RollTide
Apr 12, 08:30 PM
I wish they'd show it on a nice new shiny iMac.
Stridder44
Aug 29, 12:44 PM
well, if you post the same thing in several threads (especially if it's unrelated to the subject of the discussion), then yes, i think it's spam
Spam? No, just off topic. But all these posts about his one post being off topic? Now that I could consider spam.
Spam? No, just off topic. But all these posts about his one post being off topic? Now that I could consider spam.
SciFrog
Feb 9, 05:35 PM
Was crunching for another team before. The stats from Berkley show the aggregate as do some tools like the FAH Wudget.
Stella
Jun 22, 01:13 PM
Sounds OK - run the apps on your apple mobile as your desktop.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
As long as iOS didn't replace OSX.... many people would be pissed if desktop apps were controlled by Apple.
Rt&Dzine
Mar 20, 12:33 PM
Is Apple required to offer this app? If the app gets removed from Apple, the developers can adapt it and try a different application store. I don't see how this is censorship.
W1MRK
Apr 21, 11:14 AM
This really is not a issue in my opinion. Smart phones have tons of data stored on them and if its really not being sent, whats the harm. If someone were to get my phone and read my info, they will be as excited as I used to be in PE class. First the DUI checkpoints now this. Is there something more important for them to look into? Like a Budget and ( insert concern here ) :)
Now if your a bad boy or girl, I can see this becoming a Court Evidence Issue in the near future. But until then, remember the NSA scans calls randomly for "our safety" Bigger issues than this in the world of privacy.
Now if your a bad boy or girl, I can see this becoming a Court Evidence Issue in the near future. But until then, remember the NSA scans calls randomly for "our safety" Bigger issues than this in the world of privacy.
wolfboy
Sep 30, 03:08 PM
what do u mean watermarks? do u have a pic?
Something like this, except on an iPod
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4797522906_169bbce342.jpg
Like I said, get one where the inside has a pattern on it to avoid that or a matte one
Something like this, except on an iPod
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4115/4797522906_169bbce342.jpg
Like I said, get one where the inside has a pattern on it to avoid that or a matte one
KnightWRX
Apr 27, 01:12 PM
I was simply suggesting that Apple used the term "App" as a familiar leaning to the way they call software "Applications" in Mac OS. Also, Apple have being refering to software that runs on their operating systems as "Applications" since 1980: -
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
The Apple Lisa (precursor to the original 1984 Macintosh) had an Applications folder in 1980.
http://www.guidebookgallery.org/articles/inventingthelisauserinterface/pics/fig6
The Macintosh has obviously had an Applications folder from 1984 to present
In terms of GUI history and it's conventions, there was the Xerox Alto as far back as 1973 but from all the screen shot hunting I've done, it seems to have no Applications or Programs folder because it has a "starting point" (indicated by the Start box) and then a list of files to open, some of which end in .run which presumably are executable programs/applications: -
http://www.computerhistory.org/revolution/input-output/14/347/1857
So yeah, "The Macintosh" wasn't the first GUI that had APPlicationS but Apple appear to have a LOT of prior use of the term with the Lisa OS before it in 1980 and GUI consistency between Mac OS X and iOS being a cut down version OS X, they logically refer to Applications on iOS devices in a cut down form too.
And all of that doesn't matter. Apple refers to software as Applications because that's what the whole industry does. Microsoft, IBM, Google, Sun, HP, the industry has always used Application to refer to software (Program has also been used). App has always been the shortened form of Application, heck in the 80s, Visicalc was referred to as the "Killer app" for Apple computers.
Your ranting as no relevance to the case at hand. Apple has no more claim to the term than anyone else and App or Application is not the trademark being discussed here.
jav6454
Mar 24, 01:30 PM
Mac Pro's have big power supplies but thats mainly for the CPU and Ram, adding a 6970 would be pushing its limits, especially for gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
Getting a Mac Pro for gaming is such a waste of cash. The only real benefit of the Mac Pro is the dual CPU nature. However, games now a days are not CPU bounded, but rather GPU bounded. Another nail on the coffin for Mac Pro gaming.
Irishman
May 3, 06:17 PM
The i7. I actually have an i7 920 in my PC but the sandy bridge is still a good upgrade.
