AP_piano295
Mar 21, 12:05 PM
But if there were no army ants in addition to worker ants, the colony would have never made it.
Your making the assumption that human beings are "surviving" we haven't been around for very long.
Humans as organisms have a distressing habit of overusing our resources, building weapons so dangerous that they put our very existence at risk...etc.
I think when evolution made us it crafted a loser...but only time will tell.
Your making the assumption that human beings are "surviving" we haven't been around for very long.
Humans as organisms have a distressing habit of overusing our resources, building weapons so dangerous that they put our very existence at risk...etc.
I think when evolution made us it crafted a loser...but only time will tell.
iMikeT
Sep 6, 04:12 PM
Better than nothing.
PlipPlop
Mar 24, 01:05 PM
Hmm I got crossfire 6970s wonder if will work in my hakintosh.
bilbo--baggins
Jun 23, 02:26 PM
I like the iPad but I still feel more at home with the Mac. Maybe that will change, over time using the iPad may feel more natural and so perhaps over time there will be a gradual transition.
However, like most people here, I think this will be over a number of years, not in the near future. I've sometimes wondered what Apple might have up their sleeves for OS XI. Maybe that will mark more of a hybrid between OS X and iOS, but that's probably looking 5-10 years ahead.
However, like most people here, I think this will be over a number of years, not in the near future. I've sometimes wondered what Apple might have up their sleeves for OS XI. Maybe that will mark more of a hybrid between OS X and iOS, but that's probably looking 5-10 years ahead.
mc68k
Dec 18, 04:18 PM
i may add some more over the break
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 06:03 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
Yeah, following industry standard is boring :D
Porchland
Sep 8, 04:16 PM
And one other thing. The iTMS would keep track of what you've rented, and if you decide you'd like to own that movie later, you can purchase it by paying the difference in price between the rental and purchase. So, for a movie that was $4.99 rental and $14.99 puchase, you'd pay $10. Now THAT would be sweet!
I've actually submitted feedback to Apple before suggesting that you should get a $1 discount on an album if you've already bought a single track. I can think of a number of times that I've thought about buying a whole album but feeling like it was a bad value because I would be spending more money on it than if I had just bought the album in the first place. But with even a $1 discount, I probably would have rolled the dice on more albums.
I like your idea for the same reasons.
I've actually submitted feedback to Apple before suggesting that you should get a $1 discount on an album if you've already bought a single track. I can think of a number of times that I've thought about buying a whole album but feeling like it was a bad value because I would be spending more money on it than if I had just bought the album in the first place. But with even a $1 discount, I probably would have rolled the dice on more albums.
I like your idea for the same reasons.
*LTD*
Apr 23, 12:17 AM
Not this easy.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Sorry, I just don't buy it. Isolated examples dependent upon a very rare set of circumstances that the average user won't encounter. I *do* believe your experience, you're very well versed when it comes to tech and no doubt well-treavelled, but this is just too much of a stretch. Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible to gain the same information in much more common and easier ways, instead of the super-spy scenario. I'm not sure how your terrorist cell example applies to anything relevant (or dangerous) for the average, everyday person.
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
It's not so much about finding people at any moment, but knowing where they've been. And this file makes it dirt simple to find that out.
A guy in your terrorist cell claims he's not FBI, because he's never been to Washington DC. Even his phone contacts are all people nowhere near there. Yet what if his cache list says otherwise. He's probably dead.
By now, you also know that I always speak from personal experience when possible.
I was Military Intelligence and NSA in the heart of the Cold War. I did undercover field work at times. This kind of easy info is both priceless and dangerous. I've seen field officers compromised in almost every way imaginable. My scenarios are not stretches by any means.
Sorry, I just don't buy it. Isolated examples dependent upon a very rare set of circumstances that the average user won't encounter. I *do* believe your experience, you're very well versed when it comes to tech and no doubt well-treavelled, but this is just too much of a stretch. Yes, it's possible. But it's also possible to gain the same information in much more common and easier ways, instead of the super-spy scenario. I'm not sure how your terrorist cell example applies to anything relevant (or dangerous) for the average, everyday person.
