SteveW928
Mar 27, 02:16 PM
There are claims by some analysts that Amazon is going to kick the crap out of Apple's Maiden, N.C. data center and Netflix in one quick shot with their own cloud service.
Yea, Amazon is in a WAY better position technology wise, and track record wise with this kind of service. I guess we'll have to wait and see what Apple has up there sleeve.
Yea, Amazon is in a WAY better position technology wise, and track record wise with this kind of service. I guess we'll have to wait and see what Apple has up there sleeve.
ValSalva
May 7, 12:50 PM
I'd get it if it were free!!
gmail is free... so why can't mobile me?
Now I start thinking about it, I've never paid Google a single cent, but I use
*Gmail
*Google search engine
*Google maps
*Google Earth
(*And I used Picasa for a short period of time)
Maybe some orther stuff but the point is... its all free!:)
It's free if you think giving Google all of your privacy and identity is worth the 'price' :p
gmail is free... so why can't mobile me?
Now I start thinking about it, I've never paid Google a single cent, but I use
*Gmail
*Google search engine
*Google maps
*Google Earth
(*And I used Picasa for a short period of time)
Maybe some orther stuff but the point is... its all free!:)
It's free if you think giving Google all of your privacy and identity is worth the 'price' :p
arkmannj
May 7, 10:20 PM
I would be shocked... but you never know. Maybe they will offer it for free if you purchase a Mac.
That's the way it used to be with the old .mac, it was a selling point. You get a mac and you got email, a .mac web address, 'n such. Then they'd charge for extra space 'n such.
That's the way it used to be with the old .mac, it was a selling point. You get a mac and you got email, a .mac web address, 'n such. Then they'd charge for extra space 'n such.
tpavur
Apr 21, 04:51 PM
wow! I just fired up my 3.2 mac pro w/ 5870 for the first time and this is what welcomes me? i feel so wronged...
mcrain
Apr 15, 10:07 AM
So, the United States should start a football program?? ;)
How about a bank. There are several proposals for State owned banks, similar to N. Dakota.
See for example this discussion: Link to HuffPo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-brown/the-growing-movement-for_b_504846.html) or if you don't like that source, here is another. WebofDebt (http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/growing_movement.php)
(edit) I heard a radio discussion about this, and the guest said that California could eliminate its deficit by handling only 20% of the mortgages in California.
How about a bank. There are several proposals for State owned banks, similar to N. Dakota.
See for example this discussion: Link to HuffPo (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellen-brown/the-growing-movement-for_b_504846.html) or if you don't like that source, here is another. WebofDebt (http://www.webofdebt.com/articles/growing_movement.php)
(edit) I heard a radio discussion about this, and the guest said that California could eliminate its deficit by handling only 20% of the mortgages in California.
bep207
Sep 10, 11:01 PM
dont forget the mbp revision
that will never happen
that will never happen
ChrisTX
Apr 20, 07:54 AM
Happy it is coming this year, that way the real update, iPhone6 can be released next year.
I'm as pleased as punch with my iPhone4, no need to upgrade until the geniuses at Apple open a book learn about a little thing called 4G speeds.
4G right now is a joke. More of a marketing gimmick as the 4g footprint in America is laughable at best. Not even sure about the rest of the globe. People want 4g only because they know 4 is a higher number than 3(Not because they really know the difference). Apple will add "4G" capability when it becomes the standard across the globe. I doubt they will do so to appease the small number of Americans that might actually have access to 4G.
I'm as pleased as punch with my iPhone4, no need to upgrade until the geniuses at Apple open a book learn about a little thing called 4G speeds.
4G right now is a joke. More of a marketing gimmick as the 4g footprint in America is laughable at best. Not even sure about the rest of the globe. People want 4g only because they know 4 is a higher number than 3(Not because they really know the difference). Apple will add "4G" capability when it becomes the standard across the globe. I doubt they will do so to appease the small number of Americans that might actually have access to 4G.
neko girl
May 6, 01:57 AM
Why not move their iOS hardware to Intel now that Samsung seems to be losing their ability to respect their own customer's IP? Intel would have no motivation to co-opt Apple IP (Intel doesn't build products), and they have the most sophisticated fab technology on earth.
Ah, standby power you say?
If Apple moves their Macs away from Intel that'll encourage a lot of Mac users including myself to consider switching to buying Windows machines. Boot Camp is an important Mac feature and Intel processors are the best.
Windows 8 will work on ARM, as Microsoft has said.. current builds already do, apparently.
Ah, standby power you say?
