vincenz
Mar 26, 07:34 AM
Summer can't come soon enough!
MacRumors
Apr 19, 01:21 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/19/analysis-of-apples-lawsuit-against-samsung-includes-ios-device-sales-numbers/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
EYES: To make Angelina#39;s eyes
Angelina Jolie Warms Up
Actress Angelina Jolie arrives
Angelina Jolie Hairstyles,
Angelina Jolie looks all
Angelina Jolie Brad Pitt
has Angelina Jolie#39;s lips
Jolie played up her
And Angelina looked gorgeous
names like Angelina Jolie,
Angelina is considering
tutorial videos are up!
Angelina Jolie Hair The
Angelina Jolie
who coifs Angelina Jolie,
Angelina Jolie Inspired Hair
She loves to change her hair
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/19/142014-apple_samsung_lawsuit.jpg
AppleKrate
Sep 19, 10:49 AM
The MacBookPro is still too new a release to have the major type of changes you and others are hoping for. All you're going to get for the next year or two is speed bumps and maybe an upgrade in HD capacity, Graphics card, or Optical Drive (Blue-Ray or HD-DVD)
Basically I see two types of users in here pleading for the newer chips: the average users who just "like the idea of fast" when it really does them no good, and the professionals who are consistantly holding out for something better. The professionals are few and far between.
Please tell me what is majorly new about the current MacBook Pro besides an intel chip :confused: (and the name of course :rolleyes: )
PS how about an amateur professional? If not, maybe a professional amateur?
Basically I see two types of users in here pleading for the newer chips: the average users who just "like the idea of fast" when it really does them no good, and the professionals who are consistantly holding out for something better. The professionals are few and far between.
Please tell me what is majorly new about the current MacBook Pro besides an intel chip :confused: (and the name of course :rolleyes: )
PS how about an amateur professional? If not, maybe a professional amateur?
faroZ06
Apr 27, 08:52 AM
I'm old-fashined I guess because I have no interest in having a smartphone in the first place. I just have a standard flip-phone. By owning a smartphone, you are always going to be faced with privacy issues because if you are using facebook/twitter and whatever else you are using to broadcasting your information. If you don't want advertisers to use your information, stop using social networking sites and search engines and stop being connected.
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
I also use a flip phone. It's cheaper, less likely to be stolen, better for calling, and inspired by Star Trek's tricorder :)
But I have an iPod Touch which I nearly lost...
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
janmc
Aug 5, 08:13 PM
To me the answer to the whole IR/Mac Pro/Front Row thing is obvious - put an integrated IR receiver into the keyboard. The keyboard would come with the Mac Pro (unlike the display) and is rarely under the desk. :)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
Plus they could sell the keyboard for any Mac (including ones that don't have Front Row - they could include the app with it).
Are you listening Apple? Maybe you should patent that one quick ;)
gloss
Sep 19, 06:52 AM
As I is naught en Amerikan canned sumone plz tell mi wen tanksgifting is? :p
British Transport: "Mayday, mayday! Can you hear us? We are sinking! We are sinking!"
German Coast Guard: [pause] "...what are you...tsinking about? (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5210751527160722920&q=what+are+you+thinking+about)"
British Transport: "Mayday, mayday! Can you hear us? We are sinking! We are sinking!"
German Coast Guard: [pause] "...what are you...tsinking about? (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-5210751527160722920&q=what+are+you+thinking+about)"
minty-freshness
Aug 7, 12:14 PM
what's steve talking about?! i don't understand him.
X2468
Mar 26, 01:39 PM
Good stuff, waiting and ready to pay! :o
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
It's this mentality that makes me smile.
Without knowing any of the details as to what the final shipping version will be, mezmerized (hypnotized ?) by Apple, enthusiasts are ready to pay whatever Apple demands for the product.
I get to sit back without any effort, and watch with delight as they pour the money into Apples coffers. In turn, my vast amount of Apple stock climbs higher & higher as they brag about Apples Billions.
