aswitcher
Aug 7, 02:28 PM
Hmm... Cinema displays also got a bump.
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Oww.I saw the rpice drop but not the spec boost. I thought Apple was trying to clear older stock but now I think this is the new monitor and we caren't going to see one with an iSight built in. New iSight maybe...
20" ACD
Brightness: 250 cd/m2 -> 300 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
23" ACD
Brightness: 270 cd/m2 -> 400 cd/m2
Contrast Ratio: 400:1 -> 700:1
Oww.I saw the rpice drop but not the spec boost. I thought Apple was trying to clear older stock but now I think this is the new monitor and we caren't going to see one with an iSight built in. New iSight maybe...
hobo.hopkins
Apr 23, 05:36 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
Wow, that App Store icon devoured my whole screen (MBP 13)
Yeah. Barely fits on my screen and i have a 24" inch imac.
it would be sick to have a 30" retina ACD. /dream
Yeah a 1024 x 1024 icon is amazing considering I would bet a significant amount of 1024 x 768 monitors are still being used. Imagine not being able to view an icon in its entirety on a five-year-old monitor!
netdog
Jul 31, 01:46 AM
but what I am trying to say is, that I disagree about reception of Verizon: it's very good, and especially so outside of the major business cities like NYC and Washington. My wife's T-Mobile often is out of range when we travel, and we have to use my Verizon phone.
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
That is only because CDMA had such a jump on GSM in the USA, and the GSM carriers in the USA are still smaller. Verizon also has a massive analog network that T-Mobile won't touch as their phones are GSM only.
Unfortunately, the free market approach adopted when installing networks in the USA has led to a number of problems, and while you might think Verizon service is good relative to the other US carriers, it cannot compare to the carriers in Europe who use a shared GSM network that was adopted after much deliberation. Like most of the world, we are GSM-only.
DavidLeblond
May 4, 03:01 PM
Why put it in the App Store if it isn't an App?
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
MrWinters
May 4, 03:42 PM
Usually, "Preferred" means one will be more readily available (download) than the other (Physical).
In 3 years there will be no "PREFERRED" anything with Macs. Everything that is installed on Mac will come from the App Store. It WILL BE the EXCLUSIVE method of loading ANYTHING on Macs. OS X will become exactly like iOS and ALL of you will just happily accept it. I expect to see statements on Macrumors like "Oh how wonderful it is that Steve is looking after us and protecting us from the evil world of Malware that those crappy PC's get. Thanks Steve for looking out for us and our elegant, delicious, sexy, and magical devices"......
In 3 years there will be no "PREFERRED" anything with Macs. Everything that is installed on Mac will come from the App Store. It WILL BE the EXCLUSIVE method of loading ANYTHING on Macs. OS X will become exactly like iOS and ALL of you will just happily accept it. I expect to see statements on Macrumors like "Oh how wonderful it is that Steve is looking after us and protecting us from the evil world of Malware that those crappy PC's get. Thanks Steve for looking out for us and our elegant, delicious, sexy, and magical devices"......
inlovewithi
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
This was inevitable given the number of phone models each OS is on. It was clear to see from way off. However if Apple are making more money than Google from these units it won't be anything for them to worry about.
It's much like Windows and OS X, there's the volume model (Windows) and the Apple model. I'm happy with my iPhone and I haven't met anyone who's been unhappy with theirs either, that said, I've also not spoken to any friends who are unhappy with Android.
Competition is good and while ever there is the competition then innovation will be driven more than if there was a monopoly, so this can't really be seen as a bad thing.
This Apple. They don't need competition to innovate or make their products better, it's in their DNA.
It's much like Windows and OS X, there's the volume model (Windows) and the Apple model. I'm happy with my iPhone and I haven't met anyone who's been unhappy with theirs either, that said, I've also not spoken to any friends who are unhappy with Android.
Competition is good and while ever there is the competition then innovation will be driven more than if there was a monopoly, so this can't really be seen as a bad thing.
This Apple. They don't need competition to innovate or make their products better, it's in their DNA.
steve_hill4
Jul 30, 06:19 AM
Please dont call it an "iPhone" that is so... no. if it was called iPhone I dont think that I would buy it. if it was MacPhone Pro or something like that than maybe... ;). No but please dont name it either of those. Come up with something new and original.
I'm thinking names of apples or names related to them working again.
Looking here (http://www.allaboutapples.com/varieties/), I like Beacon. Just as long as not Crab Apple.
I'm thinking names of apples or names related to them working again.
Looking here (http://www.allaboutapples.com/varieties/), I like Beacon. Just as long as not Crab Apple.
