MacGeek1993
May 4, 06:34 PM
I don't like this at all.
I mean, yeah, hopefully they will distribute Mac OS X Lion on disc in retail stores but I like to have physical copies of my software, rather than a file on my computer. The chance of data corruption is far less likely, depending on how well you take care of your discs.
Also, I'm estimating that Mac OS X Lion will be a pretty large file. Maybe 4gb? Not everyone has broadband, some people are still on dial-up. Can you imagine how long it would take downloading a 4gb file over 56k?
Also, how will they distribute the download? Will the file be an ISO or DMG file? How do you install it from that file?
I mean, yeah, hopefully they will distribute Mac OS X Lion on disc in retail stores but I like to have physical copies of my software, rather than a file on my computer. The chance of data corruption is far less likely, depending on how well you take care of your discs.
Also, I'm estimating that Mac OS X Lion will be a pretty large file. Maybe 4gb? Not everyone has broadband, some people are still on dial-up. Can you imagine how long it would take downloading a 4gb file over 56k?
Also, how will they distribute the download? Will the file be an ISO or DMG file? How do you install it from that file?
Pixel35
Sep 16, 10:34 AM
Give us back the 12". It�s all I'm asking.
Thataboy
Jul 30, 11:54 AM
If this ever happens, I would bet the farm that Apple will do it with their own MVNO. I would make a reasonable guess that this MVNO would be based on Sprint.
In every facet, Apple is about the fully-inegrated Apple end-to-end solution. The one time I can think of where they tried it (ROKR), it was a dismal failure. Why would Apple create an unbelievable phone, just to have the likes of VERIZON cripple every feature on it?
I would guess Sprint because they are the only company that has reasonably-priced high-speed data. Apple surely would want access to a high-speed data network, and Sprint's Power Vision is very cheap and already fairly widespread.
I think the killer feature would be iChat Mobile... To be able to video chat with your friends on the go -- people would eat it up. I don't know why no one has done it yet, as it seems the technology is already there.
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out, if it ever does at all. I don't think there have been any successful MVNOs, but Apple is the one who could pull it off.
In every facet, Apple is about the fully-inegrated Apple end-to-end solution. The one time I can think of where they tried it (ROKR), it was a dismal failure. Why would Apple create an unbelievable phone, just to have the likes of VERIZON cripple every feature on it?
I would guess Sprint because they are the only company that has reasonably-priced high-speed data. Apple surely would want access to a high-speed data network, and Sprint's Power Vision is very cheap and already fairly widespread.
I think the killer feature would be iChat Mobile... To be able to video chat with your friends on the go -- people would eat it up. I don't know why no one has done it yet, as it seems the technology is already there.
Anyway, it will be interesting to see how this all plays out, if it ever does at all. I don't think there have been any successful MVNOs, but Apple is the one who could pull it off.
thankins
Mar 30, 06:47 PM
Can this build be installed/updated over the previous Developer Preview 1 install? Or do I have to do a clean install after each new build?
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
Full of Win
Mar 27, 12:09 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
RichP
Jul 30, 09:12 PM
Why would it be advantageous to ban texting? All these features on phones are simply functions of software, not requring excessive hardware technology, so its not like the phone would benefit from not having it.
Also, 5MP camera? Thats just ridiculous. The issue with all these phones is the lenses involved, not the resolution. Give me a 1.2MP that has some decent glass with it to take a picture rather than some bumped up resolution that is junk when I iSync the iPone to iPhoto :D Beside, the nokia phones that do actually have high resolution cameras are THICK. Over an inch. Im not saying we need the next razr here, but over 1" thick makes it uncomfortable to keep in your pocket.
And I think it will be SIM free too. As posted, we all go blow 200-400 on ipods, why not phones. Beside, if Apple just releases unlocked GSM phones, the carriers have no say. iTunes, iChat, VoiP when the wifi is available, its all open season if this thing isnt branded to a particular carrier.