Their blind trust pays me well. Thanks Apple !
DoFoT9
Aug 14, 11:44 PM
I have enough skill to win the faster races, i just have more fun with a "real" car instead of something with neck-snapping acceleration and tires that stick to the road if you take a hair-pin at 200mph.
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
I have a lot more fun driving cars that anyone can afford.
are you rich then? :p
i only hope that GT5 is more realistic then simulated this time..
layte
Mar 31, 03:52 PM
You're moving the goal posts. That always has been the wonderful thing about the words "open" and "free" with respect to software. They never really meant much but had such loaded connotations. You can change the definition mid-argument as easily as you change what hat you're wearing.
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
I look ace in a Trilby.
You know, projecting isn't healthy at all.
You'd best stop then old fella (yea, I can play forum clich�d response 101 as well, /tips-hat)
Dagless
Aug 18, 02:58 PM
It's better than a black Wii, surely :rolleyes:
Nope, no brightly coloured consoles in my media centre.
Nope, no brightly coloured consoles in my media centre.
obeygiant
Mar 17, 01:03 PM
Obeygiant, you have a way of distilling issues down to their core. The funny thing is, I don't think Lee even realizes he's doing it.
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
Yeah I'm pretty sure I'm on his ignore list. lol
ryanx
Apr 10, 06:37 PM
a >>dramatic<< change - the truth is that it really needs to be dramatic :))
Hamish
Apr 11, 10:36 PM
Looking forward to the new final cut studio.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
if apple is smart they will allow access to individual parts of the suite
as seperate Mac App Store downloads.
If it were possible to buy apple Motion on it's own I think many existing After Effects would be very happy to have something else to play with that can take adavantage of their hardware and deliver some fun realtime workflows...
it could be a halo product for such editors as well to end up using the whole suite...
I bought motion for 300 when it used to be sold individually, and I have spent a tonne of money since simply because I love that product.
do it apple. please.
70355
Aug 7, 04:54 PM
But Steve always likes to try to be ahead of his own schedules ....underpromising and overdelivering. :)
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
Like the whole 3ghz thing?
blahblah100
Mar 31, 03:54 PM
It's because of the Buy One Get One option. Nothing more. People choose that option because it makes financial sense and if they don't really care about the OS or the phone, they will choose the one that fits their check books. If Apple was to OK ATT and VZ to do a Buy One Get One on the iPhone, there would be no comparison. It would be game over for Android.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
-LanPhantom
Ironically, most of the people on this forum said iPhone on Verizon would be game over for Android.
This 'game over for Android' reminds me a lot of the 'this is the year of desktop linux' stuff that has been said every year for the last 9.
Folke Sonin
Jun 12, 09:55 PM
I went to my local radio shack tonight to find out about the pre order process. The store manager showed me their internal website where from June 24th to July 15th they were guaranteeing 100$ for any iPhone 3G in excellent condition and at least 200$ for any iPhone 3GS in excellent condition. As of today my iPhone 3G with 8 GB of flash was appraised for 118$. So on June 24th I might loose 18$ :-) You should go to Radio Shack and ask for the manager. She or he will be able to tell you what they can do.
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
Happy hunting
Folke Sonin
0815
Apr 6, 04:13 PM
debacle? The debacle that's sucking 51% of the profit in the entire smartphone industry? http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/01/31/apple-is-still-sucking-most-of-the-profit-out-of-the-mobile-phone-business/
Market share isn't everything.
B
Finally someone who gets it ....
Some smart-phone OS providers pay companies to put their OS on the devices (not good for profit) and others gain a big market share without making any money.
But at the end - those are all companies that need to make money. And who wins at the end of the day: Whoever makes most money. Market share might be good for some sort of reputation and bragging rights - but if it doesn't bring any money into the bank it is good for nothing. Those are not charities - those are busnisses that have to face at the end of the day the share holders.
So it also doesn't matter if Xoom sells only 100.000 Units and Apple sells many millions. The Xoom would still be a win if it would bring more money home (but this is where the true fail of the Xoom is)
Market share isn't everything.
