danielpicasso
Mar 26, 01:33 PM
Some of the comments on this board are inane.
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
thanks for keeping the inmates sane...... why would Apple let their OS be anything but perfect
1) Launchpad is the selling point...Really? You think Versions, Resume, Mission Control, OS wide Full Screen App support are not selling points?
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
3) When has Apple released an OS, and not shown new features on the final release keynote?
thanks for keeping the inmates sane...... why would Apple let their OS be anything but perfect
tortoise
Aug 22, 05:19 PM
The next Xeon is Clovertown, which is just Woodcrest scaled to 4 cores with a few changes in clock and FSB etc. Tigerton comes next, also 4 cores but MP capable (3+ chips possible) and with a possibility of increased FSB speed, bigger L2 cache and so on.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
This will likely suck, because the interconnect Intel is using is just too damn slow. Putting four cores in the same package will just make the situation worse, because a lot of applications are significantly limited by memory performance.
The Woodcrest processors have been put through their paces pretty well on the supercomputing lists, and their Achille's heal is the memory subsystem. Current generation AMD Opterons still clearly outscale Woodcrest in real-world memory bandwidth with only two cores. Unless Intel pulls a rabbit out of their hat with their memory architecture issues when the quad core is released, AMDs quad core is going to embarrass them because of the memory bottleneck. And AMD is already starting to work on upgrading their already markedly superior memory architecture.
4God
Jul 14, 11:30 PM
School House Rock - "Oh, I'm just a bill, a lonely old bill, sitting here on Capitol Hill" (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1569494088/002-8458341-9463244?redirect=true)
That's old school. Even I remember that one.
That's old school. Even I remember that one.
ART5000
Jul 20, 11:57 PM
ANy gurus on hand here..
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
is it possible that Apple will come out with dual woocrest then when kentfield hits the street, we could just buy the processor and snap out woody and snap in Kentfield.
IS THIS FEASIBLE:rolleyes:
deputy_doofy
Sep 19, 08:54 AM
Not that I really believe we'll see something today, but if we do, I'm buying - magnetic latch or not. :p
akadmon
Sep 19, 11:30 AM
I don't think you've got anything to worry about there...
Me worry? :D
Me worry? :D
Zimmy68
Apr 7, 11:36 PM
If there is one indisputable fact of this world...
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Those on message boards that say they hate Best Buy, are the first to grab the Sunday ad and visit the store at least weekly.
Bank on it.
Nuks
Aug 26, 06:31 PM
Can someone briefly explain the huge benefits of Santa Rosa (in layman's terms) or post a link to a thread/description of it?
Much thanks.
Much thanks.
62tele
Apr 11, 06:02 PM
Disappointing. I can't wait until year's end. I didn't buy the 4 because of the antenna plus lousy ATT coverage in my area. My iPhone 3GS is getting long in the tooth!
Steve is wrong about Google trying kill the iPhone. Apple may beat 'em to it!
Steve is wrong about Google trying kill the iPhone. Apple may beat 'em to it!
Vegasman
Apr 25, 04:23 PM
he didn't lie, Apple isn't tracking people, because the information doesn't get sent to Apple so his response was correct and truthful.
Unless one of his malicious Geniuses lifts it off your daughters device when it's in for repair.
Maybe the Genius is pissed off at your daughter (for no good reason of course). And maybe there is something in the database that can be used to create a nice little story to circulate around school. The kind of story nobody likes to hear about their daughter. The story doesn't have to be true because you know a little circumstantial evidence here and there... It adds up... And you know how kids are...
Well, maybe it won't happen to YOU, but with enough iDevices out there, the stars will line up for somebody.
All Apple has to do is follow what they teach you in computer privacy school: Secure personal information by default. It's simple really.
Unless one of his malicious Geniuses lifts it off your daughters device when it's in for repair.
Maybe the Genius is pissed off at your daughter (for no good reason of course). And maybe there is something in the database that can be used to create a nice little story to circulate around school. The kind of story nobody likes to hear about their daughter. The story doesn't have to be true because you know a little circumstantial evidence here and there... It adds up... And you know how kids are...
Well, maybe it won't happen to YOU, but with enough iDevices out there, the stars will line up for somebody.
All Apple has to do is follow what they teach you in computer privacy school: Secure personal information by default. It's simple really.
Ugg
Mar 22, 11:51 AM
I'm confused. :confused:
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
What point is 5P trying to make here?
Is the fact that one list contains more countries by count make it superior to the second? Is that the only way to judge a coalition, by count?
That seems a little too simplistic to me.
For instance, I added up these two lists (after removing duplicates) according to how much the countries spend on their military ...
� Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003 ~ 152 billion
� Coalition - Libya - 2011 ~ 179 billion
I guess it's just how you want to look at it. :cool:
5p's posts rarely have anything to do with reason and everything to do with histrionic political bile.