I'm pretty sure your average FBI agent's iPhone (assuming they carry around iPhones) that has been cleared for use (and very likely modified) by the FBI can be stripped right down forensically and will have revealed absolutely nothing.
The average user who is *not* a secret agent really has nothing to be in up in arms about, provided they haven't just knocked off a bank or killed someone.
apb3
Aug 31, 10:12 AM
Blue sky on wireless? Think a device which works out presence of others, and can connect safely.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Imagine being able to *share* (not stream, but share) your tunes with others on a "I'm interested in your... can I share/get that from you).
This goes beyond fair use and would not be legal. Just because I buy a song or CD, movie whatever does not mean I can give it to all my friends. I'm sure you didn't mean that
If you want to use up all your authorized machines (what is it? 5 now?) for a few friends to listen to a few songs every once in a while - I guess that would be arguably OK, but I think it would still go beyond fair use rules.
Being on the tube/commuting for ~ 1 1/2 hours a day or so and seeing >6 ipods through glancing for white buds alone, the possiblities are huge.
What are net connections used mostly for (in terms of Mb up/down) It's P2P. There wouldn't be any roaming charges, any peak rates. You could do it in a lecture room, whilst you were studying, or having coffee with friends (sharing tunes, rather than listening )
Think one big interacting social darknet :D Think virality without PC's needed.
Someone has a cool tune, and it could replicate exponentially!
For more benefits: Linking up to USB wireless receiver chips - you can wireless move files to/from PC.
Hands free driving - using changeable function paddles/butons on the steeering wheel. Hell - You could have a HUD of iTunes on a car soon (or at the very least, hook it up to those screens in the back of those orrible 4x4s )
In terms of illegal possibilities, think discogs. The amount of music you'll bump into increases a lot, so the rarer stuff might be out there. You could strike up a friendship with someone who had say, the entire back catalogue of (insert your fave band/movie/TV series). People could be walking lossless discographies of current artists. A discog of an artist is at most probably under 10Gig, so for a >60Gig player...
Who needs radio when you can stream? You could get it to actively hunt for a MP3 id tag genre - rock/pop, or highly rated artists. You could have the function to hunt for certain artists/songs...
That's another reason why I want wireless.
All this still does not tip the scales in terms of cost/benefit. Wireless will eat up your battery. It will be clumsy and frustrating (I would really hate for the new Streets single to break off midway through because iPod girl gets off at her stop or walks out of range). Also, I would not be thrilled adding drain to my battery by engaging sharing/wireless just so a bunch of strangers can mooch off of me. If my friend wants to listen to a song I have there are many ways he can do so without adding cost to the iPod and my time by having to charge the iPod all the time to make it possible in the first place
As for wireless sync... why? My god man, if we've come to the point where putting the iPod in its base is too difficult, we're screwed. Maybe there'd be the odd time when you forgot your cable or dock on a trip but that should be a rare enough occurence. If you find you always forget your cables, get an extra. You're also not addressing that you'd need that cable or dock for charging anyway (especially since you're going to be using that wireless feature to kill your battery much more quickly).
The chance that someone with an iPod (who also happens to be willing to kill their battery for my enjoyment) will be in range long enough for me to enjoy a few x-ray specks or spacemen 3 tracks are, in my opinion, close to nil.
The car options using wireless make some degree of sense (you'd be able to charge the unit by the cig lighter at least), but this seems better addressed by car/stereo makers. They're already doing it. Theree are also adapters for sale that do this.
I don't have all I need yet in this area but hooking my iPod up to the charger/FM transmitter I have let's me use the steering wheel controls for everything except the menu/scrolling bits (I know that's a big thing but I've got it set up so the iPod in it's charger/transmitter is right next to my knee and easier to manipulate than a cell phone and no harder than using the controls on the radio that are not available on the steering column). The HUD would be cool, though, and would make me a safer driver... I always wanted a HUD for my car. I think Cadillac actually had a model with an optional HUD for the main instrument panel items a while back. I wonder why more auto makers don't do this... or do they and I am just ignorant?