I'm not jealous :)
I'm not jealous :)
tokevino
Aug 7, 12:24 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
KirkL
Mar 31, 06:40 AM
Can you post a screenshot?
http://d2omthbq56rzfx.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Screen-Shot-2011-03-30-at-9.31.06-PM-670x462.png
http://d2omthbq56rzfx.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Screen-Shot-2011-03-30-at-9.31.06-PM-670x462.png
aiqw9182
Mar 24, 03:16 PM
I'd rather have a CPU that is a bit slower for non-OpenCL tasks, than a computer that is faster at that but is unusable for other things because it doesn't have OpenCL.
Tad slower? If history repeats itself Intel's CPU will completely destroy AMD's offering. It won't be a bit slower, it will be a lot slower. Tell me when OpenCL suddenly becomes a requirement. Enjoy your vaporware bro. I'm sure your Llano machine will outperform Sandy Bridge in a few years when applications actually use the technology. Assuming said Sandy Bridge machine doesn't have discrete graphics. I'd love to know these apps you are using by the way and what your career is. If you are so serious about OpenCL then you shouldn't be purchasing a machine with an IGP to begin with.
Also I had a good chuckle at this:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=12048219
"The future is fusion"
So you are a spokesperson for AMD?
Tad slower? If history repeats itself Intel's CPU will completely destroy AMD's offering. It won't be a bit slower, it will be a lot slower. Tell me when OpenCL suddenly becomes a requirement. Enjoy your vaporware bro. I'm sure your Llano machine will outperform Sandy Bridge in a few years when applications actually use the technology. Assuming said Sandy Bridge machine doesn't have discrete graphics. I'd love to know these apps you are using by the way and what your career is. If you are so serious about OpenCL then you shouldn't be purchasing a machine with an IGP to begin with.
Also I had a good chuckle at this:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?p=12048219
"The future is fusion"
So you are a spokesperson for AMD?
Jaasen Jones
Apr 21, 01:08 PM
There are other ways to access data on an iPhone outside of Apple tools. If you think a Passcode is making your phone secure, you are mistaken.[/QUOTE]
True, but what percentage of people would actually give up once facing the passcode?
True, but what percentage of people would actually give up once facing the passcode?
gwangung
Apr 21, 11:49 AM
Once again, people are going off half cocked, without knowing anything about either the law or the technical details (and, sorry, but the details MATTER).
PlayballTim
Jan 2, 12:54 PM
I can't see Apple coping with carriers and competitors like Nokia, and Motorola, but CAN see Apple chasing the 100,000,000 user plus PTP phone market with a wifi phone. I've got a dozen other reasons, but it adds up to 1,200 words that can't fit here. But check out the rationale on my blog, CogentPassion (http://cogentpassion.blogspot.com/2007/01/its-gonna-be-wi-fiphone-apple-wi-fi.html):
Baseline
Nov 15, 12:21 PM
OK, I'm hardly a programmer (PHP doesn't really count) but that's the exact same description that I've heard applied to the description of what it takes to vectorize a program (i.e. make it Alti-Vec optimized) [that and the process of making loops that can be unrolled]. So I've got to ask, is there some difference between those two concepts? If not, it sure seems like we would have a lot more multi-core enabled apps out there already...
I'm glad you admit that PHP doesn't count :)
But to answer your question: There are situations where vectorization and multi-threading/processing are both applicable. However, vectorization *tends* to work on chunks of data that are not dependent on each other, but simliar. Say, you have four integers, and you need to double them all. You could vectorize that, and it'd be a lot cheaper that spawning additional threads to do each multiplication.
However, take Word for example. I don't know how it works, but let's assume that the main editor is one thread, and the real-time spell/grammar checker is a separate thread. Those two tasks are not at all the same, so you couldn't vectorize that, but you could very easily multi-thread it.
To bring it back to my cake example, let's say you had to crack four eggs. It would make sense to vectorize that, crack all four at the same time. But then let's say you have to crack one egg, pour 500ml of milk, and measure 250g of flour. You wouldn't vectorize that, you'd multi-thread it.
I'm glad you admit that PHP doesn't count :)
But to answer your question: There are situations where vectorization and multi-threading/processing are both applicable. However, vectorization *tends* to work on chunks of data that are not dependent on each other, but simliar. Say, you have four integers, and you need to double them all. You could vectorize that, and it'd be a lot cheaper that spawning additional threads to do each multiplication.
