buckdutter
Oct 1, 04:26 PM
wow Matt, you must live in a special area of Minneapolis, because my experience with AT&T coverage in Minny is terrible! I was over in St. Louis Park just yesterday and my wife and I both had NO SERVICE until we got into Edina, and when my wife was in downtown at her patent lawyers office (IDC) she had 1 bar on Edge, and could not stay connected for more than 30 seconds before dropping the call. Thankfully in Prior Lake, I have decent coverage.
I have had Sprint service for 7 years before switching over 2 years ago with AT&T, and if it were not for this device, I would be back on Sprint.
I am tired of all the excuses I hear from AT&T every time I call them about their coverage, its a joke. What makes me and everyone I know upset, is this is AT&T we are talking about, not a 3rd rate, fly by night provider... I pay a premium price every month, and do not get anywhere close to a premium service in return.
I cant wait for this phone to be with a different carrier, the second it becomes available, I am switched over!
I would get your phone checked. I have lived in Minneapolis and travel all over the Twin Cities for work...and I have never had an issue with coverage. Only place I used to consistently get dropped calls was 169 & 494 intersection. Either your are grossly exaggerating, or your phone is literally defective.
One thing I have noticed is that the iPhone struggles switching from 3G to EDGE. My wife has an E71x, and I have played around with both in iffy areas. The E71x transitions (seemingly) seemlessly and easily...the iPhone hangs on 3G even at 0 bars if EDGE is available at 5. I am starting to suspect that some of these issues in various places are both network related (duh), and software related.
At any rate...I have nothing but good things to say about the coverage in Minneapolis...and certainly have never had an issue stretching from a distance like St Louis park to Edina. I would get your phone checked.
I have had Sprint service for 7 years before switching over 2 years ago with AT&T, and if it were not for this device, I would be back on Sprint.
I am tired of all the excuses I hear from AT&T every time I call them about their coverage, its a joke. What makes me and everyone I know upset, is this is AT&T we are talking about, not a 3rd rate, fly by night provider... I pay a premium price every month, and do not get anywhere close to a premium service in return.
I cant wait for this phone to be with a different carrier, the second it becomes available, I am switched over!
I would get your phone checked. I have lived in Minneapolis and travel all over the Twin Cities for work...and I have never had an issue with coverage. Only place I used to consistently get dropped calls was 169 & 494 intersection. Either your are grossly exaggerating, or your phone is literally defective.
One thing I have noticed is that the iPhone struggles switching from 3G to EDGE. My wife has an E71x, and I have played around with both in iffy areas. The E71x transitions (seemingly) seemlessly and easily...the iPhone hangs on 3G even at 0 bars if EDGE is available at 5. I am starting to suspect that some of these issues in various places are both network related (duh), and software related.
At any rate...I have nothing but good things to say about the coverage in Minneapolis...and certainly have never had an issue stretching from a distance like St Louis park to Edina. I would get your phone checked.
mjteix
Apr 27, 12:37 AM
While "great deal faster" is fuzzy language open to interpretation, IMO I don't consider 10 Gbps TBolt to be a "great deal faster" than 6 Gbps SATA. TBolt can't handle two SATA connections at full bandwidth - that's not a "great deal faster" in my opinion.
When it was called "Light Peak", the technology had a lot of promise. Now that it's been downgraded to daisy-chained copper - it's only a little bit better than USB 3.0. Except that we can buy USB 3.0 devices, it's still "in the future" for TBolt devices.
You always seem to forget that Tbolt is a dual bidirectional 10Gb/s channel technology, so in fact it can handle 4 SATA connections, 2 upstream and 2 downstream. With room to spare. On a single port.
But besides the raw speed of TBolt, it's the variety of devices that will be available: high-end storage, audio and video, docking equipment, etc., and the fact that PCIe-class devices will finally be available for computers without PCIe slots. It's perfectly sound for a company like Apple with 90% of their computers without PCIe slots, to pioneer that kind of technology.
Copper or optical wouldn't have change a thing except the max. length of the connection (up to 100m instead of 3m). And FWIW, the only devices you can buy today in USB3 are marginally faster (than FW800) single storage units, and there are already single solid-state drives that are faster than USB3 (http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-vertex-3-sata-iii-2-5-ssd.html). A couple of video devices that are already obsolete due to some TBolt announcements, and not a single audio interface. No need to trash TBolt because it can't handle $50,000+ devices (RAID Arrays of SSD on 16x PCIe cards) that only a handful of people worldwide will ever buy. As for the "low-end" ioDrive duo, prices range from $9,000 to $12,000 (320/640GB).
Somehow I'm glad Tbolt is not fast enough to handle those devices, I also need a new car.
