it being a future Apple product, there's too much evidence it exists, I just doubt it'll be there for MWSF, both because it's not a Mac (see above comment) and because I think they'd do an actual keynote. And, as always, for Apple's sake, I hope the rumour is complete rubbish.
iLife - why, yes. Even better would be improvements to iWork, notable some of the missing components added. Apple lacks an office suite. iWork is not an office suite, and Mac enthusiasts do everyone no favours by pretending it is. If Apple are unwilling to complete iWork, they could throw their weight behind NeoOffice.
I really love the game console rumour. It sounds completely made up to me, but now would be a great time to introduce something, even if it's just a low cost Mac mini in practice. The Playstation 3 is a disaster. The Xbox 360 isn't selling in anything like the numbers Microsoft hoped. The only console that's actually moving at the moment is the Wii, and the low power of the thing means it might only have a year of marketability in it. If ever there was a time for Apple to jump into the market, it would be now. But that said, I seriously doubt they will.
...pulls out iPhone
...geeks bumrush the stage and carry Steve off on their shoulders
I find it hard to believe they'll get that excited about a Cisco Wifi phone, especially if a Motorola iTunes phone doesn't do the job...
I guess we'll see more of Leopard.
We might see more of iTV. I think, contrary to what some insist upon here, that iTV will be a standalone box, requiring no additional Mac to work. There's little point in it having storage if it isn't going to be, and a consumer device requiring a computer is something I think Apple wants to get away from. At the same time, what I've seen so far is Apple seperating the media business from the computer business, and wouldn't be surprised if they actually avoid showing iTV (and iPod enhancements) at MWSF.
iPod Phone (or whatever it's called) is a no-no. I'm not ruling out it being a future Apple product, there's too much evidence it exists, I just doubt it'll be there for MWSF, both because it's not a Mac (see above comment) and because I think they'd do an actual keynote. And, as always, for Apple's sake, I hope the rumour is complete rubbish.
iLife - why, yes. Even better would be improvements to iWork, notable some of the missing components added. Apple lacks an office suite. iWork is not an office suite, and Mac enthusiasts do everyone no favours by pretending it is. If Apple are unwilling to complete iWork, they could throw their weight behind NeoOffice.
I really love the game console rumour. It sounds completely made up to me, but now would be a great time to introduce something, even if it's just a low cost Mac mini in practice. The Playstation 3 is a disaster. The Xbox 360 isn't selling in anything like the numbers Microsoft hoped. The only console that's actually moving at the moment is the Wii, and the low power of the thing means it might only have a year of marketability in it. If ever there was a time for Apple to jump into the market, it would be now. But that said, I seriously doubt they will.
0815
Apr 19, 11:43 AM
Just in time - I just decided yesterday that it is time to replace my first generation Intel iMac. I hope they have a 500GB SSD option for the update (the current option of 256 GB SSD is too small and you cant even order them with two 256GB SSDs). Thunderbold would also be nice (no need for it right away, but I guess in a year or two I will be happy to have one)
Multimedia
Nov 18, 11:04 AM
Also, some uses of a program make it easy to use multithreading, and others don't. As an example, if you use Handbrake to do H.264 encoding, it is work for the developers to use multiple cores (it has been posted here that it uses three cores) for encoding a single movie, but it would be absolutely easy to use four times as many cores to encode four movies simultaneously.
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean. :confused: I'm kind of anti-H.264 because of how bloated the file sizes get when you use that format and because many viewers don't have H.264 players outside the Mac community. I'd rather target a file size and/or bit rate with good old fashioned universally viewable 2-pass FFmpeg encoding than not be able to do so for an H.264 encode.
My point that Handbrake could use up to 3 cores was that you could have that happening while encoding a DVD image with Toast using another 4 cores if you had an 8-core Mac without a performace-speed hit. As soon as a third process is instigated, all the programs would have to share restricted core limits but get a bunch of stuff done without us having to baby sit the queue.
