lfc
May 3, 02:34 AM
First of all, this looks like this only works when you are in LaunchPad mode so there, it makes perfect sense. I truly doubt the press/hold/jiggle works in the Applications folder, where it would be very out-of-place.
Imagine that Apple did not put in the feature there in LaunchPad which is suppose to be iPad-like... people would come out of the woodwork to piss/moan about how Apple was lame to not unify the process with the press/hold/jiggle.
Secondly, this only works for Apps that have been downloaded from the App store,... this is probably implemented so that when you say YES, delete this, it will then give you an option to rate the App while simply deleting the App with a Command-Delete or a drag to the Trash would not invoke such a Rating option.
Thirdly, it's not like Apple is taking away the other options of trashing an App. Use the method that you're like and MYOB and STHU. Honestly.
50% of Mac buyers are new users so they're use to this from iPhones/iPads/iPods. Let them be comfortable. I've been on a Mac since 1995 but I realize that Apple needs to help switchers be comfortable. All the changes to Mac OS X that I've seen so far, I'm really looking forward. If you don't want 'em. Don't upgrade. Oh... and STHU.
Exactly. Completely agree except for the rating on delete thing. That was taken out of iOS since iOS4 so it's not likely to be in LaunchPad.
Imagine that Apple did not put in the feature there in LaunchPad which is suppose to be iPad-like... people would come out of the woodwork to piss/moan about how Apple was lame to not unify the process with the press/hold/jiggle.
Secondly, this only works for Apps that have been downloaded from the App store,... this is probably implemented so that when you say YES, delete this, it will then give you an option to rate the App while simply deleting the App with a Command-Delete or a drag to the Trash would not invoke such a Rating option.
Thirdly, it's not like Apple is taking away the other options of trashing an App. Use the method that you're like and MYOB and STHU. Honestly.
50% of Mac buyers are new users so they're use to this from iPhones/iPads/iPods. Let them be comfortable. I've been on a Mac since 1995 but I realize that Apple needs to help switchers be comfortable. All the changes to Mac OS X that I've seen so far, I'm really looking forward. If you don't want 'em. Don't upgrade. Oh... and STHU.
Exactly. Completely agree except for the rating on delete thing. That was taken out of iOS since iOS4 so it's not likely to be in LaunchPad.
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.
theBB
Jul 19, 04:17 PM
There are more details here - http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/060719/sfw089.html?.v=60
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
23% drop in desktop sales is surprising to me. Is it just due to people waiting for PowerMacs with Intels? It is not a good sign that higher iMac sales are not making up for it.
Of course, maybe Apple sold so many Mac Minis last year, that a drop was inevitable.
Desktop sales are down 14% on last quarter, and 23% on a year ago, but laptop sales are up a whopping 60% on last quarter and 61% on a year ago.
23% drop in desktop sales is surprising to me. Is it just due to people waiting for PowerMacs with Intels? It is not a good sign that higher iMac sales are not making up for it.
Of course, maybe Apple sold so many Mac Minis last year, that a drop was inevitable.
bjoplin21
Feb 17, 09:08 PM
Just got my 2009 Mac Pro Quad 2.66 today. It has a 120GB SSD drive and 640GB secondary drive, blu ray player, and 16GB of DDR3 Ram. Sitting next to it is my 2009 17 inch 2.66ghz Core2Duo Macbook Pro which has a 240GB SSD drive and 8GB of RAM.
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00964.jpg
http://i1082.photobucket.com/albums/j377/bjoplin21/DSC00972.jpg
Rt&Dzine
Mar 22, 11:47 AM
To me this is like the people that don't support war. If a veteran was killed in action and a funeral is happening they can picket the funeral all day long (talk about bull ****!) But yet if we don't let them picket they freak out scream free rights free rights. Well guess what those veterans (me included since I serve) gave them that freedom to stand there in picket.