Also, 5MP camera? Thats just ridiculous. The issue with all these phones is the lenses involved, not the resolution. Give me a 1.2MP that has some decent glass with it to take a picture rather than some bumped up resolution that is junk when I iSync the iPone to iPhoto :D Beside, the nokia phones that do actually have high resolution cameras are THICK. Over an inch. Im not saying we need the next razr here, but over 1" thick makes it uncomfortable to keep in your pocket.
And I think it will be SIM free too. As posted, we all go blow 200-400 on ipods, why not phones. Beside, if Apple just releases unlocked GSM phones, the carriers have no say. iTunes, iChat, VoiP when the wifi is available, its all open season if this thing isnt branded to a particular carrier.
tonyoramos1
Apr 24, 01:48 PM
@KnightWRX
Glad we agree, but who would ever purchase an ACD? Buying an overpriced, inferiorly performing, glare-crazy Apple display device is the height of Apple brainwashing.
It says a lot that my education college professors owned several back when they were $3000, yet complained about budget cuts. You know the study: Mac users are statistically hippy liberal douches. Like VW Bug owners.
Glad we agree, but who would ever purchase an ACD? Buying an overpriced, inferiorly performing, glare-crazy Apple display device is the height of Apple brainwashing.
It says a lot that my education college professors owned several back when they were $3000, yet complained about budget cuts. You know the study: Mac users are statistically hippy liberal douches. Like VW Bug owners.
iGary
Aug 7, 05:47 PM
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0631.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0641.jpg
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.engadget.com/media/2006/08/dsc_0636.jpg
Kinda ugly.
mr.steevo
Nov 26, 12:53 PM
If I could just have a Mac tablet that I could type and write notes on for class, I'd be in heaven :)
I used this (http://www.samsclub.com/shopping/navigate.do?dest=5&item=143780) in class to write my notes on. Very durable (I dropped it once and was still able to use it!), and I haven't had a problem with it crapping out on me when I needed it. Storage space is limited but I would buy another one in a heartbeat.
;)
s.
I used this (http://www.samsclub.com/shopping/navigate.do?dest=5&item=143780) in class to write my notes on. Very durable (I dropped it once and was still able to use it!), and I haven't had a problem with it crapping out on me when I needed it. Storage space is limited but I would buy another one in a heartbeat.
;)
s.
dba7dba
Apr 18, 04:53 PM
First off the Prada was officially announced by LG on January 18, 2007. The iPhone was announced by Apple on january 9, 2007. The last time that I checked, January 9th came before January 18th. THAT makes the iPhone first, sorry.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.�[9][10]
LG later claimed that Apple stole both the ideas and concept of the Prada phone. A lawsuit by LG had been rumored prior to this announcement; [9] however, LG has remained silent on whether or not they will file a lawsuit.
Secondly the All of the other copy cats look a ton more like the iPhone than the iPhone looks like the Prada or anything else for that matter.
As far as whether the iPhone and iPad are innovative, I respectfully disagree with you.
WRONG.
From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LG_Prada_(KE850)
LG Electronics has claimed the iPhone's design was copied from the LG Prada. Woo-Young Kwak, head of LG Mobile Handset R&D Center, said at a press conference, �We consider that Apple copied the Prada phone after the design was unveiled when it was presented in the iF Design Award and won the prize in September 2006.�[9][10]
LG later claimed that Apple stole both the ideas and concept of the Prada phone. A lawsuit by LG had been rumored prior to this announcement; [9] however, LG has remained silent on whether or not they will file a lawsuit.
kevink2
May 6, 06:23 AM
Wouldn't a new CPU have to be much faster than the equivalent Intel chip to make it worthwhile? Not just equivalent. Wouldn't it have to be able to run previous generation software in emulation for a period of years.
ghostlyorb
Mar 29, 07:50 PM
Even though it's sad to everyone who wants to buy an iPod.. I'll refuse to complain about it. Japan was crippled by the earthquake. Japan is in our prayers!
ftaok
Apr 7, 02:32 PM
A lot of the comments on this thread is about competition. How Apple is stiffling the competion by scooping up all of the important parts, thus leaving nothing for the other OEMs.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
toddybody
Apr 25, 09:00 AM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Nightarchaon, youre my hero. All the conjecture about future hi res displays aside...the current iMac is almost crippled with its current GPU options. At 2560x1440...it should have something equivalent to an HD 6950/GTX 570. Given that those cards would blow past any thermal limits Apple has set...iMac owners are in a bit of a graphical quandary. It's an utterly gorgeous machine, superb display, great CPU, decent RAM, sufficient HDD options. But those graphics? :eek: SP cores and clock rates aside...it should have 2GB of VRAM(frame buffer) at that res.