I am confused by what you think about encoding 4 programs simultaneously vs. one alone. 4 simultaneously will take longer but be possilbe on the 8-core while much slower on the 4-core Macs. While one on a 4-core will do fine by itself, problem is as soon as you start doing anything else, it's speed is compromized while in an 8-core system that would-should not be the case. Does that make any sense?
Something like that would be perfect if you want to encode four half hour movies, but awful if you want to encode a single two hour movie.I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean. :confused: I'm kind of anti-H.264 because of how bloated the file sizes get when you use that format and because many viewers don't have H.264 players outside the Mac community. I'd rather target a file size and/or bit rate with good old fashioned universally viewable 2-pass FFmpeg encoding than not be able to do so for an H.264 encode.
My point that Handbrake could use up to 3 cores was that you could have that happening while encoding a DVD image with Toast using another 4 cores if you had an 8-core Mac without a performace-speed hit. As soon as a third process is instigated, all the programs would have to share restricted core limits but get a bunch of stuff done without us having to baby sit the queue.
I am confused by what you think about encoding 4 programs simultaneously vs. one alone. 4 simultaneously will take longer but be possilbe on the 8-core while much slower on the 4-core Macs. While one on a 4-core will do fine by itself, problem is as soon as you start doing anything else, it's speed is compromized while in an 8-core system that would-should not be the case. Does that make any sense?
Otto J
May 3, 01:40 AM
As someone who's come over from the Windows world this has to be one of the few features that I think OS X is worse at. I shouldn't have to install a stand alone app (AppCleaner) to be sure that I'm removing the whole programme.
So, you're saying that windows programs don't leave files on your computer when uninstalled? Installing and uninstalling a bunch of programs don't make your windows PC slow down? I must be using the wrong programs. Not that I'm saying that Mac's are perfect, but worse than windows? I hope not (I'm not a mac user... Yet)
So, you're saying that windows programs don't leave files on your computer when uninstalled? Installing and uninstalling a bunch of programs don't make your windows PC slow down? I must be using the wrong programs. Not that I'm saying that Mac's are perfect, but worse than windows? I hope not (I'm not a mac user... Yet)
Avatar74
May 2, 07:13 PM
I guess that's way easier than dragging it to the trash?
People may have already been over this, but dragging an app to the trash doesn't always clean up the mess it leaves. There are preferences files, cache and other things that may be sitting in the User or System libraries, and not in the "package" hidden behind the app icon.
People may have already been over this, but dragging an app to the trash doesn't always clean up the mess it leaves. There are preferences files, cache and other things that may be sitting in the User or System libraries, and not in the "package" hidden behind the app icon.
Doctor Q
Jul 18, 02:27 PM
Supposedly Mr. Jobs "lost" this round of negotiations...I wouldn't be surprised if he ceded that point to the studios because he knows something is around the corner. One possibility that jumps to mind is competition between studios to be the first to provide pay-to-own content.In the meantime, Movielink already offers rental and purchase options, and I read that they will also be allowing you to burn your own DVDs, although I don't know the details.
This is from their site:
This is from their site:
JRM PowerPod
Aug 7, 08:03 AM
Don't taunt him too much, he might kill you once he finds out they are now 64-bit and higher speed!
what about when steve says they have a new case and the 17" has an optional blu-ray drive. and they all have hdmi output. x1800 256/512
he will kill us all
what about when steve says they have a new case and the 17" has an optional blu-ray drive. and they all have hdmi output. x1800 256/512
he will kill us all
cleanup
Nov 23, 10:06 PM
http://att.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=261567&stc=1&d=1290568599
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
X-rays and casting. It counts as a purchase.
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
iJohnHenry
Mar 21, 05:31 PM
The idea is to avoid casualties as much as possible by rapidly degrading Gaddafi's ability to wage war. The focus is on inflicting material damage to the Gaddafi-loyalist military, and to disrupt their operations against rebel-held cities - not killing Gaddafi loyalists.