Which anti-war groups picket veteran's funerals? The only group that I'm aware of is the Westboro Christian anti-gay Church.
Which anti-war groups picket veteran's funerals? The only group that I'm aware of is the Westboro Christian anti-gay Church.
iWonderwhy
Apr 2, 08:47 PM
What makes this commercial so awesome is that they didn't throw the technical specifications in your face (RAM, storage, etc) like some of the other competitors have.
KingYaba
Oct 23, 08:52 PM
One of these days the MBP Merom rumor will be correct. :)
NebulaClash
Sep 15, 05:32 PM
Such a rude response deserves a rude retort, but I'll leave it up as an example of what Apple users face.
I get called a groupie and someone who lights candles for Steve Jobs in my basement, yet I'm the guy who admitted there is a flaw that needs to be fixed, that Apple says they are going to fix, and has a program in place to freely help all affected owners today. Such logic is ignored and instead I'm called names. End of discussion. The anti-Apple attacks are beginning.
I'm still a subscriber to CR. Their tech coverage has sucked for years, but their other tests are better.
I get called a groupie and someone who lights candles for Steve Jobs in my basement, yet I'm the guy who admitted there is a flaw that needs to be fixed, that Apple says they are going to fix, and has a program in place to freely help all affected owners today. Such logic is ignored and instead I'm called names. End of discussion. The anti-Apple attacks are beginning.
I'm still a subscriber to CR. Their tech coverage has sucked for years, but their other tests are better.
gugy
Sep 1, 12:47 PM
23" Imac is a great size. Add HD resolution then that's great.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
I would love to see dual display support. But I highly doubt they will allow it. Apple wants to make sure there is a distinction between their consumer and pro line. It would be cool to have the Imac 23" with a 23" Cinema display next to it.
dkoralek
Oct 23, 11:33 PM
The current Napa64 platform (that is, Napa with Merom as the CPU) does support 64-bit instructions. It can't address more than 4 GiB of physical memory, but it can run the faster 64-bit instructions.
Here's the download page for the x64 drivers for Dell's Latitude D620 with Core 2 Duo:
http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/devices.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&SystemID=LATITUDE%20D620&os=WXPX&osl=EN#
Interestingly, though, the iMac (with c2d) appartently does not include the Napa64 platform (or rather the chipset that belongs in Napa64). Anyone know if it can deal with 64-bit isntructions?
cheers.
Here's the download page for the x64 drivers for Dell's Latitude D620 with Core 2 Duo:
http://support.dell.com/support/downloads/devices.aspx?c=us&cs=555&l=en&s=biz&SystemID=LATITUDE%20D620&os=WXPX&osl=EN#
Interestingly, though, the iMac (with c2d) appartently does not include the Napa64 platform (or rather the chipset that belongs in Napa64). Anyone know if it can deal with 64-bit isntructions?
cheers.
macrumors12345
Jul 19, 06:25 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Apple posted their (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/jul/19results.html) 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
Live streaming of the results conference call will be broadcast at 5pm EST (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq306/).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_Q3_2006_Financial_Results_Are_In!_2nd_Best_In_Company_History!)
The numbers on portables and desktops aren't right (looks like they are Q3 05 numbers). The right numbers are 800k laptops and 527k desktops.
Apple posted their (http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2006/jul/19results.html) 3rd Quarter 2006 financial results today.
Apple posted revenue of $4.37 billion and a net quarterly profit of $472 million or $.54 per diluted share. For reference, the year-ago quarter brought in $3.53 billion in revenue, net profit of $320 million or $.37 per diluted share.
Apple shipped 1,327,000 Macintosh computers and 8,111,000 iPods during this quarter which represents a 12% growth in Macs and 32% growth in iPods year-over-year.
- 75% of Macs sold during the quarter used Intel processors.
- 2nd highest quarterly sales and earnings in Apple's history
Live streaming of the results conference call will be broadcast at 5pm EST (http://www.apple.com/quicktime/qtv/earningsq306/).