If Apple moves their Macs away from Intel that'll encourage a lot of Mac users including myself to consider switching to buying Windows machines. Boot Camp is an important Mac feature and Intel processors are the best.
Windows 8 will work on ARM, as Microsoft has said.. current builds already do, apparently.
Dimwhit
Apr 5, 01:00 PM
Honestly, I hope Toyota tells Apple to stuff it.
tblrsa
Dec 15, 12:37 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't, either. That's why I'm polite enough to make sure my PC friends are running anti-virus software, to protect them from malware, no matter where it may come from.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
I don't, either. That's why I'm polite enough to make sure my PC friends are running anti-virus software, to protect them from malware, no matter where it may come from.
Eventually Macs will get viruses too.
What's the big deal? It's free and it runs well on my Mac. It's just extra protection for my Mac and for my PC friends.
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
flopticalcube
May 4, 04:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8C148)
CCC would also copy any issues (apart from hardware faults) so how would that be better?
Hopefully you would rotate your backups, as is usually recommended, so that issues would become apparent before overwriting an older backup and you could restore from a safe place and then use TM to recover any lost work.
CCC would also copy any issues (apart from hardware faults) so how would that be better?
Hopefully you would rotate your backups, as is usually recommended, so that issues would become apparent before overwriting an older backup and you could restore from a safe place and then use TM to recover any lost work.
timmillwood
Nov 26, 10:56 AM
So this will be a super remote for the iTV?
i think i will get one if they are reasonably prices but i would not pay more than �500 for it when I have a Macbook Pro
Would be nice if it has built in HSDPA, EDGE and GSM!
i think i will get one if they are reasonably prices but i would not pay more than �500 for it when I have a Macbook Pro
Would be nice if it has built in HSDPA, EDGE and GSM!
linuxcooldude
Apr 22, 09:23 PM
Yet another sign Apple is going to kill the Mac Pro.
You'll see! With Final Cut Pro on it's deathbed there is no way the Mac Pro is sticking around!
/s
I think quite the opposite. I think It will increase the market.
You'll see! With Final Cut Pro on it's deathbed there is no way the Mac Pro is sticking around!
/s
I think quite the opposite. I think It will increase the market.
milo
May 4, 03:11 PM
If I have to DL it from the App Store, I've got to download it 4 times! I don't care about paying for multiple licenses... I do care about blowing out my internet bandwidth downloading the same multi-gigabyte file 4 times.
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
What makes you so sure you wouldn't be able to copy the installer to your other machines? With the current app store, you don't have to re-download everything, you can copy an app over and then just have to authorize with your apple ID. Or do installs over a network (which is already possible, even wirelessly).
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
vincebio
Nov 22, 01:13 PM
Wouldn't it be something if Apple sold one of the first unlocked phones from the get-go.
You walk into an Apple store, they have the iPhone in GSM form.. and you get a trade-in discount for your old phone.. the Apple reps pop-out your sim card, transfer your contacts.. and hand you an ipod like phone that has all your old info in it and works with your current plan.
:eek:
im pretty sure thats what steevie boy has in mind ;)
You walk into an Apple store, they have the iPhone in GSM form.. and you get a trade-in discount for your old phone.. the Apple reps pop-out your sim card, transfer your contacts.. and hand you an ipod like phone that has all your old info in it and works with your current plan.
:eek:
im pretty sure thats what steevie boy has in mind ;)
Benjy91
Apr 25, 10:10 AM
Your context is incorrect. I was referring to the website that supposedly has a lot of information about you, not the location database.
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
I dont know if its intentional, but your Signature link is broken, it has 1 too many h's. It begins hhttps ;)
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
I dont know if its intentional, but your Signature link is broken, it has 1 too many h's. It begins hhttps ;)
thisisahughes
Mar 27, 05:58 AM
won't it suck if there isn't a new iPhone until Oct?
that's an understatement.
that's an understatement.
valkraider
Apr 26, 03:02 PM
Except that each and every single person who has purchased an Android phone could have purchased an iPhone instead. The fact there is one Android phone or ten Android phones is irrelevant. Every one of those people could have chose to buy an iPhone. They didn't.
Only true in the sense that every Honda Fit owner could have chose to buy an Audi R8 but didn't.
Not every Android device is purchased. My brother has one only because IT WAS FREE (and he has no clue how to use even 10% of the functions). He has never once purchased an app.
Only true in the sense that every Honda Fit owner could have chose to buy an Audi R8 but didn't.