When it was called "Light Peak", the technology had a lot of promise. Now that it's been downgraded to daisy-chained copper - it's only a little bit better than USB 3.0. Except that we can buy USB 3.0 devices, it's still "in the future" for TBolt devices.
You always seem to forget that Tbolt is a dual bidirectional 10Gb/s channel technology, so in fact it can handle 4 SATA connections, 2 upstream and 2 downstream. With room to spare. On a single port.
But besides the raw speed of TBolt, it's the variety of devices that will be available: high-end storage, audio and video, docking equipment, etc., and the fact that PCIe-class devices will finally be available for computers without PCIe slots. It's perfectly sound for a company like Apple with 90% of their computers without PCIe slots, to pioneer that kind of technology.
Copper or optical wouldn't have change a thing except the max. length of the connection (up to 100m instead of 3m). And FWIW, the only devices you can buy today in USB3 are marginally faster (than FW800) single storage units, and there are already single solid-state drives that are faster than USB3 (http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-vertex-3-sata-iii-2-5-ssd.html). A couple of video devices that are already obsolete due to some TBolt announcements, and not a single audio interface. No need to trash TBolt because it can't handle $50,000+ devices (RAID Arrays of SSD on 16x PCIe cards) that only a handful of people worldwide will ever buy. As for the "low-end" ioDrive duo, prices range from $9,000 to $12,000 (320/640GB).
Somehow I'm glad Tbolt is not fast enough to handle those devices, I also need a new car.
robbieduncan
Oct 24, 09:11 AM
So how long do you think before I can pick one of these up in the refurbished store?
1-2 months. At least.
1-2 months. At least.
MacManX
Apr 17, 05:04 PM
3rd party apps crash, all of the them :mad: The standard Apple apps still work.
Terrible update. :mad:
Some apps, like Wikipedia, crash immediately after you try launching them. Not all 3rd party apps crash, but many do. Do NOT install this update! :mad:
Terrible update. :mad:
Some apps, like Wikipedia, crash immediately after you try launching them. Not all 3rd party apps crash, but many do. Do NOT install this update! :mad:
KT Walrus
Apr 13, 02:42 PM
Makes more sense to me that Apple would work to standardize AirPlay as a built-in feature of all new HDTV's, blu-ray players, and other set top boxes like Apple TV. In addition to AirPlay input to the HDTV, the HDTV would do AirPlay output from a TV connected webcam/microphone (if any). I don't see Apple trying to sell actual HDTVs, but the iPad would make a great SmartTV content controller that would replace the need for an Apple TV module.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
The existing Apple TV could just evolve into an iOS app.
notabadname
Apr 22, 05:48 PM
That seems impossibly thin. Where are they going to put the hardware? Take the thickness of the glass and backlighting & the back-plate away and there's nothing left on the lower half.
Sceptic here.
Sceptic here.
Krevnik
Apr 22, 11:13 AM
Bash is under the GPL license - not GNU. Never has been GNU see source link -> http://www.opensource.apple.com/release/mac-os-x-106/
BTW - No part of MacOSX i distributed under GNU licensing...
Couple notes:
GNU is an organization that amongst other things, controls the GPL (GNU Public License).
Linux has it's background in Minix, using a GNU userland, hence the common term GNU/Linux to denote the two pieces. The Linux kernel is not controlled by GNU projects.
BTW - No part of MacOSX i distributed under GNU licensing...
Couple notes:
GNU is an organization that amongst other things, controls the GPL (GNU Public License).
Linux has it's background in Minix, using a GNU userland, hence the common term GNU/Linux to denote the two pieces. The Linux kernel is not controlled by GNU projects.
rovex
Apr 27, 01:25 PM
Jesus christ. You presented your point as "obvious fact" then it was knocked back to pure conjecture, and now you've gone straight to whining that you feel disallowed your opinion, because *gasp* someone on the internet disagreed.
Grow up.
Fair enough, not fact but a blatantly obvious observation which by no means is false, as others have agreed. It may be difficult for you to put things in perspective, perhaps due to the strong emotion after watching what unfolded.
japanese cherry tree drawing.
Cherry Blossoms Side Tattoo
Japanese tattoo sleeve.
Japanese Cherry Tree Tattoos
japanese cherry tree tattoo. Japanese Cherry blossom tattoo; Japanese Cherry blossom tattoo. edifyingGerbil. Apr 24, 06:20 PM
chinese cherry tree tattoo.
japanese cherry blossom tattoo
cherry tree tattoo. cherry
cherry blossom tree tattoo.
japanese cherry tree tattoo.
weeping cherry tree tattoo.
Grow up.
Fair enough, not fact but a blatantly obvious observation which by no means is false, as others have agreed. It may be difficult for you to put things in perspective, perhaps due to the strong emotion after watching what unfolded.
kiljoy616
Apr 26, 12:26 PM
Can you point me to were you are getting your 2TB hard drives for free? :cool:
Oh look smart remarks without substance must be a fanboy. :p
Oh look smart remarks without substance must be a fanboy. :p
Doctor Q
Apr 28, 06:15 PM
This whole debate is a clever conspiracy by Apple, trying to get us each to buy two iPhones just so we can line them up. Come to think of it, I did buy two iPhones so their plan is working!
dba7dba
Apr 13, 02:51 PM
If true, it could be absolutely huge. Truly landmark. Imagine if Apple could somehow do the the TV industry what they did to nearly every other industry (segment) they're in?
The possibilities are pretty astounding. This is the Apple of folks. They have the money, drive, talent and momentum to get into any market and shake things up with a very good chance of success, and make the established players look totally flat-footed in the process.
We should let the NUMBERS (or $$$) speak for themselves.
Absolutely not likely to happen. It will happen only if they somehow price the TV at say like $500.
Apple seems to be really enjoying making people buy new iphone/ipad every 1 or 2 years. At $500 or so, it's easier for consumers to swallow. And the consumer knows he/she will spend a lot of time using it.
At $1000 - $2000 (TV with profit margin Apple likes), # of people willing and able to pay that every 1 - 2 years goes down alot.
And let's not forget Apple won't enter a market if they don't get to have a huge profit margin.
The possibilities are pretty astounding. This is the Apple of folks. They have the money, drive, talent and momentum to get into any market and shake things up with a very good chance of success, and make the established players look totally flat-footed in the process.
We should let the NUMBERS (or $$$) speak for themselves.
Absolutely not likely to happen. It will happen only if they somehow price the TV at say like $500.
Apple seems to be really enjoying making people buy new iphone/ipad every 1 or 2 years. At $500 or so, it's easier for consumers to swallow. And the consumer knows he/she will spend a lot of time using it.
At $1000 - $2000 (TV with profit margin Apple likes), # of people willing and able to pay that every 1 - 2 years goes down alot.
And let's not forget Apple won't enter a market if they don't get to have a huge profit margin.
smallnshort247
Apr 29, 02:13 AM
But will it blend?
gramirez2012
Apr 26, 12:37 PM
$20/year is only $1.66/month. :rolleyes: Can't be any more reasonable, if you ask me.
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:02 AM
The word "same" never occurs in the text, which never contemplates multiple installs.
It says you can't use it in a virtual machine. End of story. End of discussion.
Vista Business and Ultimate include additional licenses to also run the same licensed copy of Vista running natively on the licensed device in a virtualization environment as well.
In other words, if you purchase or build a PC with Windows Vista Ultimate, you can use that same installation and license to install it in a virtualization environment on that same platform. That goes beyond what has been done on any other platform for virtualization, and why the limitation is specifically delineated on Vista Home:
You may not use the software installed[1] on the licensed device[2] within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
[1] This means "the software" (i.e., Vista Home Basic or Premium) is already installed on a licensed device.
[2] The "licensed device" is the device that Vista Home is already installed on, and that license may not be reused to also install it in a virtualization environment, which you CAN do with Vista Business and Ultimate, because Microsoft includes additional licenses specifically for virtualization use, which is why there are all these specifics about virtualization use on the lower end Vista versions in the EULA in the first place.
The Vista Business/Ultimate EULA on the same topic states:
6. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If
you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital,
information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications
protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights
management services or using full volume disk drive encryption.
This is because Vista Business and Ultimate include additional licenses so that you can use the same copy, legally ALSO within a virtualization environment on that same system. This is more than is possible with any other commercial OS, from a licensing perspective. The restrictions on Vista Home are ONLY restricting you from using it in a VM on the device where it's already installed. If you buy Vista Home standalone as a retail box, and it's not installed anywhere else, you are free, legally and technically, to use it in a VM to your heart's content.
It says you can't use it in a virtual machine. End of story. End of discussion.
Vista Business and Ultimate include additional licenses to also run the same licensed copy of Vista running natively on the licensed device in a virtualization environment as well.
In other words, if you purchase or build a PC with Windows Vista Ultimate, you can use that same installation and license to install it in a virtualization environment on that same platform. That goes beyond what has been done on any other platform for virtualization, and why the limitation is specifically delineated on Vista Home:
You may not use the software installed[1] on the licensed device[2] within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
[1] This means "the software" (i.e., Vista Home Basic or Premium) is already installed on a licensed device.
[2] The "licensed device" is the device that Vista Home is already installed on, and that license may not be reused to also install it in a virtualization environment, which you CAN do with Vista Business and Ultimate, because Microsoft includes additional licenses specifically for virtualization use, which is why there are all these specifics about virtualization use on the lower end Vista versions in the EULA in the first place.
