Surely
Apr 8, 01:16 PM
A lot of these companies also have Agreements with the Manufacturers on when, how, and what they can sell. Maybe Apple has told them to run this promotion to help draw not only sales but accessories sales or like I said above maybe its a promo like the Back to School promo.
I dunno......it doesn't seem like Apple is having a hard time selling their iPad2 accessories, especially the Smart Cover. I don't see why Apple would ask BB to run a promotion in order to sell 3rd party accessories.
I dunno......it doesn't seem like Apple is having a hard time selling their iPad2 accessories, especially the Smart Cover. I don't see why Apple would ask BB to run a promotion in order to sell 3rd party accessories.
Music-Man
Sep 12, 08:01 AM
Film content from Fox and Dreamworks?!
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
Nice find!
I hope it's true.
Clicking on any of the links just takes you to the "It's Showtime" page.
Look at the german Quicktime page, bottom left, under "iTunes Videos": Transporter 2 from Fox and Red Eye from Dreamworks!!
http://www.apple.com/de/quicktime/mac.html
Nice find!
I hope it's true.
Clicking on any of the links just takes you to the "It's Showtime" page.
secondhandloser
Mar 11, 01:42 PM
Milestone 1:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0FtgZNOD44
Milestone 2:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftf4riVJyqw
Milestone 3 (the most recent):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OBhYxj2SvRI
Any questions?
[Citation needed]
Fun fact: Showing SJ talk does not mean Apple has "redefined" computing. They have helped evolve it, as a player in the industry, of course. Hardly anything that could be called redefining.
D1G1T4L
Mar 17, 05:06 PM
Love this forum for a good laugh. Obviously the OP was wrong with what he did but love laughing at all the holier than thou responses. :D
more...
Appstur
Apr 15, 07:33 PM
The design is nice and I honestly wouldn't doubt that Apple might make the new iphone similar to this since the macs and the ipad are taking that turn, however like others have said, this is a fake because the aluminum would block the 3G receiver. Unless Apple magically found a way to get around that issue! which would be AMAZING!
Here is an idea, because the apple logo is black plastic, why not put the 3G receiver behind the Apple logo? ;)
Here is an idea, because the apple logo is black plastic, why not put the 3G receiver behind the Apple logo? ;)
dunk321
Mar 17, 10:52 AM
Lets keep the flaming going lol, Maybe it will reach 500 posts, lmao funny how people believe everything they read in a forum, sec I'm also a lawyer, and Doctor, yea I can pick any profession I want on MacRumors, everyone enjoy their iPad, I'm going back to the real world, while the debate in this thread continues.
more...
KnightWRX
Apr 29, 04:51 PM
major kernel version
1,2: 1.0 and 2.0
3: 3.0, WfW3.11, NT 3.51
4: 95, 98, NT4
5: 2000, XP
6: Vista
7: Windows 7 (but really 6.1):confused:
So the answer is, "marketing"
You're mixing up your kernels. NT 4.0 doesn't share a kernel with 95/98, NT 3.51 doesn't share a kernel with Windows 3.x...
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
1,2: 1.0 and 2.0
3: 3.0, WfW3.11, NT 3.51
4: 95, 98, NT4
5: 2000, XP
6: Vista
7: Windows 7 (but really 6.1):confused:
So the answer is, "marketing"
You're mixing up your kernels. NT 4.0 doesn't share a kernel with 95/98, NT 3.51 doesn't share a kernel with Windows 3.x...
Windows 7 is Windows 7 because it's the 7th release of Windows NT.
1- Windows NT 3.1
2- Windows NT 3.5
3- Windows NT 4.0
4- Windows 2000
5- Windows XP
6- Windows Vista
7- Windows 7
That's the only way it makes sense.
TheMacBookPro
Mar 18, 10:51 AM
That was exactly my point. I don't see why people care so much about what phone someone else has. It's only the Android folks that engage in this, I have yet to see an iPhone owner behave so pathetically.
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
Seriously?
You're behaving pretty pathetically too. What are you trying to gain from this thread? The approval of other Apple fanboys? Or are you trying to make yourself feel better about your purchase?
Take a look through the forums, and you'll find plenty of people 'behaving so pathetically' in plenty of threads. Including this one!