Not every Android device is purchased. My brother has one only because IT WAS FREE (and he has no clue how to use even 10% of the functions). He has never once purchased an app.
benpatient
Mar 29, 11:59 AM
I seem to remember the "backing up your library" to the "cloud" was tried by someone before. They had software that scanned the CD in your drive and then either ripped it to their servers, or just unlocked access to that album in your account. RIAA brought them down. This seems a little different, and highly wasteful of space. If 500 people upload a copy of "whatever," Amazon has to store 500x the space of "whatever," rather then just unlocking one copy for 500x people. Keep in mind 1 meg of cloud space is easily over 10 megs of physical storage. (RAID, redundancy, geographical peers, backups, etc...)
Amazon... not sure what to make them. They seem to be doing things which obviously will get them sued. I guess they figure if any ONE takes off they will make bank. Either way, I'm excited about this because Apple is great at being the best. The better the competition, the better the Apple product.
Um...the RIAA didn't bring them down. Apple bought them. it was called Lala.com and nothing has been as good since.
It was nearly perfect. Amazon's offering here is a good step back towards they way things were a year ago with Lala.com.
I had nearly 100 GB of itunes library synced to lala.com and available anywhere there was a browser. I could listen to any song or album in their massive library one time all the way through for free. "web albums" were 99 cents. Tracks were 10 cents. My biggest gripe was the lack of a non-browser player option. Of course they were working on an iOS player app (in public beta) when Apple bought them and shut them down without ceremony.
Whatever we get will be less than what Lala was 2 years or more ago. They had the support of all the major labels and most of the larger indie distributors, as well.
Amazon... not sure what to make them. They seem to be doing things which obviously will get them sued. I guess they figure if any ONE takes off they will make bank. Either way, I'm excited about this because Apple is great at being the best. The better the competition, the better the Apple product.
Um...the RIAA didn't bring them down. Apple bought them. it was called Lala.com and nothing has been as good since.
It was nearly perfect. Amazon's offering here is a good step back towards they way things were a year ago with Lala.com.
I had nearly 100 GB of itunes library synced to lala.com and available anywhere there was a browser. I could listen to any song or album in their massive library one time all the way through for free. "web albums" were 99 cents. Tracks were 10 cents. My biggest gripe was the lack of a non-browser player option. Of course they were working on an iOS player app (in public beta) when Apple bought them and shut them down without ceremony.
Whatever we get will be less than what Lala was 2 years or more ago. They had the support of all the major labels and most of the larger indie distributors, as well.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 02:30 PM
According to the latest data, Android now edges out iOS, 31% to 30%, a significant change from the July-September 2010 period when iOS held a 33%-26% lead over Android among future smartphone purchasers.
The difference is most like not significant enough to say that Android edges out iOS. What's most likely is significant enough is Android's rise and iOS losing share.
Once again, the seperating into 'smartphone' and 'tablet' markets makes little sense. A tablet is a lot more like a laptop than a smartphone. The survey is about smartphones. The iPad isn't a smartphone, nor is the iPod Touch. It's about more than just the OS. If Microsoft decided to run Windows 7 on their smartphones, then their desktop computers, laptops, or tablets wouldn't be counted either.
edit:
Apple isn't forced to allow iOS only on their own devices.
The difference is most like not significant enough to say that Android edges out iOS. What's most likely is significant enough is Android's rise and iOS losing share.
Once again, the seperating into 'smartphone' and 'tablet' markets makes little sense. A tablet is a lot more like a laptop than a smartphone. The survey is about smartphones. The iPad isn't a smartphone, nor is the iPod Touch. It's about more than just the OS. If Microsoft decided to run Windows 7 on their smartphones, then their desktop computers, laptops, or tablets wouldn't be counted either.
edit:
Apple isn't forced to allow iOS only on their own devices.
CyberB0b
Sep 16, 08:21 PM
If MacRumors keeps predicting MacBook Pro updates, it will eventually come true. (:
karolynaz
Mar 31, 08:13 AM
Does anyone know if you can now print highlighted text like you can in Windows? Since they're adding the age old full-screen window feature, I think this feature would also be a welcome addition.
Don't forget the CUT. OS X still can't cut file and paste in another place.
Don't forget the CUT. OS X still can't cut file and paste in another place.
CAWjr
Mar 28, 11:06 AM
I'm still on a 3GS. If I don't get an iPhone 5 this summer, the world won't end. In fact, it will be nice to not hear my wife get in my ear about getting an iPad & an iPhone only months apart from each other.
Plus, if they delay it & get better technology in it, I can wait it out.
Plus, if they delay it & get better technology in it, I can wait it out.
No comments:
Post a Comment