Loyalists blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy. .... sorry, Tripoli. :o
Loyalists blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy. .... sorry, Tripoli. :o
jxyama
Mar 19, 11:11 AM
You take the low end model, subtract the cost for the monitor and you have a computer that is sitting in the $500.00 - $600.00 range. Many people already have monitors and if not, you can find a decent one for relatively low cost.
since CRT monitors cost next to nothing these days, eMac price can't be lowered that much even if it was headless. that will just eat into the profits. and why give the money for the monitor to other companies?
apparently, apple's marketing dept. has concluded that the sale of AIO units with bigger margin turns more profit than that can be expected from increased sale of headless units with smaller margin. and as long as apple's profitable, there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...
eMac and iMac are for people who want to take home a box, open it up, plug in the power and start using them. they are NOT meant for people who want the absolute cheapest computers. right now, apple is not interested in making that kind of "cheapest" computers... nor has they ever been. the only time that happened was when they allowed clones and that certainly went nowhere because Macs were suddenly a commodity and apple took a major hit as "premium" hardware company.
mind you, apple could change their mind and offer such a headless machine in the future, if their dept. sees that the computer market is changing. so while you may well be 100% correct in principle, apple hasn't had to or is yet to find a reason to offer such a headless.
since CRT monitors cost next to nothing these days, eMac price can't be lowered that much even if it was headless. that will just eat into the profits. and why give the money for the monitor to other companies?
apparently, apple's marketing dept. has concluded that the sale of AIO units with bigger margin turns more profit than that can be expected from increased sale of headless units with smaller margin. and as long as apple's profitable, there's no reason to argue that their strategy is wrong...
eMac and iMac are for people who want to take home a box, open it up, plug in the power and start using them. they are NOT meant for people who want the absolute cheapest computers. right now, apple is not interested in making that kind of "cheapest" computers... nor has they ever been. the only time that happened was when they allowed clones and that certainly went nowhere because Macs were suddenly a commodity and apple took a major hit as "premium" hardware company.
mind you, apple could change their mind and offer such a headless machine in the future, if their dept. sees that the computer market is changing. so while you may well be 100% correct in principle, apple hasn't had to or is yet to find a reason to offer such a headless.
skottichan
Apr 1, 02:00 AM
I assume Safari 5.1 is in this refresh of Lion Preview?
Is it faster? How is memory the resource usage? :cool:I retract my previous statement; the current build seems just as bad as the last and that's on the aforementioned 8GB toting i7 MBP. Even with Flash disabled and harmful scripts blocked, it's a hog capable of eating a combined 3GB or more on its own; the split processes in Activity Monitor just make it look nicer.
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
Is it faster? How is memory the resource usage? :cool:I retract my previous statement; the current build seems just as bad as the last and that's on the aforementioned 8GB toting i7 MBP. Even with Flash disabled and harmful scripts blocked, it's a hog capable of eating a combined 3GB or more on its own; the split processes in Activity Monitor just make it look nicer.
Unrelated: does anyone else have a problem keeping their Google Calendars synced in iCal? I hop in and it shows me the local calendars, but I end up having to go into settings and manually recheck my Delegates to get the server-side calendars to trickle back down.
jent
Apr 12, 11:13 PM
Is there a video of the announcement available?
Peterkro
Mar 21, 02:25 PM
There is an unfortunate propaganda war going on making it hard to verify what is happening Shabab is still a good source though as is:
http://feb17.info/
(pretty much the same people)
http://feb17.info/
(pretty much the same people)
stcanard
Nov 30, 10:47 AM
Another way to ask this question: If Apple decided to compete head-to-head with this feature, what should they do differently?
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Here's the funny thing, I can tell you a feature is poorly thought out, even if I can't necessarily tell you how to solve it :) The fact that we don't have an answer is probably a good start on why the iPod doesn't already do it.
First thing I can say is this: Dump the idea of restrictions on non-DRM'd songs. If "the guy with guitar" wants to beam you his own song he should be allowed to decide that you can keep it as long as you want and send it to as many people as you want.
This goes back to the root of the problem with these devices and online stores: The record labels aren't worried about piracy, they're worried about all the guys on the street being able to bypass them by advertising virally then selling their own burned CDs. Sure it's only one or two now people now, but then it starts to grow, and some band ends up hitting it big and getting radio play, then everybody starts doing it, and then gradually the RIAA loses their money train.