DavidLeblond
May 4, 02:53 PM
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
Obviously Lion will not follow App Store conventions seeing as it isn't an app.
lilo777
Mar 29, 11:23 AM
i dont like this new idea of storing purchased media in the cloud. The thing that immediately comes to mind is more restrictions for our purchases. More limitations to make the end user cough up more money.
Nobody forces you to store your music there. You can always store it on your computer if you want. Funny how you can see extra feature as a "limitation". I bet that when Apple offers similar service (just more expensive) you'll call it a "revolutionary" feature.
Nobody forces you to store your music there. You can always store it on your computer if you want. Funny how you can see extra feature as a "limitation". I bet that when Apple offers similar service (just more expensive) you'll call it a "revolutionary" feature.
VPrime
May 6, 12:20 AM
So I just bought a new 4 core Sandy Bridge iMac tonight and now this news breaks. Is ARM actually building anything in any way shape or form that competes with the Intel X86 stuff right now or is this just vaporware at this point?
No.. They make mobile processors. Low power usage.
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
No.. They make mobile processors. Low power usage.
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
seek3r
Apr 22, 12:40 AM
You are right, I fold. I know nothing about 19" racks (1.80 meters tall and 150 kg. in weight), and nothing about conditioned server rooms with dual power feeds at all. Flight cases with equipment I also know nothing about. I'm sorry I'm doubting your knowledge and insight.
You do realize "rack *mountable*" doesn't mean "has to be in a rack to function"?
Over the years I've had plenty of mountable equipment that for one reason or another didn't live in the machine room, or lived on a shelf in the machine room instead of on a rack (or on a table in the case of several servers and one particularly finicky disk array a while back).... Simply giving the option of rack mounting doesn't dictate it has to be racked remotely in your datacenter!
You do realize "rack *mountable*" doesn't mean "has to be in a rack to function"?
Over the years I've had plenty of mountable equipment that for one reason or another didn't live in the machine room, or lived on a shelf in the machine room instead of on a rack (or on a table in the case of several servers and one particularly finicky disk array a while back).... Simply giving the option of rack mounting doesn't dictate it has to be racked remotely in your datacenter!
tokevino
Aug 7, 03:46 PM
That's what I'm saying, $400x2=$800-$300=$500 profit for Apple, That's wonderful for Apple.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
On the other hand, internal pricing from Intel can be VERY different. So don't let it get too much into your head.
Bottom line, these quads are truly wonderful machines to buy.
Huntn
May 3, 09:19 AM
Metric system should be in the U.S.. No point in keeping an odd system.
For manufacturing, my impression is that the U.S. does use metric. Maybe that is because most stuff is manufactured overseas or for something like automobiles, they are marketed worldwide.:o However for living around town, I like my miles, inches, gallons, and pounds.
For manufacturing, my impression is that the U.S. does use metric. Maybe that is because most stuff is manufactured overseas or for something like automobiles, they are marketed worldwide.:o However for living around town, I like my miles, inches, gallons, and pounds.
gnasher729
Apr 7, 11:55 AM
And just how could Apple be found to be absuing its position by buying what it needs to supply its customers whith product? Maybe if the iPad wasn't selling all that well but Apple can't keep up with demand as it is. Arguments like yours don't even make sense and I'll bet you some serious money that no one can produce a single instance of a company "found to be abusing its position" by buying what its needs to produce and sell its products. It would appear people like you are just angry that Apple is successful and want to take it down somehow. Stupid, just stupid.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
The critical question would be: In the contract between Apple and the manufacturer, is there any clause that stops the manufacturer from selling to other companies? That would be anti-competitive. If a manufacturer says "RIM offered us $100 a piece for one million screens", and Apple says "We'll give you $110 for each" and RIM can't get the screens, that would be fine. If the manufacturer says "we can make 2 million screens a month" and Apple says "Ok, we'll buy 2 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "Ok, we'll buy all you can build up to 3 million screens a month", that is fine. If Apple says "We'll buy 2 million screens a month, and you must not sell any screens to anyone else", that is anti-competitive.
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
You confuse "monopoly" and "anti-competitive". Being a monopoly is in itself just fine. It just means that you have to be more careful what you do than other companies, because what you do could be anti-competitive. For example, Microsoft has a monopoly in the operating system market. They can't refuse to sell Windows to Dell without getting into lots of trouble. Apple can refuse to sell MacOS X to Dell without getting any trouble. And people often confuse "competitive" and "anti-competitive". Being better than the competition is competitive. If company X makes a product that is a lot better than Y's product, and Y doesn't sell anything, that is competitive. "Anti-competitive" is when X does things so that Y couldn't sell their product even if it was better. For example, if the Windows license said that you are not allowed to use any word processor other than Microsoft Word, that would be anti-competitive, because even if I had a word processor that was better and cheaper than Microsoft Word, nobody would buy it.
bruinsrme
Apr 9, 05:24 PM
48.
waking me up efore 10:30,
read: on or efore 10/21.