FTR I have two iPhone 4's, a Nexus S and a LYNX 3D (SH-03C). There goes your theory that Android device owners are all too poor to afford an iPhone :rolleyes:
Several things:
Never had Angry Birds run at '2FPS' and I have the 'original Google phone'- a HTC G1. Runs nice and smooth on 2.2 (general usage and games). My iPhone 3G OTOH...
Doing the same things (heavy web browsing, 1~2 hours of talk time, 1 hour of A2DP BT music streaming in my car) I get just under 1 days' battery life on both my NS and iPhone 4.
As for the screen- less pixel dense on my NS obviously but in direct sunlight the NS's SAMOLED is way better than my iPhone.
Love the 3D on my SH-03C. Mobile ASV on it is as good, if not better than, the iPhone's IPS technology.
I gotta admit that my 4's screen is crisper. Shame they can't produce them all the same (my 32GB is pee-yellow while my 16GB is very white).
You're either a balanced 'reviewer' or an Apple apologist (plenty of them here!). I'm leaning towards the latter. ;)
more...
darh
Sep 12, 08:05 AM
I thought tht too, but there's already a section on the page for trailer. Just about the iTunes Videos
and under the films, stands "more music video's" hmmm thats strange:rolleyes:
and under the films, stands "more music video's" hmmm thats strange:rolleyes:
rtdgoldfish
Mar 29, 01:13 AM
Too bad you cannot scare the snot out of the kid, on camera.
Shows up with camera crew...
"Microsoft Prize patrol, do you have an XBox 360? Can you show it to me"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Do you own this machine?"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Oh, sorry ... you cannot collect a prize with this XBox 360 -- the serial number has it listed as a murder weapon, and the owner is a likely suspect."
I like it. Think I'll try it tomorrow. :-)
Shows up with camera crew...
"Microsoft Prize patrol, do you have an XBox 360? Can you show it to me"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Do you own this machine?"
Types stuff into handheld...
"Oh, sorry ... you cannot collect a prize with this XBox 360 -- the serial number has it listed as a murder weapon, and the owner is a likely suspect."
I like it. Think I'll try it tomorrow. :-)
more...
vniow
Jan 5, 04:38 PM
Feel it people. A million geeks, all achieving orgasm at the same time. It's such a thing of beauty. :)
Too bad the keynote wasn't set for December 22nd (http://www.globalorgasm.org/) instead.
Too bad the keynote wasn't set for December 22nd (http://www.globalorgasm.org/) instead.
digitalbiker
Oct 4, 02:49 PM
Squarely wrong. Even "The Inquirer" has talked about the vastly superior multitasking AND SMP features of OS X Leopard, as compared to what Vista seems to offer. Damn, even today any version of Windows crawls far behind OS X in that (XP Home didn't even have SMP support in the first place).
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.
In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.
Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
And the lack of any OS X-running "quad" machines is not surprising either, given the usual (and) historical focus of the IDF; besides, it's an easy fallacy to assert that the non-existence of machines "running OS X" in quad configurations at a certain event means a lack of capacity by OS X to do so. This statement has no basis whatsoever.
The inquirer is definitely wrong about this! OS X is a great OS with many features but it needs a lot of work with SMP compared to 64 bit windows and Linux.
In fact, OS X is behind on being a full 64 bit OS as well.
Besides, I wouldn't contradict Aiden if I were you. The man knows of that which he speaks.
more...
Chrispy
Sep 25, 01:17 PM
I�m loving the amout of sarcasm in this thread� I was afraid it would not be picked up. This is a good update to the software and free is even better.
I do, however, think people are just tired of waiting for new macbook pros. Apple really does need to get on that update if they are going to justify charging $1999+ for the notebook.
I do, however, think people are just tired of waiting for new macbook pros. Apple really does need to get on that update if they are going to justify charging $1999+ for the notebook.
MacsAttack
Jan 12, 07:00 PM
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
MacWorld
Mac World
But we got no Macs
And both items are pitched at he US market - not the world market (need to get movie downloads onto other iTunes stores for the Apple TV to be a compelling product)
Oh - and I don't own a mobile phone and have no intention of getting one. Just a rat hole for suckers to pour money down :D
Have not watched the keynote. Not going to bother.
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
MacWorld
Mac World
But we got no Macs
And both items are pitched at he US market - not the world market (need to get movie downloads onto other iTunes stores for the Apple TV to be a compelling product)
Oh - and I don't own a mobile phone and have no intention of getting one. Just a rat hole for suckers to pour money down :D
Have not watched the keynote. Not going to bother.