Zargot
Aug 25, 09:00 AM
Has Dell or any other PC manufacturer started shipping Merom notebooks or Conroe PC's?
I haven't seen any Merom notebooks but the Conroe desktops have been shipping for a couple of weeks now.
I haven't seen any Merom notebooks but the Conroe desktops have been shipping for a couple of weeks now.
Small White Car
Aug 29, 09:17 AM
How much would it hurt Apple to just double the height of the Mini and put a 1.83 GHz Conroe (Allendale) in there and a 3.5" Hard Drive? I'm pretty sure no-one would be whining about that. It would also get the price back down to $499 easy!
Oh, yeah, of course that is MY fantasy too. I'd love for them to beef up the mini at a cost of size only. I'd be the first to buy one of those.
I'm afraid, however, that Apple was very successful at convincing people that the mini is not at all like the old cube Mac. That was good since it had the reputation of being overpriced, but it also means that I can't see Apple making the mini any bigger. To do so would make it look like they were headed back that way. Even if the price got lower it would be an image they didn't want to encourage.
Oh, yeah, of course that is MY fantasy too. I'd love for them to beef up the mini at a cost of size only. I'd be the first to buy one of those.
I'm afraid, however, that Apple was very successful at convincing people that the mini is not at all like the old cube Mac. That was good since it had the reputation of being overpriced, but it also means that I can't see Apple making the mini any bigger. To do so would make it look like they were headed back that way. Even if the price got lower it would be an image they didn't want to encourage.
aquajet
Sep 6, 09:46 AM
I really kinda wish Apple would offer deeper education discounts on the mini. $20 just seems cheap to me. I wonder what the exact margins are on these things.
The 24" iMac can be upgraded to a 7600GT video card. Anyone know how decent that is? What about the x1600?
Wrong thread.
The 24" iMac can be upgraded to a 7600GT video card. Anyone know how decent that is? What about the x1600?
Wrong thread.
Giaguara
Apr 15, 10:30 AM
What people don't understand is that Apple is dying....
Yes, I don't really understand WHY according to ... you ?? apple would be dieing.
If you want a Mac that costs 500 $, buy a second had iMac / eMac.
I have NEVER seen a petition that has anything to do with computer or software industry, that I could believe would make _really_ any difference. All the petitions I've seen seem rant - like. If you have an idea, just present it in a more constructive manner, bring / ship it to Cupertino.
Besides - I find it really weird that you don't have more than 500 $ to spend for a computer ... when you are living in Japan. Quit drinking gallons of milk a day there, and you can get a computer in a week. ;)
Yes, I don't really understand WHY according to ... you ?? apple would be dieing.
If you want a Mac that costs 500 $, buy a second had iMac / eMac.
I have NEVER seen a petition that has anything to do with computer or software industry, that I could believe would make _really_ any difference. All the petitions I've seen seem rant - like. If you have an idea, just present it in a more constructive manner, bring / ship it to Cupertino.
Besides - I find it really weird that you don't have more than 500 $ to spend for a computer ... when you are living in Japan. Quit drinking gallons of milk a day there, and you can get a computer in a week. ;)
Chundles
Jul 18, 03:16 AM
List of things I don't want to hear one word about at the WWDC:
iPod
iPod nano
iTMS
iMac
Mac mini
MacBook.
The WWDC is now and always should be a professionally focussed conference. All technical, nerdy and Pro stuff - Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, Pro Apps, OS X development.
All the other stuff can be updated in their own little events or quietly on the online store on or around the WWDC if needs be but the actual event should be totally professional stuff. That's why the developers pay the big bucks.
iPod
iPod nano
iTMS
iMac
Mac mini
MacBook.
The WWDC is now and always should be a professionally focussed conference. All technical, nerdy and Pro stuff - Mac Pro, MacBook Pro, Pro Apps, OS X development.
All the other stuff can be updated in their own little events or quietly on the online store on or around the WWDC if needs be but the actual event should be totally professional stuff. That's why the developers pay the big bucks.
No comments:
Post a Comment