We could also point out that the Arab League is backing the Allied actions and that Libya now is not Iraq then, but why bother, because he'll just take off on some irrelevant tangent praising Reagan and Paul et fils while denigrating Obama.
coyote
Mar 31, 02:49 PM
This wont end androids openness. It will make is so that there is more of a consistent experience amung all android devices.
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
Oh, then I can take the Honeycomb source code and do whatever I want with it?
Oh, wait, I can't? Then how doesn't this make Android 'closed source'?
citizenzen
Apr 28, 10:08 AM
Imagine that, three responses which utterly fail to refute let alone dispute my clear and truthful argument.
Here 5P. Let me try to explain this in a (hopefully) clear and truthful manner.
Tribalism works on a variety of levels. You don't care about conservative blacks because your shared conservative ideology overcomes any racial issues. The fact that you feel a kinship, based on the political ties can even fool you into thinking that you've become color blind. "I like Colin Powell, that proves I'm not a racist."
But when the overriding political connection doesn't exist then the subtler identifiers come into play. The tensions over race, religion, class or gender are always there, they're just overcome by political kinship. Take away that basis for agreement and those other aspects are more prone to color our perception of that person.
Here 5P. Let me try to explain this in a (hopefully) clear and truthful manner.
Tribalism works on a variety of levels. You don't care about conservative blacks because your shared conservative ideology overcomes any racial issues. The fact that you feel a kinship, based on the political ties can even fool you into thinking that you've become color blind. "I like Colin Powell, that proves I'm not a racist."
But when the overriding political connection doesn't exist then the subtler identifiers come into play. The tensions over race, religion, class or gender are always there, they're just overcome by political kinship. Take away that basis for agreement and those other aspects are more prone to color our perception of that person.
monster620ie
Apr 5, 08:34 PM
Looking forward to the new FCP :D
If you are trying to learn FCP, check out Larry Jordan tutorials. I learned a lot.
If you are trying to learn FCP, check out Larry Jordan tutorials. I learned a lot.
noisycats
Mar 22, 05:10 PM
x
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:41 PM
Ridiculous. Mac OS X and iOS can never merge because their UI paradigms are completely different. Why don't people understand this?
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
And on what computers would iOS apps be developed on of Apple were to can the Mac? iOS may be much more popular, but the Mac is more popular now than it ever has been and still makes then plenty of money.
You're too lost in a programing manual to see the point people are making. Blending is taking 2 things and mixing them together, or parts of things. Merging would be taking 2 things to make 1 new thing. Don't be so literal.
A more unified experience is definitley in Apple's plans for the future of both OS-es. Not my opinion. They've said so. That does not say, however, having one OS to rule them all. Lion takes a lot of cues from IOS (have you looked at it? Watched the Back To The Mac keynote and listened to Steve Jobs talk about this strategy?) The Mac OS will get more IOS like over time. And that might not be a bad thing. Jobs claims they don't want a touch screen Macintosh, yet they've patented the hell out of them and have bought components and things (obviously they've got something in the labs). When that day does come, and it most likely will be sooner than later... a blending of the two OS-es makes a lot of sense. The way people want to interact with technology is changing. Your operating system has to change too. To something more exciting that what we've had since the 1980's. Apple holds a patent on a sensor that works something like the Kinect does. This is where things are going. In a few years you'll swipe i the air without the need to a track pad. A mix of touch, sight, and gestures and perhaps voice. All this tech is here and has been for awhile. Time for the software to hit puberty, and this is the right track to go.
Personally, I'm bored with IOS and Mac OSX on an aesthetic level. I don't want the ugly IOS folders for my Apps anywhere, but I don't want the same old finder either.
bigmc6000
Jul 27, 10:08 AM
Rule 1 of Apple Events:
You never get all the marbles.
Considering some of the rumors I'm thinking all the marbles would be:
MacPro
MBP, MB, iMac, Mini processor update
Leopard Preview
iTunes Movie Store
Larger capacity nanos
True Video iPod
So, you're right. Not a chance we're getting all of that (one can only dream).
You never get all the marbles.
Considering some of the rumors I'm thinking all the marbles would be:
MacPro
MBP, MB, iMac, Mini processor update
Leopard Preview
iTunes Movie Store
Larger capacity nanos
True Video iPod
So, you're right. Not a chance we're getting all of that (one can only dream).
Mike84
Apr 25, 03:13 PM
"Federal Marshals need a warrant. . . . . "
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
Duh, the police always have to jump over a higher bar . . . I, personally, can come into your home, take your bag of cocaine, and go give it to the police and it will be admissible, even though the cops need a warrant. (I can be sued for breaking and entering, etc., but the drugs are still admissible
Also, there is a case in California, upheld by the 9th Circuit, that says the police do NOT need a warrant to come onto your property and place a GPS tracking device on your car and track you and your car. It might get overturned at the USSC, but today, it is legal. Their legal theory is that you don’t have a right to privacy on PUBLIC roads, and it also isn't unreasonable to think that no one would ever come on your property, uninvited. . salesmen, delivery people, the neighbor, etc. So, unless your yard is fenced, and/or clearly posted NO TRESPASSING, the police can put that GPS on your car.