Digg This (http://digg.com/apple/Apple_s_Q3_2006_Financial_Results_Are_In!_2nd_Best_In_Company_History!)
The numbers on portables and desktops aren't right (looks like they are Q3 05 numbers). The right numbers are 800k laptops and 527k desktops.
Evangelion
Aug 29, 09:14 AM
No Merom? :( Mac mini and Mac Pro drifting even further apart now.
Yeah, imagine that. Their top-of-the-line 64bit full-tower quad-core workstation and their bottom-of-the-barrel consumer-model have wildly different specs!
As to putting Merom in there... Yep, in a way, it would make sense. But I bet that Intel is unloading their Core Duo's to Apple for rock-bottom prices to be used in the Mini (and maybe MacBook).
Yeah, imagine that. Their top-of-the-line 64bit full-tower quad-core workstation and their bottom-of-the-barrel consumer-model have wildly different specs!
As to putting Merom in there... Yep, in a way, it would make sense. But I bet that Intel is unloading their Core Duo's to Apple for rock-bottom prices to be used in the Mini (and maybe MacBook).
alecmcmahon
Feb 1, 09:10 AM
my rides
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
2010 dodge ram 1500 hemi
99 jeep wrangler
http://farm5.static.flickr.com/4004/5130546008_dce479858d_b.jpg
thederby
Mar 22, 05:26 PM
Just put it in a YoTank case like I did. You can drive your car over it without damaging the iPod.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
that's hot.
http://www.substrata.ca/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/12/CJE3140.jpg
More pics here (http://www.substrata.ca/blog/uncategorized/portable-music-rig/).
that's hot.
~Shard~
Nov 15, 08:57 AM
Perhaps this would allow me to play a large map on Civ4 without the terrible huge long pauses...
It depends whether Civ IV was coded to take advantage of multiple cores or not. If it is indeed a multi-threaded app, then fine, it could probably share the load across all 8 cores, however this may not be the case as the app may not be able to to take advanatge of all 8 cores. Not sure, guess you'd need to test it out...
It depends whether Civ IV was coded to take advantage of multiple cores or not. If it is indeed a multi-threaded app, then fine, it could probably share the load across all 8 cores, however this may not be the case as the app may not be able to to take advanatge of all 8 cores. Not sure, guess you'd need to test it out...
apb3
Aug 19, 09:39 AM
If they go the aforementioned route, they need to keep a dedicated iPod so that the price point stays down. Seems like they'd have the common sense to just know to do that, but you never know sometimes..
Yeah. let's hope... But my confidence in the ability of others to be as smart and cool as I was never developed as a child.
I've just been surprised by all the calls (almost frenzy-like) by others on this thread (it seems you and I are pretty much on the same page as I just read your comments you entered while I was entering my own) to make the iPod, basically, an all-in-one type peice of crap. I have honestly asked why they really need this and have only sen one (maybe two) cool, albeit niche-type, uses.
While some may say Steve is mercurial, I hope in this case he is 1) on my side here, 2) just as mercurial and controlling as rumored and 3) pays no attention to this thread or any polls in which like-minded individuals participate.
Yeah. let's hope... But my confidence in the ability of others to be as smart and cool as I was never developed as a child.
I've just been surprised by all the calls (almost frenzy-like) by others on this thread (it seems you and I are pretty much on the same page as I just read your comments you entered while I was entering my own) to make the iPod, basically, an all-in-one type peice of crap. I have honestly asked why they really need this and have only sen one (maybe two) cool, albeit niche-type, uses.
While some may say Steve is mercurial, I hope in this case he is 1) on my side here, 2) just as mercurial and controlling as rumored and 3) pays no attention to this thread or any polls in which like-minded individuals participate.
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
Pressure
Aug 27, 06:07 PM
Err...I was defending that Conroe could fit in the iMac. Especially having the G5 in there. (Woodcrest's TDP is 85W by the way...)