B
Finally someone who gets it ....
Some smart-phone OS providers pay companies to put their OS on the devices (not good for profit) and others gain a big market share without making any money.
But at the end - those are all companies that need to make money. And who wins at the end of the day: Whoever makes most money. Market share might be good for some sort of reputation and bragging rights - but if it doesn't bring any money into the bank it is good for nothing. Those are not charities - those are busnisses that have to face at the end of the day the share holders.
So it also doesn't matter if Xoom sells only 100.000 Units and Apple sells many millions. The Xoom would still be a win if it would bring more money home (but this is where the true fail of the Xoom is)
edk99
Apr 11, 11:33 AM
If it is going to be a 4g/LTE iPhone then this works for me. I have no complaints with my iPhone 4 so waiting another 4-6 months is fine with me.
notabadname
Mar 22, 01:12 PM
Blackberry playbook = The IPad 2 killer - you heard it here first.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Except for the battery life. Ha, ha . . . yeah, that's not important at all in a mobile device. You get your 10.1 inch "point and shoot" camera, I'll take the battery for a handheld portable computer. Haven't heard a lot of concern over all the laptops without a rear-facing camera. It's funny how critical it is for the iPad though, and what an important comparison it is to many people.
Look at the specs, their greater or equal to the iPad 2 with the exception of battery life.
Except for the battery life. Ha, ha . . . yeah, that's not important at all in a mobile device. You get your 10.1 inch "point and shoot" camera, I'll take the battery for a handheld portable computer. Haven't heard a lot of concern over all the laptops without a rear-facing camera. It's funny how critical it is for the iPad though, and what an important comparison it is to many people.
shawnce
Aug 7, 09:42 PM
Running the preview now... some nice developer level stuff that I cannot ebelish on however beyond what was talked about in the keynote.
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
The new Core Animation stuff looks simple yet powerful and will increase the visual effects and feedback that application can do with only minor work on their part.
Also new Xcode Tool capabilities are well... great to have (need to review what is available publicly before I can comment more).
Next spring Apple will have a good answer to Vista with little disruption to end users and developers (unlike Vista).
Mr. Retrofire
Mar 26, 09:22 PM
It's crap that is no longer needed.
It sounds like you speak about your own posts.
You are in a progress trap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap), kid. It feels good that you are not responsible for the use of nuclear weapons. I'm sure you would use them, if you could kill "Rosetta" with them.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress.
Your logic is flawed, because Rosetta is already "cut out" in SL. It is a separate option, if you know what that means. No? Now explain, how you cut something out, which is already cut out.
Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
*lol*
It is important to note, that Apples success and progress in emerging markets in the past 10 years is associated with iTunes (it is necessary to access your iDevices), and the iTunes success is based on your biggest foe: The Carbon API. Or in other words: Apple would not be as big as it is, if Carbon and iTunes did not exist in the past. Strange that you must see now, that your enemies are your friends (and you use them daily).
It sounds like you speak about your own posts.
You are in a progress trap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_trap), kid. It feels good that you are not responsible for the use of nuclear weapons. I'm sure you would use them, if you could kill "Rosetta" with them.
Stuff that can be cut out but isn't, holds back progress.
Your logic is flawed, because Rosetta is already "cut out" in SL. It is a separate option, if you know what that means. No? Now explain, how you cut something out, which is already cut out.
Progress = cutting and more cutting and then perfecting what's left over.
*lol*
It is important to note, that Apples success and progress in emerging markets in the past 10 years is associated with iTunes (it is necessary to access your iDevices), and the iTunes success is based on your biggest foe: The Carbon API. Or in other words: Apple would not be as big as it is, if Carbon and iTunes did not exist in the past. Strange that you must see now, that your enemies are your friends (and you use them daily).
sanmiguel
Aug 12, 07:15 AM
fake obviously but it seems like a nice possibility....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-5qGn7kIkMA