celticpride678
Apr 1, 11:02 PM
Use the dev version instead. A lot more stable than the beta one.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
Which is kind of ironic.
Google is likely going to be updating the dev build of Chrome to work with Lion has they have been doing over the past month, rather than the stable or beta builds.
mandis
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
At this pace the iPad3 will come close to the PS3 in terms of performance when it is released next year...
I'm really impressed by the increasing performance of the ARM architecture. Mind you all this is coming from a tiny SoC which doesn't require cooling or any substantial power intake.
Impressive indeed!
Maybe we'll be seeing ARM based Desktops by the end of the decade... or sooner?
I'm really impressed by the increasing performance of the ARM architecture. Mind you all this is coming from a tiny SoC which doesn't require cooling or any substantial power intake.
Impressive indeed!
Maybe we'll be seeing ARM based Desktops by the end of the decade... or sooner?
7thMac
Mar 22, 04:42 PM
I love the Classic. Everything doesn't need to run iOS. But there is room for improvement and when something better comes along I'll buy it. For now there doesn't seem to be any competition.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 01:39 PM
Knight is correct.
You can trademark a graphic that contains words, but have no rights to the actual words themselves.
It is you who needs an education on what a trademark actually is.
Lame
1. Pet Store was trademarked in one form or another.
2. Trying to argue that "App" was as much part of the lexicon as "pet" is ridiculous.
Objection overruled.
You can trademark a graphic that contains words, but have no rights to the actual words themselves.
It is you who needs an education on what a trademark actually is.
Lame
1. Pet Store was trademarked in one form or another.
2. Trying to argue that "App" was as much part of the lexicon as "pet" is ridiculous.
Objection overruled.
anti-microsoft
Jan 13, 02:03 AM
MacBook Air is a bit stupid but I suppose we'll get used to it. It would be better to call it the AirBook.:D
SpiderDude
Jun 24, 12:18 PM
No chance. The ergonomics would be a disaster.
I second that. I have both an 27 iMac and the first aluminum Macbook with a Multi-Touch trackpad and touching on a screen would be quite uncomfortable. I'd rather use my macbook's Multi-Touch trackpad than the magic mouse.
:apple:
I second that. I have both an 27 iMac and the first aluminum Macbook with a Multi-Touch trackpad and touching on a screen would be quite uncomfortable. I'd rather use my macbook's Multi-Touch trackpad than the magic mouse.
:apple:
paul4339
Apr 27, 12:59 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 2.3.3; en-gb; Nexus S Build/GRI40) AppleWebKit/533.1 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/533.1)
WordPerfect Office X5?
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/gb/en/Product/1207676528492#tabview=tab0
But as the hitmaker#39;s mom
on fire, justin bieber set
Justin Bieber came to his
jealous Justin Bieber fans
Justin Bieber - Justin Bieber
shes Justin+ieber+moms
Justin Bieber accidentally set
Bing: Justin Bieber sets his
justin bieber mom fire.
Justin Bieber saved his
Last weekend the singer Justin
Justin Bieber rescues mum as
WordPerfect Office X5?
http://www.corel.com/servlet/Satellite/gb/en/Product/1207676528492#tabview=tab0
Anonymous Freak
Nov 28, 12:01 AM
Apple previously had sold a 17" 4:3 ratio LCD until June 2004
Correction: the 17" Apple Cinema Display was the oddball 5:4 ratio. 1280x1024 is *NOT* 4:3. 1280x960 is. CRTs are usually 4:3, and Apple's CRTs that support 1280 or higher use 1280x960 (such as the eMac.) LCDs that use 1280 use the the non-standard ratio of 1280x1024. Why? No clue. Some oddball decision a little over half a decade ago. But 1280x1024 became the standard for LCDs.
Correction: the 17" Apple Cinema Display was the oddball 5:4 ratio. 1280x1024 is *NOT* 4:3. 1280x960 is. CRTs are usually 4:3, and Apple's CRTs that support 1280 or higher use 1280x960 (such as the eMac.) LCDs that use 1280 use the the non-standard ratio of 1280x1024. Why? No clue. Some oddball decision a little over half a decade ago. But 1280x1024 became the standard for LCDs.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 09:17 PM
What was the render dialog ?
Basically: "You Wait While I Render."
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Basically: "You Wait While I Render."
New one will apparently let you keep working while it renders in the background.
Stella
Jan 12, 08:07 AM
If this machine is truly is what the rumour suggests then what is the point?
A thinner MacBook that doesn't have any CD drives?
There has got to be some information that is missing.
Cool name though!
A thinner MacBook that doesn't have any CD drives?
There has got to be some information that is missing.
Cool name though!
islanders
Jan 3, 02:07 PM
I guess a 14�� laptop with a decent word processor is too much to ask for?
appleguy123
Mar 20, 03:49 PM
I agree.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
I think that if the App Store wasn't regulated, this app would clearly have standing to be in there, as would an app that was misogynistic, anti-semitic, or pro-flatulence.
However, Apple (and Steve Jobs in particular) has said that the App Store is meant to "protect" people from certain things (namely porn). Since Apple has the right to determine what goes into its store, I think it's fair to ask that an app that is more offensive than porn (most people disagree with this type of "therapy" and approve of homosexuality compared to the level of disagreement there is with porn) should be similarly removed from the App Store.
I think there's also a Pandora's Box in that if this App delves into trying to "cure" people of some non-existent psychosis, could Apple be guilty of aiding and abetting the practice of medicine/psychology without a license? I'm not saying there's an answer to this, but it certainly does leave the door open to more problems.
There are homeopathic apps in the AppStore. Those won't work any better than this 'pray the gay away' app, but they still are allowed in the store.
sauer228
Apr 19, 11:59 AM
Just in time for the back to school promo!
Meltdownblitz
Feb 8, 04:07 AM
2008 Infiniti G37S
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/xedgewaterx/G37%20iForged%20Wheels%20Posting/DSC02896.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/xedgewaterx/G37%20iForged%20Wheels%20Posting/DSC02938.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/xedgewaterx/G37%20iForged%20Wheels%20Posting/DSC02896.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y85/xedgewaterx/G37%20iForged%20Wheels%20Posting/DSC02938.jpg
princealfie
Nov 30, 10:49 AM
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.
Hurrah, the RIAA loses again :D
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.
Hurrah, the RIAA loses again :D
Porco
Apr 19, 04:55 PM
I've been putting a family member off buying an iMac for months in order to wait for the new ones, I hope the updates are very soon.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 7, 03:28 AM
Dude, the MBP was updated in late April of this year, why would you think it'll be updated four and a half months later??
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
Because Apple is no longer in a hardware reality distortion field.
Because the MBP is a part of a Pro line, and the consumer iMacs have merom.
Because merom easily swaps in place of yonah at the same price.
I'm hopeful for the new MBP rev. They could have introduced C2D MBPs today - why didn't they? Maybe they're doing more than just a processor change, which might be why the iMacs got their update first. (Apart from the 24'' iMac, the rest of the iMac line is largely untouched.)
AlphaDogg
Feb 20, 10:43 PM
now not to start a ppc vs intel flame war. but if it serves his purposes just fine why would he switch? for example my MDD works amazingly well and if it had a better graphics card it would be my main machine; why? because when you run software that is optimized for ppc (and most pro apps still are) they are blazing fast. as far as i can recall i could run fcp at a speed that rivaled my 13 mbp (before its gfx card died). anyway don't take this personally :P just pointing out a fact.
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
K. Flame war=over
(if this starts a flame war i will seriously smack myself XD :p)
K. Flame war=over
jettredmont
Apr 12, 09:55 PM
Also the guy who took a nice iMovie and made it unusable. I hope he doesn't fsck up FCP. Even iMovie had background rendering until he stripped it out.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
Have you used iMovie recently? In the last two releases it has moved forward by leaps and bounds (and I'm fairly certain it does background rendering of everything...) Your criticism was true of the oriinal new iMovie, but since then they've been re-adding the features on the streamlined chassis and it is a rather nice program now.
mac-er
Jul 20, 08:19 AM
"We're not sitting around doing nothing," Apple said about the prospect that mobile phones may soon emerge as very capable digital music players and challenge the iPod.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
This was a pretty interesting quote AppleInsider had from the presentation.
smugDrew
Apr 1, 05:39 AM
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.
OK but I don't care how much memory Safari 5.1 uses, that's why I load up my MBP with RAM.
So does Safari feel fast? Is it stable? :eek:
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.
OK but I don't care how much memory Safari 5.1 uses, that's why I load up my MBP with RAM.
So does Safari feel fast? Is it stable? :eek:
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.
imac_japan
Mar 21, 09:21 AM
Please sign it !! For our sakes
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
http://www.petitiononline.com/rumi04/petition.html
Thanks
jxyama
Apr 2, 09:09 AM
You have some good points here....but the basic arguement is how to survive in the future - How to grow the business....Itms doesn't make any money for Apple, the ipod is going to have too many similar players. So why not go for the lower end of the market - eg: like they did with the old "LC"s machines. People buy software but they don't want to shell out alot of money for hardware.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
no worry, people's been saying that apple's been dying since like 10 years ago. and increasing the marketshare doesn't mean it's growing and not increasing the marketshare doesn't mean its future is doomed.
look at gateway. it just acquired eMachines and "doubled" its marketshare to 7%. apple is half that. and guess which company has been more profitable recently? which company is debt free? (hint: it's not gateway) and which company had to expand beyond just selling cheap PCs to continue its operation? (another hint: it's not apple.)
i see absolutely no economic reason why apple should bother selling cheap macs.
people who know what they want will pay for Macs. if they don't know what they want, they won't care if they got a Mac.
No comments:
Post a Comment