She died just efore 10 a.m.,
efore 10 p.m. Saturday.
shaolindave
May 4, 03:29 PM
two things:
a) Does nobody read?
From TFA:
Granted, I think that the article is a little bit of intentional flamebait because they use wishywashy words like "preferred" to start up a discussion to ratchet up page views.... But come on, people. We all know that every time Macrumors tries to start controversy on a perceived "change" in functionality or standards, nine times out of ten there's more than one option available... '
yes, I'm sure we all read that. it doesn't really answer any questions though.
i have physical versions of iLife and iWork (or did, actually). my family lost our iWork disc. I still have it installed on my hard drive. I COULD buy it from the app store, but it'd cost me full price (again).
what if I buy Lion from the app store, then my computer fails or i replace the hard drive. yes, i do have the option of buying a physical disc, but i'd have to pay full price (again).
if they allow to app store version to be burned to disc or copied to USB drive, awesome, that'll solve the problem. however, so far this is being presented as a digital download, not an alternative means to get a physical copy.
a) Does nobody read?
From TFA:
Granted, I think that the article is a little bit of intentional flamebait because they use wishywashy words like "preferred" to start up a discussion to ratchet up page views.... But come on, people. We all know that every time Macrumors tries to start controversy on a perceived "change" in functionality or standards, nine times out of ten there's more than one option available... '
yes, I'm sure we all read that. it doesn't really answer any questions though.
i have physical versions of iLife and iWork (or did, actually). my family lost our iWork disc. I still have it installed on my hard drive. I COULD buy it from the app store, but it'd cost me full price (again).
what if I buy Lion from the app store, then my computer fails or i replace the hard drive. yes, i do have the option of buying a physical disc, but i'd have to pay full price (again).
if they allow to app store version to be burned to disc or copied to USB drive, awesome, that'll solve the problem. however, so far this is being presented as a digital download, not an alternative means to get a physical copy.
Jon the Heretic
May 6, 07:47 AM
I can't think of a worse idea!
If this happens, my 25+ year love of the Mac ends. Only the 68K--> PPC transition was smooth and effortless. The Intel transition was worth it for native Windows support but painful and costly.
I have already pledged never to upgrade to Lion -- bunch of useless features in exchange for a big upgrade cost of my Macs? No thanks; keeping useful expensive apps outweigh useless new features any day.
IF they go to ARM, tha that that's ALL folks! After the dreadful Intel transition, never again will I follow like an Apple-scented Sheep (first lost all of my Classic apps, then my Carbon apps, and now all of Rosetta apps???) You can't trust Apple to maintain Intel compatibility beyond a few years, and my apps have a much longer life than that. I AM NOT MADE OF MONEY!!! Bite me on so many levels.
I like my iOS devices---but if this happens, my next laptops/desktop will be Windows 7-based. PCs are better media hubs anyway for iOS devices since Apple doesn't fleece you by forcing you to have the latest OS and hardware like they do with the Mac just to sync your iPhone/iPad. I'd prefer to keep my Macs but I am already passing on Lion on my MacBook and 24" Intel iMac; I would be more than fine with passing on new Macs as well and saving a wad o' money. I have plenty of iOS devices to play with.
If this happens, my 25+ year love of the Mac ends. Only the 68K--> PPC transition was smooth and effortless. The Intel transition was worth it for native Windows support but painful and costly.
I have already pledged never to upgrade to Lion -- bunch of useless features in exchange for a big upgrade cost of my Macs? No thanks; keeping useful expensive apps outweigh useless new features any day.
IF they go to ARM, tha that that's ALL folks! After the dreadful Intel transition, never again will I follow like an Apple-scented Sheep (first lost all of my Classic apps, then my Carbon apps, and now all of Rosetta apps???) You can't trust Apple to maintain Intel compatibility beyond a few years, and my apps have a much longer life than that. I AM NOT MADE OF MONEY!!! Bite me on so many levels.
I like my iOS devices---but if this happens, my next laptops/desktop will be Windows 7-based. PCs are better media hubs anyway for iOS devices since Apple doesn't fleece you by forcing you to have the latest OS and hardware like they do with the Mac just to sync your iPhone/iPad. I'd prefer to keep my Macs but I am already passing on Lion on my MacBook and 24" Intel iMac; I would be more than fine with passing on new Macs as well and saving a wad o' money. I have plenty of iOS devices to play with.