All in all, I just don't see enough good in adding wireless (of whatever kind) to the iPod to justify it. Now, a non-iPod (new) product that had wireless with a limited music/photo/video feature set (iPhone?, iBerry?) might be on the horizon. That wouldn't be bad as it would give those you feel the same as you the option to get their much needed "wireless," while letting others enjoy the most elegant, easy to use media player on the market without the bloat.
Mobster Sauce
Apr 2, 07:08 PM
Nicely done.
iJohnHenry
Apr 10, 06:49 PM
Coupes are just awkward.
Coupes are for anti-social people. IMNSHO.
And two-seaters?? :eek: Well, let's not go there.
Coupes are for anti-social people. IMNSHO.
And two-seaters?? :eek: Well, let's not go there.
bketchum
Sep 1, 01:40 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
If the Mac Mini and the MB would have stayed under 500 and 1000 repsectively then I would have said you are so wrong, but because they didn't I wouldn't be surprised if they came out with one just above 1999.
But then again, look how aggressively priced the Mac Pros are. My out-'n-left-field wishful thinking says:
17" iMac - $999
20" iMac - $1,499
23" iMac - $1,999
Originally Posted by BlizzardBomb
Hmm... the problem with that line-up is that when consumers see the shiny new advert saying "Meet the new iMacs" they'll look at the clock speeds and say "What new iMacs?". I think it would be reasonable for Apple to offer...
17" iMac - $1,199 - 2 GHz, X1650 Pro 128 MB
20" iMac - $1,699 - 2.16 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
23" iMac - $2,199 - 2.33 GHz, X1650 Pro 256 MB
If the Mac Mini and the MB would have stayed under 500 and 1000 repsectively then I would have said you are so wrong, but because they didn't I wouldn't be surprised if they came out with one just above 1999.
But then again, look how aggressively priced the Mac Pros are. My out-'n-left-field wishful thinking says:
17" iMac - $999
20" iMac - $1,499
23" iMac - $1,999
stagi
Jul 19, 05:37 PM
Sounds like some pretty sweet things are coming for iTunes, can't wait!
iJohnHenry
Mar 12, 04:41 PM
Does not aerodynamics dictate form, to a large extent?
regandarcy
Apr 19, 11:06 AM
I can't wait! My G5 iMac has officially died and gone to that big computer desk in the sky. It served me well for 5 years, but it's over. Darn thang won't even turn on anymore. I hear the apple start up chime, but the screen stays black and then the iMac just shuts off. But even if I could fix it, it's so old it can't run the latest OSX or even play HD movies. Yup...it's time to buy a new iMac.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
I'm hoping that the next update sees i7s across the line...even the 21.5" models. I expect thunderbolt too since the MacBook pros got it. Other things on my wish list would be for them to include that rumored flash start up drive as standard....but I'm not holding my breath. It would be great if the 21.5" model got the same ability as the 27" to be used as an external monitor. That way in 5 years or more when it becomes unable to run the latest software, you can still use it as a second monitor. :-)
I like the 27" features, it's just a tad too big. Actually the rumor about Apple adding a 24" size back to the iMac lineup would be PERFECT. But again...not gonna count on it.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 27, 07:33 PM
If they bring out a core2duo mac mini it will be faster than my 18month old power mac.
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
I would have said the same about the Mac Mini getting a Core Duo about 10 months ago.
cant see it happening, they might go for a faster core duo in the mac mini and macbook then core 2 duo in iMac and Macbook pro
I would have said the same about the Mac Mini getting a Core Duo about 10 months ago.
RawBert
Jun 23, 11:04 AM
iOS and Mac OS will merge. Very slowly over the years. Eventually, I see OS X dying out and becoming a comapatibility mode like Classic, as iOS (which is still OS X at heart anyway) becomes the mainstream OS. But this will take a LONG time.
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you�maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard�these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only �old� Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be�and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don�t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great�I hope it ships!
I think this might be exactly where desktops are going. They will actually be desktops. :cool:
As that happens, I expect Apple desktops will evolve into flat screens that lie on the surface in front of you�maybe slanted a bit, but not vertical (though they could tilt up for passive movie viewing). This sounds great to me! I can imagine Photoshop etc. with a whole new UI, and a future iOS adapted to big screens by allowing multiple apps on-screen at once. (And keyboards will probably be standard�these are production machines used for mass content creation, and with a need for shortcuts. But mice will be optional, since only �old� Mac software will use them.)