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
more...
goober1223
Apr 6, 11:21 AM
With respect, you clearly don't work in advertising. You pay to put ads in front of the right people, not just anyone. Especially not competing advertisers and agencies. Why do you think Google (a) makes so much advertising revenue and (b) collects so much data about its users? Coincidence?
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
Secondly individuals are just as greedy as corporations, and generally get to operate outside of the spotlight. Apple has a lot to lose if its iAd platform is seen to be poorly targeting users, but an App developer has a lot to gain from indiscriminate iAd spamming. So in this case, yes, for the sake of self interest I'd expect Apple to reimburse advertisers for clicks inside their iAd app, and I'd expect an independent developer of a similar app to laugh all the way to the bank.
I never said btw I'd expect Apple to reimburse developers for their time on rejected apps. Or if I did I didn't mean it.
I know you didn't say that. I was just explaining my original statement that said that they should.
And no, I don't work in advertising (electrical engineer), so you certainly bring a different view, which I appreciate.
As far as a comparison between corporations and individuals, and in this case Apple, I still see no proof that they aren't charging advertisers for displaying these ads. Certainly, they are more capable than a 3rd party in reimbursing such money, but I also see no proof that there is an exorbitant amount of money to be made here. It's a cool gimmick that will not spend much time in actual use, especially if the ads don't change very often, and if there is no additional content to the application.
Besides, pertaining to your best point, how well are iAds targeted at this point? Considering how few big advertising partners there are, I have a hard time understanding how well they are able to advertise when these ads also aren't included in general browsing, but specifically-purposed apps.
Certainly, Apple wants to get there with iAds, but the first step seems to be to take the premium off of the price. The infrastructure may cost a lot, but they have tons of cash to drain on this project if they want to make it a true competition with google and operate similarly. For instance, if I'm playing "Doodle Bowling", the odds that I will get an iAd for anything relevant to bowling is zero. I also associate bowling with greasy bowling alley food, too, but the odds of having any food advertised (on purpose) appears to be zero, as well. The odds of getting an advertisement for a local bowling alley? Again, zero. If I go online and search "doodle bowling" they have tons of options to select from in targeting my search: past search history (and whatever else they know about me), they know that my search is related to bowling, mobile applications, cartoonish games, etc.
The point is, the differences are innumerous. iAds is absolutely primitive in its targeting capability simply by virtue of how many advertising partners it has, and it should not be any different (at this point) how those ad impressions are received.
peharri
Oct 4, 03:15 PM
Second: the fact that IDF didn't have any "octo" machines derives from the simple and obvious assessment that Apple does NOT have any "octo" machines. Anything else would be just illegal.
It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.
It'd be pretty easy to check actually, and really quite legal. The part of Mac OS X that actually implements SMP is the kernel, which is part of Darwin. You can install Darwin without fear of repurcusions, on your toaster, if you want.
more...
arn
Apr 21, 01:27 PM
We're making some adjustments to the score display so it's less confusing.
So people won't see scores jump 2 points, etc...
arn
So people won't see scores jump 2 points, etc...
arn
Links
Aug 10, 03:41 PM
I ordered mine on Monday and got it yesterday (ground shipping!). [...]
Jim
Reminds of an issue many years ago when Apple released the G3 (B&W).
The first batch had a crippled ATA bus due to the wrong chip.
If you bought the same machine, same model number, same specs
a month later you had a different chip and much improved Hard Drive performance.
How could you tell them apart?
You had to search out the chip inside the G3 and find the number on the chip to compare with the newer one.
Jim
Reminds of an issue many years ago when Apple released the G3 (B&W).
The first batch had a crippled ATA bus due to the wrong chip.
If you bought the same machine, same model number, same specs
a month later you had a different chip and much improved Hard Drive performance.
How could you tell them apart?
You had to search out the chip inside the G3 and find the number on the chip to compare with the newer one.
dabear
Apr 29, 04:11 PM
I noticed on an aforementioned wikipedia page that Samba was removed...
Does this mean I cannot connect to a linux server via smb:// ???
Not everything is a windows workgroup... :(
I mean I guess it's not a huge deal since I can ssh in, but I liked mounting it as a volume from finder.
Apple invented their own software for interfacing with the smb protocol (and v2 of the protocol). The samba version included in OS X is horribly outdated, and the shift is most probably due to the new license of Samba (was gpl v2, is now GPL v3).
So you can still connect via the smb:// protocol :)
Does this mean I cannot connect to a linux server via smb:// ???
Not everything is a windows workgroup... :(
I mean I guess it's not a huge deal since I can ssh in, but I liked mounting it as a volume from finder.
Apple invented their own software for interfacing with the smb protocol (and v2 of the protocol). The samba version included in OS X is horribly outdated, and the shift is most probably due to the new license of Samba (was gpl v2, is now GPL v3).
So you can still connect via the smb:// protocol :)
nuckinfutz
Oct 17, 05:58 PM
Apple supports both formats. They've made this clear last April when they announced HD DVD support (rudimentary) in DVD Studio Pro 4. At NAB 2007 I fully expect them to announce authoring support for HD DVD and Blu-Ray. They may make them modules that you add on if you need to for licensing/cost reasons.
HD DVD vs Blu-Ray- forget the specs. You can't win that argument since both platforms use the SAME codecs. Both will look identical with the same encode. Thus it comes down to price and content.
HD DVD has the price - players can be had for $399
Blu-Ray has the content- 7 of 8 large studios
The storage is inconsequential. HD DVD already has 3 hr movies in Troy and King Kong (nov 14) which look phenomenal. These new codecs AVC and VC-1 can kick out a phenomenal picture at DVD bitrates.
Don't wait...by the most affordable player you can and start enjoying the best HD you will see on your HDTV.
Do it now!
HD DVD vs Blu-Ray- forget the specs. You can't win that argument since both platforms use the SAME codecs. Both will look identical with the same encode. Thus it comes down to price and content.
HD DVD has the price - players can be had for $399
Blu-Ray has the content- 7 of 8 large studios
The storage is inconsequential. HD DVD already has 3 hr movies in Troy and King Kong (nov 14) which look phenomenal. These new codecs AVC and VC-1 can kick out a phenomenal picture at DVD bitrates.
Don't wait...by the most affordable player you can and start enjoying the best HD you will see on your HDTV.
Do it now!
ipodtoucher
Apr 6, 11:09 PM
I'm gonna have to try this.
AGREED!
....i knew i should have stopped at harris teeter after the bank.....
AGREED!
....i knew i should have stopped at harris teeter after the bank.....
DrumApple
Apr 25, 02:23 PM
Resizing only means having to rewrite apps if the screen resolution changes -- especially if it changes by something other than a whole-number multiple (e.g. 1.5x versus 2x). All rumors indicate a 3.7-inch screen iPhone would have the same Retina-Display resolution (still maintaining over 300dpi).
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Yeah, making developers have to re-develop all of their apps would be a knife to the heart. When Apple decided on the screen size, it was pretty much set in stone. This would be a terrible move and anger many developers, especially independents who don't have the time, resources, or budget to re-develop. I could have blown my life savings developing one app, and now to find out that it isn't compatible with the newest iphone anymore? /die
Technically their "Retina-Display" stuff is based also on typical viewing distance as well -- so a "Retina Display" iPad, iMac, or MacBook (assuming those are in the works) may not go as high as 300dpi. However, a Retina-Display iPad would like require the same pixel-doubling (2x) that was done for apps not optimized for the Retina Display until updates came that included higher-resolution graphics.
Yeah, making developers have to re-develop all of their apps would be a knife to the heart. When Apple decided on the screen size, it was pretty much set in stone. This would be a terrible move and anger many developers, especially independents who don't have the time, resources, or budget to re-develop. I could have blown my life savings developing one app, and now to find out that it isn't compatible with the newest iphone anymore? /die
arkmannj
Apr 29, 02:17 PM
Now that OS X Server is bundled with the Client version, does this mean we should see a price drop on the Mac Mini server edition?
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
Geckotek
Dec 14, 03:13 PM
But the fact remains how are they going to exactly implement two separate phones for carriers that use different cell tech, and implement them properly
You act like this is some impossible task that's never been done before. Or is Apple just not as capable as every other cell phone manufacturer in the world?
You act like this is some impossible task that's never been done before. Or is Apple just not as capable as every other cell phone manufacturer in the world?
0 comments:
Post a Comment