Erasmus
Aug 4, 07:35 AM
I do not believe that Apple should wait to announce their new 64 bit systems. They should (and could) give promos of complete overhauls of their entire Mac lineup. (Final propaganda for iMac Ultra)
I think that Apple should concentrate on getting lots of switchers. Apple probably care about us old "maccies", because, of course, it is very rare for a mac user to change to using the Operating System That Must Not Be Named.
I therefore think Apple promoing iMacs, Macbooks, MBPs, MPs, MMs, etc. would be in their best interest, as potential switchers would know that Apple intends to bring out cool machines as soon as they can, if not immediately. Sure, it would impact on initial sales, as no-one would buy any of their computers between then and the shipping date, however, Apple would catch many fence-sitters who would otherwise bite the bullet and buy a much cheaper (and much more pathetic) PC after Steve's Keynote.
Wining Switchers should be Apple's goal now.
I think that Apple should concentrate on getting lots of switchers. Apple probably care about us old "maccies", because, of course, it is very rare for a mac user to change to using the Operating System That Must Not Be Named.
I therefore think Apple promoing iMacs, Macbooks, MBPs, MPs, MMs, etc. would be in their best interest, as potential switchers would know that Apple intends to bring out cool machines as soon as they can, if not immediately. Sure, it would impact on initial sales, as no-one would buy any of their computers between then and the shipping date, however, Apple would catch many fence-sitters who would otherwise bite the bullet and buy a much cheaper (and much more pathetic) PC after Steve's Keynote.
Wining Switchers should be Apple's goal now.
0tim0
Apr 18, 03:08 PM
Have you looked at the TouchWiz UI? It's almost identical to iOS - dock at the bottom, pages of icons in a grid and you even remove applications in the same way as you do on the iPhone. I've nothing at all against competition for iOS, but they shouldn't just rip the design off
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
Wow, that does look familiar!
It looks just like the original Palm UI....
Maybe HP should sue Samsung instead :rolleyes:
--t
http://www.sizzledcore.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/09/Galaxy-S-24-375x500.jpg
Wow, that does look familiar!
It looks just like the original Palm UI....
Maybe HP should sue Samsung instead :rolleyes:
--t
jpcanaverde
Apr 5, 02:45 PM
Maybe now Apple realizes that they must allow some things on their devices like themes. Or not...
wclyffe
Jan 5, 01:15 PM
BUT i'm curious whether the satnav apps are waiting on the mount's fix or taking first availalble? ... i would hope they'd wait on mount since ultimately it should have more precision since it's called 'enhanced' GPS, but how can you tell for sure?
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
Here's what I've noticed in just one day of use. I'm using Navigon and I did download the TomTom Free App to stop the message from appearing each time. With my 3Gs docked in the car kit, I get the my directions locked in about 5 seconds from when I hit the "Start Navigation" button. I also tried an experiment in my garage, where my phone was unable to get the GPS signal, but docked I had a route in motion in under 5 seconds. Still experimenting.....
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
Here's what I've noticed in just one day of use. I'm using Navigon and I did download the TomTom Free App to stop the message from appearing each time. With my 3Gs docked in the car kit, I get the my directions locked in about 5 seconds from when I hit the "Start Navigation" button. I also tried an experiment in my garage, where my phone was unable to get the GPS signal, but docked I had a route in motion in under 5 seconds. Still experimenting.....
burningbright
May 6, 06:21 AM
I didn't think ARM's stocks would be so volatile.
"ARM tumbles ahead of Intel 'breakthrough'", May 4 2011 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/electronics/8493555/ARM-tumbles-ahead-of-Intel-breakthrough.html)
"ARM tumbles ahead of Intel 'breakthrough'", May 4 2011 (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/mediatechnologyandtelecoms/electronics/8493555/ARM-tumbles-ahead-of-Intel-breakthrough.html)
milo
Sep 11, 10:02 AM
My Motorola set-top box already has the killer app that everyone wants to see from a IP-streaming device: HD movies on demand for $4 a pop.
Doesn't that require having cable TV?
No, but they're not playing games with my rather fragile heart =(
I don't see how announcing something but not shipping it is better than not announcing something and not shipping it. Either way, you have no computer. Threatening to buy a dell is pretty empty until Dell actually makes that possible.
Doesn't that require having cable TV?
No, but they're not playing games with my rather fragile heart =(
I don't see how announcing something but not shipping it is better than not announcing something and not shipping it. Either way, you have no computer. Threatening to buy a dell is pretty empty until Dell actually makes that possible.
dukebound85
May 3, 05:50 PM
holy smokes these games are intimidating to play....
here I am thinking the basic werewolves games were hard lol
here I am thinking the basic werewolves games were hard lol