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
Remember that TDP is for the highest clocked chip (3.0Ghz). The rest of the family sits at 65W TDP, like the Conroe.
And look here (http://spamreaper.org/frankie/macintel.html)
Remember that TDP is for the highest clocked chip (3.0Ghz). The rest of the family sits at 65W TDP, like the Conroe.
Small White Car
Apr 12, 08:55 PM
I remember the keynote... He was on vacation and wanted a super easy way to edit his home movie. So he whipped up this "new" program to do it. Steve liked it and it became iMovie. And in the process threw 50 years of video editing out the window. Great if you've never edited before, but if you want to edit, iMovie isn't an option. If you want to slap together a super quick video, it's almost faster to cut and paste clips in a QT7 window then use iMovie now.
Speaking of that. I really hope they fix QTX today also, at least bring it up to par with QT7 in features.
I thought the new iMovie was genius. I knew SO many family members who wouldn't touch the old iMovie because it was too complicated. They needed something simpler and the new iMovie gave it to them.
I really think the only people who complained about the new iMovie were people who should have been using Final Cut Express all along anyway. It's not Apple's fault that they weren't using the right program before.
Speaking of that. I really hope they fix QTX today also, at least bring it up to par with QT7 in features.
I thought the new iMovie was genius. I knew SO many family members who wouldn't touch the old iMovie because it was too complicated. They needed something simpler and the new iMovie gave it to them.
I really think the only people who complained about the new iMovie were people who should have been using Final Cut Express all along anyway. It's not Apple's fault that they weren't using the right program before.
Ashtangi
Aug 29, 09:52 AM
As a few have already mentioned - there would have to be some price adjustments. Right now, the Core Duo commands a $200 premium over the Core Solo. But assuming that the "new" lineup consists of a 1.66 and 1.83 Core Duo, Apple would either have to seriously adjust the price points - or majorly strip down the 1.66 Core Duo. Perhaps remove the combo drive? Or use the smaller HD?
twoodcc
Feb 10, 04:52 PM
Speaking of bigadv units, I haven't gotten any in the last 2 or 3 days, just regular units on my mac pro?
hmm, not sure. i haven't gotten anything the last 2 updates today. not sure what's going on
hmm, not sure. i haven't gotten anything the last 2 updates today. not sure what's going on
xPismo
Oct 24, 01:04 AM
At this rate the PowerBook G5 will be here before the Merom.
Evil. Just plain evil. ;) :D
Evil. Just plain evil. ;) :D
mrapplegate
Apr 3, 06:11 PM
I dont know the significance of the big gray bar on top of the page where it blocks a portion of the page when the menu bar is coming out of auto hide -they could of made it semi transparent Hopefully they change that in the final release
I see how some might not like how it is handled. I guess my point was it was by design and is not a bug.
I see how some might not like how it is handled. I guess my point was it was by design and is not a bug.
jakemikey
Aug 25, 11:59 AM
Sadly, I've tried to make cheaper VIA based mini-ITX systems. I usually end up getting a better buy from a Mac Mini.
Not if you're going for an embedded system that doesn't need a heavy duty CPU and graphics. I built a fanless home server/internet filter/firewall box for less than $200 (and this is in the mini form factor - mini-ITX). A mini would be overkill for that and almost all of the other above listed embedded applications. Get the right tool for the right job is all I'm saying. I would never use a VIA system for a desktop, but for almost every embedded application they're fantastic.
Not if you're going for an embedded system that doesn't need a heavy duty CPU and graphics. I built a fanless home server/internet filter/firewall box for less than $200 (and this is in the mini form factor - mini-ITX). A mini would be overkill for that and almost all of the other above listed embedded applications. Get the right tool for the right job is all I'm saying. I would never use a VIA system for a desktop, but for almost every embedded application they're fantastic.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق