skunk
Mar 21, 05:39 PM
Loyalists blow with the wind, and the prevailing wind happens to be from Vichy. .... sorry, Tripoli. :oI think that's the prevailing water.
FadeToBlack
Feb 6, 04:00 AM
Well said.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
My Dad bought a '96 brand new back when I was about 12. Pacific Green Metallic with Gray leather. It wasn't fully loaded, but it was a GT, 5 Speed. Had almost everything, but it didn't have the Mach 460 or the 17" wheels. He didn't have it for very long, but I have lots of fond memories of it and I've always kinda wanted to get one and it looks like you've found a gem in that black one. VERY nice car. It's amazing how good of shape it's in.
Yeah it's definitely been taken care of, both owners kept it for quite a few years each, both only putting about 6,500 miles a year on it. You can tell it's been garaged likely its whole life because the headlights and tail lights aren't hazy from sun exposure.
I remember when these cars were just 1-2 years old, basically factory fresh, and I would go to the dealer and drool over them under the lights at night--ones just like this, with these 17" wheels and leather. I've always loved them, and probably always will. I'm also a fan of the 5L cars, and the thirdgen F-bodies of the day (I own a thirdgen Camaro too).
I really can't wait to get it.:)
My Dad bought a '96 brand new back when I was about 12. Pacific Green Metallic with Gray leather. It wasn't fully loaded, but it was a GT, 5 Speed. Had almost everything, but it didn't have the Mach 460 or the 17" wheels. He didn't have it for very long, but I have lots of fond memories of it and I've always kinda wanted to get one and it looks like you've found a gem in that black one. VERY nice car. It's amazing how good of shape it's in.
hexonxonx
Mar 23, 11:15 AM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I have 12,972 songs. I am so happy that the Classic will stick around.
I have two classics, one filled with songs and music videos, the other filled with TV shows so I can take them on the road and watch them in the car on my cars Pioneer video screen. My deci works with my iPod 100%. Both classic are filled to capacity. I'll be buying a third soon.
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
I have 12,972 songs. I am so happy that the Classic will stick around.
I have two classics, one filled with songs and music videos, the other filled with TV shows so I can take them on the road and watch them in the car on my cars Pioneer video screen. My deci works with my iPod 100%. Both classic are filled to capacity. I'll be buying a third soon.
bigpics
Mar 24, 12:57 PM
Dude, I'm sorry to inform you that what you're saying is an outright lie, and there are guys from the Lossless Compression Clan, called "Apple Lossless codec", "FLAC", and "APE", standing with heavy cluebats in their hands, ready to perform a painful reality sync on anyone thinking compression ALWAYS degrades quality.
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Because it doesn't, full stop.You're (very probably) right. My comments were aimed at those who were saying the Classic is overkill because who could ever "need" anything more than 128 or even 256 kbps AAC's or mp3's. (Nobody even mentioned 320, at which many of my fave songs are ripped.)
So as for the "lossless" CODECs, my reach exceeds my grasp. When it comes to photo files I pretty much understand the principles of ZFW lossless compression in TIFF files and have thousands of 'em. And in case anyone doesn't know, if you work on JPEG's and do multiple editing sessions on a photo, you do introduce new compression artifacts every time you re-save even at the highest settings. I've done tests for kicks and giggles - repeatedly opening and saving .jpg's and you reach a point where the image looks like a (very) bad xerox copy.
Back to audio, I've plowed through a few articles on formats - years ago - and I've seen slightly differing conclusions about Apple Lossless and FLAC ('tho all felt that these were alternatives worth considering for at least the great majority of people serious about sound), but, frankly, I lack the chops to have an informed opinion of my own, and know nada about APE.
And, no, while I can appreciate friends' systems that are tricked out with vacuum tube amps, "reference" speakers and high-end vinyl pressings, I'm hardly one of the hard-core audiophiles in practice. My files are mostly 256 and 320 kbps, my home speaker placements are wrong and I use preset ambiance settings that totally mess with the sound to produce surround effects from AAC's.
Worse, the great majority of my listening is on the mid-level rig in my car at freeway speeds or in city traffic, meaning I and millions of others are constantly fighting like, what, 20-30 db of non-music noise that totally overwhelms delicate nuances in sound. And worst, some of my earliest pre-iPod rips (back when I had a massive 20 GB HDD) were done in RealPlayer at 96 or even 64 kbps - before I sold or traded those CDs - and yeah, in the car, some of those still sound "pretty good" to me (tho' some clearly don't).
Add the (lack of) quality of most ear buds and headsets used by most people, and there's probably less than 5% of music listeners experiencing "true high-fidelity." To turn around an old ad campaign, no, our music listening today is "not live - it's Memorex."
But my point was and is that there's no reason to champion lossy compression per se other than for the economies of storage space it provides, and for fungible uses like topical podcasts.
As long as we have the space, "data fidelity" is desirable so that the files we produce which will be around for many years - and get spread to many people - don't discard signal for no real gain. No one would put up with "lossy" word processing compression that occasionally turned "i's" into "l's" after all.
And those audio files will still be around in a future of better DAC's, speakers, active systems which routinely monitor and cancel out things like apartment, road and car noise (in quieter electric cars with better road noise supression in the first place), better mainstream headsets and who knows what other improvements.
Compatibility between players (software or hardware) used to be another reason to choose, say, mp3's, but there's really no meaningful competition to Apple's portable sound wonders any more.
So please keep those "cluebats" holstered! No offense intended. ;)
Tonsko
Jan 7, 05:13 AM
Not too bad, if it's a modern one. Depends if he rags it all the time, but you'll get 35+ out of it I imagine.
KeriJane
Apr 9, 04:56 PM
Yes, I can drive manual.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
My father was too cheap to buy an automatic car and the cars I could afford when I was younger were all manual.
I didn't actually start with a car. My first motor vehicle was a Yamaha 60, which was a full-sized motorcycle with a 60cc engine and a... manual transmission!
1st car= 1968 SAAB 96 with 3 cylinders and a manual transmission! It was loads of fun and sounded like nothing else except maybe a very angry snowmobile.
Nowdays, 2 of my last 3 Toyota Tercels were automatics. I wish for manual a lot as the autos are a bit sluggish and not as economical.
Have Fun,
Keri
PS. I may have a really fun manual car pretty soon.
Consultant
Apr 26, 01:37 PM
Actually, it would 1-Click ;)
In formal writing, one should always write out the words for all numbers one through ten.
"1 click" would be unacceptable in proper English writing.
Therefore, Apple should have done one-click instead of 1-click to avoid licensing issues: ;)
Amazon filed a patent infringement lawsuit in October 1999 in response to Barnes & Noble offering a 1-Click ordering option called "Express Lane." After reviewing the evidence, a judge issued a preliminary injunction ordering Barnes & Noble to stop offering Express Lane until the case was settled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click
Apple should get an injunction against App Store knockoffs.
In formal writing, one should always write out the words for all numbers one through ten.
"1 click" would be unacceptable in proper English writing.
Therefore, Apple should have done one-click instead of 1-click to avoid licensing issues: ;)
Amazon filed a patent infringement lawsuit in October 1999 in response to Barnes & Noble offering a 1-Click ordering option called "Express Lane." After reviewing the evidence, a judge issued a preliminary injunction ordering Barnes & Noble to stop offering Express Lane until the case was settled.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1-Click
Apple should get an injunction against App Store knockoffs.
1000masks
Jan 12, 03:02 AM
Im hoping for something out the box from Apple this year. Hopefully something with the touch input and lightweight. Even though I just performed surgery on my 12in Powerbook and replaced the hard drive it would be nice for something new. I dont think it will be called anything "Air" but who knows.
newagemac
May 2, 05:03 PM
They could have simplified the whole process in the following way:
justin ieber style hair.
Justin ieber new hair style
Justin ieber new hair style
justin ieber style.
concert Style, hair,
about his hair style.
of getting my hair cut.
Also the classic style of
justin ieber new hair 2011
bobsentell
May 2, 05:44 PM
iOS style multitasking features (benefits) are indeed in Lion.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
Applications written for Lion can "suspend and resume" without having to "save and close" documents. The reason the little light below running apps on the Dock was removed is that "running" is now more of a decision between the App and OS -- not so much the user. (APP - "Am I idle right now? Can I resume from this point very quickly? If so, I'll just suspend myself till the user or an event wakes me back up. No need to burn RAM or CPU, the user won't even notice I'm not here.)
There is no reason with modern computer architecture for humans to do memory management by getting involved with which programs are actually physically in memory/active. We have 7200rpm SATA3 or SSD drives, multicore processors with Gigahertz speeds, and Gigabytes of RAM...
The way we interact with Multitasking in Windows 7 and OS X Snow Leopard is based on the hardware limitations imposed by 640K RAM, 4.7 Megahertz single core processor, and Floppy Disks. Apple took the first brave step away from that with iOS. It's good to see it moving forward in Lion.
But my iPhone is far more limited than my first Windows PC in that regard. Even with Windows 95 I could go from one app to another while letting the other on load in the background. iOS freezes everything. If I want a video to upload on Facebook, I have no choice but to keep the app open until it's done. On my PC, I can start the upload and then move on to other things while the process is completing.
I find moving to non-true multitasking as a step backward, not a step forward. As you said, out systems capabilites are able to do so much more. I can be playing a computer game, hit the Windows key, and open a media player and never see a drop in performance. Why limit your computer to one task at a time? Kind of defeats the point of multi-core processors.
tlinford
Mar 7, 08:35 AM
Diesel engines are excellent although it in worth considering one drawback and that is the freezing point of diesel fuel....
I drive a Jeep Liberty 2.8 CRD (common rail diesel) which is not available in the States so I understand. The fuel economy is great, mine in an auto and I get all round 30 mpg's in euro terms this isn't too great as most small cars do around 38-40 mpg if petrol 50+ mpg's in diesel, but these are cars that weigh nothing!
I love the Jeep, especially the diesel because it gives the truck gravitas! but diesel fuel freezes at around -15 degs C... In the UK is hardly every gets this cold (although I did have one day this winter when the Jeep wouldn't start because it was -18!)... In the UK we don't have engine block heaters in the UK, so I am not sure if it would be possible to cold proof?
just be aware!
Someone said about diesel engines coming from single sources... this is because these engines are complicated to design and build and it's cheaper for car makers to go to the experts..... the one I have in the Jeep is a VM Motori and Italian engine based on one they put in London Black cabs! bullet proof engine!
I drive a Jeep Liberty 2.8 CRD (common rail diesel) which is not available in the States so I understand. The fuel economy is great, mine in an auto and I get all round 30 mpg's in euro terms this isn't too great as most small cars do around 38-40 mpg if petrol 50+ mpg's in diesel, but these are cars that weigh nothing!
I love the Jeep, especially the diesel because it gives the truck gravitas! but diesel fuel freezes at around -15 degs C... In the UK is hardly every gets this cold (although I did have one day this winter when the Jeep wouldn't start because it was -18!)... In the UK we don't have engine block heaters in the UK, so I am not sure if it would be possible to cold proof?
just be aware!
Someone said about diesel engines coming from single sources... this is because these engines are complicated to design and build and it's cheaper for car makers to go to the experts..... the one I have in the Jeep is a VM Motori and Italian engine based on one they put in London Black cabs! bullet proof engine!
KilGil27
Sep 6, 07:08 PM
It costs me nothing to walk into town (about 10 minutes) or bike (5) and pick up a DVD at the municipal library for �1.50. Occasionally I'll copy it to my hard disk if I didn't have the time I thought I would have to watch it and watch it later, then delete it.
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
you don't watch movies more than twice? I feel bad for you...
Unlike music, you rarely watch a movie twice. Why buy or store these on your hard disk for longer than it takes to view it?
I've not bought a movie since 1995 on VHS. It's was just kind of silly having them litter up your shelves then and your hard disk now.
you don't watch movies more than twice? I feel bad for you...
dreamsburnred
Mar 24, 11:04 PM
A refresh is expected soon...
nagromme
Sep 1, 12:22 PM
Getting rid of the chin would require an external power supply like the ACDs unless you want a power supply sized blank space on the screen :p
Not to mention, lots of displays (not even computers!) have had a big space below the screen. But I guess because they put VISIBLE speaker grilles and cluttery lines down there, it's OK :)
Not to mention, lots of displays (not even computers!) have had a big space below the screen. But I guess because they put VISIBLE speaker grilles and cluttery lines down there, it's OK :)
ErikGrim
Apr 4, 07:36 PM
Click2Flash (the extension) seems to not work with a lot of Flash banners now. Especially on this forum. Anyone else get that?
RaceTripper
Jan 6, 04:48 PM
...and started to run roughly at 70,000 miles when idling. Dealer said it was due to my dad putting 87 in the tank when BMW recommends 91/93....There's a reason BMW says to use high-octane fuel. If you don't use the recommended fuels and fluids and the engine starts to get rough, you can't entirely blame BMW.
I run my BMW and MINI on 91/93 always. My 70K miles 330ci purrs like a kitten.
I run my BMW and MINI on 91/93 always. My 70K miles 330ci purrs like a kitten.
HiRez
May 2, 04:56 PM
So are Mac apps sold though the App Store expected to keep all assets in their respective bundle, and not utilize Application Support? Would this uninstaller method remove files not in the app's bundle? What about preferences?
p.s. I think a lot of people are overreacting to this. Remember when everyone was all up in arms with the fear that the Final Cut rewrite would be a dumbed down iOS style iMovie? Well, instead it looks awesome. Yes, it borrows from iOS and from iMovie, but it takes the best parts of those to make a better, more powerful, and at the same time, easier to use, product. Hopefully Apple is doing the same in regards to Lion. Have a little faith!
p.s. I think a lot of people are overreacting to this. Remember when everyone was all up in arms with the fear that the Final Cut rewrite would be a dumbed down iOS style iMovie? Well, instead it looks awesome. Yes, it borrows from iOS and from iMovie, but it takes the best parts of those to make a better, more powerful, and at the same time, easier to use, product. Hopefully Apple is doing the same in regards to Lion. Have a little faith!
islanders
Dec 28, 10:41 AM
SeaFox, So what you are saying its that:
�You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.�
1) the iTV should is not and should not have a harddrive, or any kind of computer capabilities? You say I�m comparing apples to oranges when I said my cable box has a harddrive, assuming I don�t know what a tuner is, when I was just saying a harddive is not that big a deal. And if it doesn�t have one that will be less of a reason to buy one.
2) �The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.�
Withnew hair jb silly brandz
�You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.�
1) the iTV should is not and should not have a harddrive, or any kind of computer capabilities? You say I�m comparing apples to oranges when I said my cable box has a harddrive, assuming I don�t know what a tuner is, when I was just saying a harddive is not that big a deal. And if it doesn�t have one that will be less of a reason to buy one.
2) �The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.�
DrEasy
Mar 23, 02:08 AM
With a bigger hard drive, it would be conceivable to think of the iPod classic as a portable hard drive that you could also use for Time Machine backups. I would have a greater incentive in backing up my files if I could use my iPod that is always nearby. It would back up my files as I'm recharging it.
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
Or look at it the other way: there's plenty of portable hard drives in the market, but how many of you carry one "just in case"? Whereas if the portable hard drive doubles up as a very competent MP3 player, you will always have it with you.
Now there should be some data protection scheme so that if someone steals your iPod they can't use all your data. Encryption + some kind of pairing with your machines should do the job.
I know I'd buy such a thing...
CyberBob859
Jun 22, 12:58 PM
Then what was the point in the iPad?
I think the question should be - what would be the point of the iOS layer?
It's not like OS/X has no program support. Which would people rather run - the full OS/X iWork programs or the limited iOS versions on their desktop? And as others pointed out - some iOS programs require hardware support (GPS, accelerometers, etc) that an iMac wouldn't have or need.
iOS as a replacement for Dashboard? Maybe. I can see some apps replacing Dashboard programs and being more useful.
iOS could be used as a "front-end" for touch and gesture support, much the same way as HP has their touch-designed programs on top of Windows 7 for their all-in-one Touchsmart PC's.
Instead of touching the screen, the rumored Magic Pad, along with the current Magic Mouse brings full gesture support to iMac via the iOS layer. So, you would have a Magic Pad, a small wireless keyboard, and the Magic Mouse in front of you, and navigate that way.
But - will iAds come to the desktop now?
I think the question should be - what would be the point of the iOS layer?
It's not like OS/X has no program support. Which would people rather run - the full OS/X iWork programs or the limited iOS versions on their desktop? And as others pointed out - some iOS programs require hardware support (GPS, accelerometers, etc) that an iMac wouldn't have or need.
iOS as a replacement for Dashboard? Maybe. I can see some apps replacing Dashboard programs and being more useful.
iOS could be used as a "front-end" for touch and gesture support, much the same way as HP has their touch-designed programs on top of Windows 7 for their all-in-one Touchsmart PC's.
Instead of touching the screen, the rumored Magic Pad, along with the current Magic Mouse brings full gesture support to iMac via the iOS layer. So, you would have a Magic Pad, a small wireless keyboard, and the Magic Mouse in front of you, and navigate that way.