The Vista Business/Ultimate EULA on the same topic states:
6. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may use the software installed on the
licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system on the licensed device. If
you do so, you may not play or access content or use applications protected by any Microsoft digital,
information or enterprise rights management technology or other Microsoft rights management
services or use BitLocker. We advise against playing or accessing content or using applications
protected by other digital, information or enterprise rights management technology or other rights
management services or using full volume disk drive encryption.
This is because Vista Business and Ultimate include additional licenses so that you can use the same copy, legally ALSO within a virtualization environment on that same system. This is more than is possible with any other commercial OS, from a licensing perspective. The restrictions on Vista Home are ONLY restricting you from using it in a VM on the device where it's already installed. If you buy Vista Home standalone as a retail box, and it's not installed anywhere else, you are free, legally and technically, to use it in a VM to your heart's content.
robeddie
Apr 19, 06:33 PM
^
thank you.
Well said.
A faster cpu is a luxary, but not crucial. But a slower gpu can be deadly.
thank you.
Well said.
A faster cpu is a luxary, but not crucial. But a slower gpu can be deadly.
Les Kern
Apr 24, 11:08 AM
I have had several friends and family members try Android with several different models, trying so hard to believe it was better then iOS iP4, but finally giving in and now love their iP4s! They all have iPads as well!
A friend in IT was all over his new EVO, saying and trying to show how superior it was to his old iPhone. Within a month or two the EVO was gone, replaced with an iPhone4. Why? He said it was a dead end. While a few things were really nice, it was buggy, there were too few apps, and it was just no fun to use.
Life should be fun, not fraught with glitches and a tool that had no soul.
A friend in IT was all over his new EVO, saying and trying to show how superior it was to his old iPhone. Within a month or two the EVO was gone, replaced with an iPhone4. Why? He said it was a dead end. While a few things were really nice, it was buggy, there were too few apps, and it was just no fun to use.
Life should be fun, not fraught with glitches and a tool that had no soul.
BeSweeet
Apr 13, 07:26 PM
Can't wait to check it out and do a comparison of all of the white iPhone 4 parts that I have lying around.
dscuber9000
May 1, 10:41 PM
Looking forward to the movie version. ;)
Obama sure made it sound badass. :p
Obama sure made it sound badass. :p
gnasher729
Oct 24, 05:09 AM
Ummmm ... The Oct 18 Update in that link says exactly what we've been saying here: you can't legally run Vista Home editions in a VM. Period.
I would be careful. Macintosh users are probably a bit unusual in that they want to run Vista in a virtual machine _only_, and not as the real operating system. Most PC users would want to run Vista _both_ as their operating system and on a virtual machine; that would be two copies, whereas Macintosh users only want to run one copy. (Of course, most Mac users actually want to run zero copies of Vista...) So anybody issuing any clarification might not have given the Macintosh situation any thought.
And it doesn't say anywhere that the "dedicated machine" couldn't be a virtual machine in the first place.
I would be careful. Macintosh users are probably a bit unusual in that they want to run Vista in a virtual machine _only_, and not as the real operating system. Most PC users would want to run Vista _both_ as their operating system and on a virtual machine; that would be two copies, whereas Macintosh users only want to run one copy. (Of course, most Mac users actually want to run zero copies of Vista...) So anybody issuing any clarification might not have given the Macintosh situation any thought.
And it doesn't say anywhere that the "dedicated machine" couldn't be a virtual machine in the first place.
iApples
May 1, 11:35 PM
I guess Osama Bin Ladin's iPhone tipped Pres. Obama off.
I heard he didn't disable the location service on his newly purchased Tweetbot app. That damn Twitter will get you every time.
I heard he didn't disable the location service on his newly purchased Tweetbot app. That damn Twitter will get you every time.
savar
Oct 23, 08:58 AM
Why would they make such a stupid move? I can tell you this much, they have just lost my support as a vendor! How do they expect me to to sell a $300 copy of windows to a home user just so he can use Microsoft's O/S on his Mac? Oh well I'm sure they know what they are doing or do they?!?!?
:confused:
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
:confused:
So this is true?? I suppose this isn't any different than Apple saying that you can't run Mac OS X on non-Apple hardware, is it?
likemyorbs
May 2, 03:09 AM
Rather macabre, in my opinion...
Cry about it :)
Cry about it :)
thisday
Apr 18, 12:10 AM
What about the heat? MBP are too hot and not in a nice way.
Platform
Oct 24, 09:06 AM
Does anyone know if they are available from today in the retail stores?
The new MacBook Pros are available from the online Apple Store. The new MacBook Pros will ship next week.
That was in the story :confused:
The new MacBook Pros are available from the online Apple Store. The new MacBook Pros will ship next week.
That was in the story :confused:
0 comments:
Post a Comment