However, take Word for example. I don't know how it works, but let's assume that the main editor is one thread, and the real-time spell/grammar checker is a separate thread. Those two tasks are not at all the same, so you couldn't vectorize that, but you could very easily multi-thread it.
To bring it back to my cake example, let's say you had to crack four eggs. It would make sense to vectorize that, crack all four at the same time. But then let's say you have to crack one egg, pour 500ml of milk, and measure 250g of flour. You wouldn't vectorize that, you'd multi-thread it.
vincenz
Feb 24, 01:31 PM
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60005872@N08/5473950261/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60005872@N08/5473950261/From left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. :apple: TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which control a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which asks as a FTP server.:apple::apple::apple:
Your link isn't working :confused:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/60005872@N08/5473950261/From left to right:
20" Apple Cinema Display, 1st Gen. 16gb iPod Touch, Late 2008 MacBook Pro on top of Griffin iStand controlled Apple wireless keyboard and Magic mouse, 1TB Seagate external HDD, 32gb Ipad wifi only, 21" Samsung display, 2cd Gen. :apple: TV, Razer Lycosa keyboard and Razer Death Adder mouse which control a Windows XP box i built for my job(under the desk). You can barly see it but there is also a Power PC Mac Mini on top of the Windows machince which asks as a FTP server.:apple::apple::apple:
Your link isn't working :confused:
Angrisano
Sep 6, 08:45 PM
You are not alone. I think there are a lot of Apple users right now who would love to see Apple release a mac-mini pro.
Well I posted it in another thread however I just built a PC with some amazing specs for under $500. It was a P4 3ghz, 2gb ram, 250GB HD, 256MB GPU, DVDR, bluetooth, wifi. The kicker is it's a Shuttle so it's tiny, not much bigger than a mini, and it's made of aluminum. The thing is very Mac like. And being able to build it so cost effectively, really ticked me off.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Well I posted it in another thread however I just built a PC with some amazing specs for under $500. It was a P4 3ghz, 2gb ram, 250GB HD, 256MB GPU, DVDR, bluetooth, wifi. The kicker is it's a Shuttle so it's tiny, not much bigger than a mini, and it's made of aluminum. The thing is very Mac like. And being able to build it so cost effectively, really ticked me off.
Because no matter what I'd get on the Apple side it would either cost much, much more or it would be hobbled in some way (GPU, monitor, etc.). In the end you have to realize that as a Mac user you're paying more for a brand and for the ability to run OS X. That's fine, provided you can find a system which meets your needs.
(yeah it's late and I'm cranky) :P
Schnebar
Jan 13, 01:24 AM
this is crap,
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Hmm maybe they could get around this by shipping bluetooth headphones with it.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
no one in their right mind would make something with 0 ports, you have to at a bare minimum have an audio out.
Hmm maybe they could get around this by shipping bluetooth headphones with it.
And the no-plug dock charging sounds good too.
Imagine a ultra portable macbook with no ports.
It would have a docking station with a lot of ports in the dock but it would all wirelessly be transfered to the macbook.
No clicking into the dock. Just set it down.
If the dock could be integrated into the desk it could look like you are just setting it on the desk.
But it is wirelessly sending power and signals with the dock which has usb, firewire, large HD, optical drive, headphone jacks, and other ports that are hidden under the desk.
Edit: just realized that in the time I took to reply someone else already pointed out bluetooth headphones.
MacRumors
Jul 13, 10:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
Macworld has posted a roundup of recent analyst speculation (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/07/13/blurayapple/index.php) on the possibility of Apple using Blu-ray in forthcoming products. Most analysts seem to agree that Apple will first include the technology on its professional "Mac Pro" line before transitioning it to its consumer products.
"Apple’s past practices favor bringing new optical technologies to professional systems first,” said Jupiter Research senior analyst Joe Wilcox. “DVD-RAM and DVD-R formats are excellent examples.”
The exact timing of Blu-ray's introduction into the Mac Pro is uncertain, however.
Ross Rubin, director of analysis at market-research firm NPD Group, agrees that Apple will work with the professional machines first. However, noting that Intel-based pro desktops have yet to appear, he predicts Blu-ray drives won’t wind up in Apple systems for a few more months.
“January would be good—the timing for that would work out pretty well,” Rubin said. “It comes down to the introduction cycle, but we would see it in desktops first, no doubt.”