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Nightarchaon, youre my hero. All the conjecture about future hi res displays aside...the current iMac is almost crippled with its current GPU options. At 2560x1440...it should have something equivalent to an HD 6950/GTX 570. Given that those cards would blow past any thermal limits Apple has set...iMac owners are in a bit of a graphical quandary. It's an utterly gorgeous machine, superb display, great CPU, decent RAM, sufficient HDD options. But those graphics? :eek: SP cores and clock rates aside...it should have 2GB of VRAM(frame buffer) at that res.
gorgeousninja
Apr 20, 09:01 AM
Now I will celebrate a change of brand while Jobs and company hunts for answers. :)
If buying a different brand of phone means you wont feel the need to come on these boards telling everyone how bad Apple are, then you definitely wont be the only one celebrating....
Al together now.. Hip Hip Hip .... Hooray!!
If buying a different brand of phone means you wont feel the need to come on these boards telling everyone how bad Apple are, then you definitely wont be the only one celebrating....
Al together now.. Hip Hip Hip .... Hooray!!
-aggie-
May 6, 06:08 PM
Everyone will but we can get back to the starting room quicker using "Don't Panic's" plan of having you in a separate group.
Why quicker?
Why quicker?
toddybody
Mar 31, 08:55 AM
I'm so glad I hung onto my 2010 MBP.
Hey Dude, how does your 2010 MBP benefit you over the 2011 refresh...its not like they axed important HW and made things more of an iOS experience. Just curious. :D
Hey Dude, how does your 2010 MBP benefit you over the 2011 refresh...its not like they axed important HW and made things more of an iOS experience. Just curious. :D
heisetax
Aug 2, 04:47 PM
Why is everyone so convinced that there will be significant updates to the Cinema Displays? Remember how long the non-Alu plastic displays were out? It must have been five years, while the Alu displays have been out for less then two years.
I can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
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 can't see Apple making a bigger screen then 30" for desktop use. And if they were to, it would be for a multimedia center type thing, which not only is unlikely, but would never be released at WWDC. As a 30" display owner, theres no way a screen larger then 30" would be a feasible desktop display. Besides, anything larger then 30" is just too niche of a market.
Regarding a built-in iSight, I think the Pro market is just the wrong market for that. Apple has to be aware of its market, and b/c of security reasons, cameras just aren't feasible at this point.
Hell, who knows, I'm probably 100% wrong :p.
Edit: Perhaps Apple will just bump the display to be HDCP compliant. HDMI is pretty much the same as DVI, for everyone who doesn't know ;).
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
wclyffe
Nov 7, 11:16 AM
I've now read through all 48 comments and I just ordered the Tom Tom Car Kit for $87....here's why. At this price, its a phenomenal deal for the following reasons:
a) I needed a Bluetooth Speakerphone (the law in CA) and was looking at the BluAnt for $79. For a few dollars more, I get a lot more.
b) I love that it is a powered cradle/dock as the current one I have is always a hassle trying to plug in for power, and these apps drain power big time. I use Navigon....it's fabulous.
c) I can directly connect the 3.5mm line out right into my car system and even plug in an FM transmitter when I travel to output the sound from my iPhone 3Gs. Now I can tuck these cables away leaving enough slack to turn it to landscape, but its all ready to use by just snapping the phone in.
d) The enhanced gps receiver chip seems to make quite a difference in the numerous tests you can view on Youtube. Much faster response time when re-routing occurs in "low signal areas". One test in particular left the un-aided iPhone without a signal for quite a long time. Even if we all start using the new Google Maps app, this chip will greatly enhance its performance, too.
e) Landscape mode is fast and easy which is not available in my current dock configuration. A simple, no frills dock like the Kensington that has no power connect, no bluetooth speakerphone, no gps chip, etc lists for $40.