These machines will be like pro/prosumer versions of the iPad, used for totally different purposes. Eventually. 5 years? Will they even be called Macs? (I suspect they will be�and fair enough, if they have an OS X compatibility mode.)
In the meantime, I don�t see conventional iMacs with touchscreens. Touch on a vertical surface is a harmless gimmick at best (ask HP). And they give you Popeye Arm Syndrome!
That leaked desktop touchpad, though, sounds great�I hope it ships!
I think this might be exactly where desktops are going. They will actually be desktops. :cool:
MacinDoc
Jan 12, 01:10 PM
Why do some posters have problems with a consumer notebook having an Alu finish? Is the iMac not a consumer product?
batitombo
Apr 21, 10:58 PM
This is what I think about this: http://youtu.be/O6b9P963jW8?hd=1
BruiserB
May 2, 04:18 PM
I guess that's way easier than dragging it to the trash?
Lollypop
Jul 20, 03:33 AM
Gah. The Linux community doesn't want to unify. In fact, not unifying is the core of their philosophy. The vast majority of Linux users (ie, non-n00bs) don't really give a crap about mass adoption of Linux. Many even view such a possibility with horror and disgust. The only priority is choice. It's why there are 415 distributions (none of which are compatible with each other), 9,843 window managers (none of which have remotely similar configuration options), and 3.43x10^15 terminal emulators (none of which actually emulate terminals any better or worse than any other one).
Waving the "king of the OS hill" prize in front of a bunch of Linux users/developers will only result in them staring at you like a dog that's been shown a card trick. With very few exceptions, only n00bs (and uncomprehending businessmen who think they can somehow profit) want mass adoption of Linux.
This is a very true statement! With all the different features of the different distributions there will never be a singular Linux out there. People dont want to download the source and compile it, even the best package managers dont really solve the problem, I want to download any application and run it, I dont want to have something check dependancies and then get teh appropriate version ect. The newest Suse enterprise desktop has a lot of Mac os like features, and claim to have done a lot of research into user interface optomization ect, but thats only Suse, what about the rest, Linux will never have a singular unified front, and that is its achilees heel, and the macs inherant strenght (ok so the mac isnt that unified anymore)
I hope apple continues the trends they showed this quater, more and more people need to exposed to the mac, and more and more people will switch.
Waving the "king of the OS hill" prize in front of a bunch of Linux users/developers will only result in them staring at you like a dog that's been shown a card trick. With very few exceptions, only n00bs (and uncomprehending businessmen who think they can somehow profit) want mass adoption of Linux.
This is a very true statement! With all the different features of the different distributions there will never be a singular Linux out there. People dont want to download the source and compile it, even the best package managers dont really solve the problem, I want to download any application and run it, I dont want to have something check dependancies and then get teh appropriate version ect. The newest Suse enterprise desktop has a lot of Mac os like features, and claim to have done a lot of research into user interface optomization ect, but thats only Suse, what about the rest, Linux will never have a singular unified front, and that is its achilees heel, and the macs inherant strenght (ok so the mac isnt that unified anymore)
I hope apple continues the trends they showed this quater, more and more people need to exposed to the mac, and more and more people will switch.
Gurubarry
Apr 13, 02:42 AM
I second this.
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
Me too, I gave up FCE when my new mini mac wouldn't run it , then imovie after I spent hours trying to work with SD card captured HD footage . So ,perhaps I may be able to return to mac editing without firing up my hacked imovie HD suite . I hope so , but another $300 each time the OSX is changed is not encouraging me at the moment .
scrapple
Jun 24, 09:06 AM
apple will do anything to sell more apps and make more money..
its all about money now.. sad..
its all about money now.. sad..
timmillwood
Oct 23, 09:34 AM
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intelcoreduo.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This is getting very annoying!!!
It is old news, the page its supposed to link to http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
That no longer exists. Go to the mbp page and click the core duo icon, and I get a page not found.
This will probably change by the time anyone verifies it. :rolleyes:
This is getting very annoying!!!
It is old news, the page its supposed to link to http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/intel.html
No comments:
Post a Comment