Blu-ray is a next-generation optical disk format that can hold up to 25 GB of data per layer compared to rival HD DVD's 15 GB per layer. In April, TDK produced a 6 layer Blu-ray disk (http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2006/04/28/tdk_200gb_blu-ray_disc/) that could hold up to 200 GB when the single-layer maximum was pushed to 33 GB. Currently, Blu-ray players are scarce and cost over $1000 USD, and the format has seen several delays. Much of the industry is watching Sony's Playstation 3 (http://www.us.playstation.com/PS3/default.html) game console which is expected to arrive in November 2006 and should push Blu-ray prices down.
Apple joined Blu-ray's Board of Directors (http://www.macworld.com/news/2005/03/10/bluray/index.php) in March of 2005.
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Mac_Pro_And_Bluray_Speculation)
Lollypop
Aug 7, 02:25 AM
SOAP is a protocol that passes XML over HTTP......it basically allows client apps to access data from remote servers.
Applescript has some tools to make it easy....if you want to use applescript, but Cocoa really doesn't. You have to hard code every function in a wrapper library to make the HTTP call, get the parsed resposnes, etc
In Microsoft.NET, you add a "Web Reference" to your project, it scans the WDSL webservice description file on the internet to figure out what functions are there, and then builds a C# class that acts like its a local peice of code. You just call the functions natively from your program, and you'd never know you are talking to a remote server. If the server program changes, one click in your client project updates that stub-proxy file to the newest WDSL, click compile and bam, you have access to the latest and greatest functions from the server.
With Xcode......you really have to do alot of work by hand. We have a web service with thousands of functions to access our ecommerce system, we want to make a Mac OS native version of our client, but the shear amount of time spent making/maintaining a proxy stub in Xcode by hand would be more than the amount of work porting the user interface. I'm really hoping they automate this!
Cool! I have writen a few of applications that use the RPC mechanism in JAVA, but like I said, that was ages ago. My MS development skills ended with VB6, and even in comparison I feel XCode needs some work.
Wouldn't that mean that Adium needs the upgrade? ;-)
LOL, I does actaully ye, but if apple want to compete they desperately need to do something to iChat, especially on their own platfrom where there is another application that is far supperior to what they offer (and few will disagree with this statement), its just a shame!
Applescript has some tools to make it easy....if you want to use applescript, but Cocoa really doesn't. You have to hard code every function in a wrapper library to make the HTTP call, get the parsed resposnes, etc
In Microsoft.NET, you add a "Web Reference" to your project, it scans the WDSL webservice description file on the internet to figure out what functions are there, and then builds a C# class that acts like its a local peice of code. You just call the functions natively from your program, and you'd never know you are talking to a remote server. If the server program changes, one click in your client project updates that stub-proxy file to the newest WDSL, click compile and bam, you have access to the latest and greatest functions from the server.
With Xcode......you really have to do alot of work by hand. We have a web service with thousands of functions to access our ecommerce system, we want to make a Mac OS native version of our client, but the shear amount of time spent making/maintaining a proxy stub in Xcode by hand would be more than the amount of work porting the user interface. I'm really hoping they automate this!
Cool! I have writen a few of applications that use the RPC mechanism in JAVA, but like I said, that was ages ago. My MS development skills ended with VB6, and even in comparison I feel XCode needs some work.
Wouldn't that mean that Adium needs the upgrade? ;-)
LOL, I does actaully ye, but if apple want to compete they desperately need to do something to iChat, especially on their own platfrom where there is another application that is far supperior to what they offer (and few will disagree with this statement), its just a shame!
wmmk
Nov 27, 05:30 PM
I hope it happens. This would not only be great for Mac Mini buyers, but also laptop owners. We already have 13-17 inches of screen real estate, so 17 more sounds just about perfect! I just hope there'd be a non iSight option so that laptop users wouldn't be paying a premium for something they already paid for.
marksman
Mar 26, 04:18 PM
Hardcore gaming will never change to the extent it doesn't need a controller and as such the market isn't going to change. Sure I can't wait until I play starcraft or the like on an ipad, but I won't be ditching any of my consoles.
You clearly lack any sort of vision. You couldn't be more wrong about the future of gaming.
You clearly lack any sort of vision. You couldn't be more wrong about the future of gaming.
No comments:
Post a Comment