You are right, but you are wrong in mentioning that you need a fence and a sign saying "NO TRESPASSING" for cops to come in and take a look. Look up the cases from the United States Supreme Court that hold otherwise. That will not stop cops and it has not stopped cops. For example, cases where people were growing pot in their barn. Cops jumped the fence, peeked into the barn, saw the rugs, boom you have a warrant because it is based on probable cause. . However, this is not the point of the discussion here.
I think Apple just moved for summary judgment as a matter of law and get with it because these attorneys are trying to see if Apple will settle, but I highly doubt they will even consider it.
"If you are a federal marshal you have to have a warrant to do this kind of thing, and Apple is doing it without one."
This lawyer needs to go back to law school. The 4th amendment, which protects our right to privacy, is to prevent the government from infringing on that right. Last I checked Apple was not part of the government.
Also, Apple is not tracking anything. They simple have a file on your phone that has all of this information. (correct me if I am wrong).
rtdunham
Aug 27, 10:07 AM
As far as "legalities" go, usually corporations do have to generally not take unsolicited ideas, commercials, marketing materials, etc. developed by the public. The reason for this is that they want to avoid being sued later on if they do something similar. ...the more obvious examples would be things where, for example, someone designs a new computer and sends it to Apple; Apple eventually releases something quite similar to it, and the person who sent in the design tries to sue them for taking their idea and not paying anything for it.-Zadillo
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
but wouldn't it be neat to see a computer maker have a website for submission of ideas: you type in your idea, and get a message that says, "IF we choose to use your idea, you'll receive $1 per unit; if you agree to those terms, hit the "SEND" button now."
Imagine all the 'puter features, (cheap lyric theft intended) that might be in today's units, if they incorporated ideas suggested on these forums alone in the past 5 yrs. It'd be fun to see someone compile a list. Here's a start: Ports on the FRONT of desktop units; easy-swap HD bays on laptops; built-in memory card readers; built-in iPod dock; etc.
Look at the stuff on YOUR desk: how much could be consolidated into the computer itself? Think about what you wish your computer could do that it can't do, now.
Peterkro
Feb 28, 12:57 PM
A same-sex attracted person is living a "gay lifestyle" when he or she dates people of the same sex, "marries" people of the same sex, has same-sex sex, or does any combination of these things. I think that if same-sex attracted people are going to live together, they need to do that as though they were siblings, not as sex partners. In my opinion, they should have purely platonic, nonsexual relationships with one another.
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere "sex machine."
It's life Captain but not as we know it.:confused:
Heterosexual couples need to reserve sex for opposite-sex monogamous marriage. If I had a girlfriend, I might kiss her. But I wouldn't do that to deliberately arouse either of us. If either of us felt tempted to have sex with each other, the kissing would stop right away. I know of a woman who gave an excellent answer when men asked her why saved sex for marriage. She said, "I"m worth waiting for." She lived by her Catholic convictions, and she wouldn't risk letting any man use her as a mere object, as a mere "sex machine."
It's life Captain but not as we know it.:confused:
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 08:58 AM
It's not quite 0700 Cupertino time - so maybe? :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
Rice-a-roni, you're right! I just checked my widget clock set to San Francisco time... here's hopin' :)
California
Aug 26, 03:21 AM
I tell you, I've had nothing but trouble with Apple. I'm young, I'm a medical student (so relatively affluent), and I'm a "switcher." I'm their target audience! That switching part though, that was a mistake on my part. Mac OS X is beautiful software, I love it. Unfortunately I've had a lot of problems with the hardware. These days it's enough I wish I still had my IBM/Lenovo laptop--that never gave me problems.
kdarling
Apr 6, 02:32 PM
As was pointed out by a previous poster, iOS was developed for tablet use.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
That's a common misreading of what Jobs said.
iOS was developed for the phone first, although its idea of using a touch UI was not.
As Jobs explained, there was a simple UI demo done on a touch device originally designed to be a keyboard input prototype. That demo gave him the idea to go all touch on the iPhone. That's what he meant by "the tablet came first".
Since we know that during summer/fall the first iPhone UI concepts were done using iPods with wheels, his touch "eureka" moment probably came in late with the UI demo almost certainly done under OSX.
According to all known histories, the actual creation of iOS didn't begin until 2006. Prior to that, some at Apple were still proposing using Linux for the phone OS.
Bill McEnaney
Mar 1, 04:55 AM
Couldn't God just forgive everyone and make heaven bigger?
However many people go to heaven, it'll have plenty of room them. For God to forgive sinners, they need to repent first.
However many people go to heaven, it'll have plenty of room them. For God to forgive sinners, they need to repent first.
No comments:
Post a Comment