But - will iAds come to the desktop now?
Sky Blue
Jan 1, 06:58 PM
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.
No.
i'm hoping really surprising...
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/welcome2007_20070101.jpg
This year better be good!
No.
i'm hoping really surprising...
http://images.apple.com/home/2007/images/welcome2007_20070101.jpg
This year better be good!
RMo
May 3, 03:01 AM
No, Microsoft have not got it right. There should be no need for a specific tool to uninstall applications. applications should be self-contained and be deletable with the press of a button�
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
You're missing the point that Windows uninstallers usually, at least, give you the option of cleaning up user data (e.g., things in your profile, usually C:\Users\username\AppData or C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data, roughly the equivalent of the ~\Library (and Application Support) folder on OS X.
Yes, this is easily done yourself--if you know where to look. Most users don't. But, on the other hand, this usually doesn't cause any problems, and in most cases it won't take up too much space just to leave it there.
Finally, this would also be easier for applications that do things like install a pref pane (e.g., Growl, Perian--although it actually puts an uninstaller in the pref pane itself). These are few and far between and better have a good reason for doing so, but they are still around.
On the other hand, having a single .App bundle is a great way to encourage the (good, in my opinion) practice of self-contained apps. I thought MS was learning towards this around the dawn of the .NET era, but this seems to have been lost...
Many applications work this way on Mac, some developers still put related files into various other locations though unfortunately...
You're missing the point that Windows uninstallers usually, at least, give you the option of cleaning up user data (e.g., things in your profile, usually C:\Users\username\AppData or C:\Documents and Settings\username\Application Data, roughly the equivalent of the ~\Library (and Application Support) folder on OS X.
Yes, this is easily done yourself--if you know where to look. Most users don't. But, on the other hand, this usually doesn't cause any problems, and in most cases it won't take up too much space just to leave it there.
Finally, this would also be easier for applications that do things like install a pref pane (e.g., Growl, Perian--although it actually puts an uninstaller in the pref pane itself). These are few and far between and better have a good reason for doing so, but they are still around.
On the other hand, having a single .App bundle is a great way to encourage the (good, in my opinion) practice of self-contained apps. I thought MS was learning towards this around the dawn of the .NET era, but this seems to have been lost...
Danksi
Dec 31, 12:54 AM
What do I see the iTV for? Streaming media, a glorified IP TV box, an easier way to bring the iPod to the living room. I really don't see it doing anything else. I'm hoping that I'm wrong.
This is how iTV was originally presented, at least from what I recall, accessing your iTunes/iPhoto content on a TV. There's a hint there may be more, but I don't think so.
My interest is the convenience of not having to plug my iBook into the TV and then mount the media drive inside the MacPro located upstairs, to watch some family movies or something I've downloaded. This certainly isn't convenient for the rest of the family.
I've been shoving everything Music/Video related into iTunes, which has made access loads easier/quicker from both the iBook and my wife's Windows XP laptop (using iTunes) - but it's still not on the TV, without cables etc (and no remote)
Unfortunately I've also noticed that not all movies/video-podcasts are shared properly, some are fixed by re-importing, some by re-tagging with 'lostify', but others are stubborn - this 'bug' needs fixing!
This is how iTV was originally presented, at least from what I recall, accessing your iTunes/iPhoto content on a TV. There's a hint there may be more, but I don't think so.
My interest is the convenience of not having to plug my iBook into the TV and then mount the media drive inside the MacPro located upstairs, to watch some family movies or something I've downloaded. This certainly isn't convenient for the rest of the family.
I've been shoving everything Music/Video related into iTunes, which has made access loads easier/quicker from both the iBook and my wife's Windows XP laptop (using iTunes) - but it's still not on the TV, without cables etc (and no remote)
Unfortunately I've also noticed that not all movies/video-podcasts are shared properly, some are fixed by re-importing, some by re-tagging with 'lostify', but others are stubborn - this 'bug' needs fixing!
Vantage Point
Apr 27, 07:06 AM
My title for my first job after Grad school in 1984 was Applications Engineer, my next job in 1987 was Applications Manager. Do you think I have a case against apple using a variation of my old title??? At any rate, I would happy settle of a them giving me the latest iPhone, iPad and a MBP of choice every two years for life ;)
No comments:
Post a Comment