This purchase at this price is a no brainer.
a) I needed a Bluetooth Speakerphone (the law in CA) and was looking at the BluAnt for $79. For a few dollars more, I get a lot more.
b) I love that it is a powered cradle/dock as the current one I have is always a hassle trying to plug in for power, and these apps drain power big time. I use Navigon....it's fabulous.
c) I can directly connect the 3.5mm line out right into my car system and even plug in an FM transmitter when I travel to output the sound from my iPhone 3Gs. Now I can tuck these cables away leaving enough slack to turn it to landscape, but its all ready to use by just snapping the phone in.
d) The enhanced gps receiver chip seems to make quite a difference in the numerous tests you can view on Youtube. Much faster response time when re-routing occurs in "low signal areas". One test in particular left the un-aided iPhone without a signal for quite a long time. Even if we all start using the new Google Maps app, this chip will greatly enhance its performance, too.
e) Landscape mode is fast and easy which is not available in my current dock configuration. A simple, no frills dock like the Kensington that has no power connect, no bluetooth speakerphone, no gps chip, etc lists for $40.
This purchase at this price is a no brainer.
ruffdeezy
Nov 5, 02:01 PM
Who cares.
It's an epic rip off.
I hope the next report out is how they only sold 10% of what they forcasted for these pieces of junk.
It's an epic rip off.
I hope the next report out is how they only sold 10% of what they forcasted for these pieces of junk.
johnnymg
Mar 28, 10:22 AM
Smells like another paid FUD piece. Someone wants to buy aapl at a better price. ;)
paolo-
Apr 9, 09:17 PM
@ Mac'nCheese and Tilpots
I think tilpots has shown that he understands the proper priority of operation but is simply stating the fact the this notation can lead to interpretation or at least doubt as to what is meant. I clearly see the answer as 288 and would consider 2 a wrong answer. But if you take it for it's face value, it has to be 288, write it down with � and X, instead, you'll end up with 288, and that's what should be meant. But I still think this is a ****** notation and a second set of parentheses would make it clear.
Wow I should be studying way more complex stuff than this right now...
I think tilpots has shown that he understands the proper priority of operation but is simply stating the fact the this notation can lead to interpretation or at least doubt as to what is meant. I clearly see the answer as 288 and would consider 2 a wrong answer. But if you take it for it's face value, it has to be 288, write it down with � and X, instead, you'll end up with 288, and that's what should be meant. But I still think this is a ****** notation and a second set of parentheses would make it clear.
Wow I should be studying way more complex stuff than this right now...
linuxcooldude
Apr 22, 01:41 PM
Half of their profit comes from the sale of one device. Say that the iPhone 6 was a flop, imagine having to tell your investors you're losing 50% projected profit nearly overnight.
I would not think it would be fair comparing cell phones to computers as their designed for much different markets. As more adults own cell phones then computers you would expect higher profits off of it. Apple was doing quite well even before they entered the phone market.
A more realistic comparison would be phone to phone or computer to computer.
I would not think it would be fair comparing cell phones to computers as their designed for much different markets. As more adults own cell phones then computers you would expect higher profits off of it. Apple was doing quite well even before they entered the phone market.
A more realistic comparison would be phone to phone or computer to computer.
benhollberg
Nov 9, 01:51 PM
I am curious; I seldom find anything is free. How does Sophos recover his investment in this project?
I believe that it used to cost money but it was mainly for business users. My guess is that now they decided to also go for the average consumer and they probably want to get people to see them and recognize their name at first. I could be completely wrong though.
I believe that it used to cost money but it was mainly for business users. My guess is that now they decided to also go for the average consumer and they probably want to get people to see them and recognize their name at first. I could be completely wrong though.
No comments:
Post a Comment