zacman
Apr 19, 03:29 PM
2.5 million more? Apple has likely sold more than double then number of iPhones in q1 2011 than q1 2010 (8.75 million).
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
I'm speaking about estimated Q1/11 to Q4/10 numbers (the est. Q1/11 numbers is what that news was about...). And what about reading the graphs I posted yourself? :rolleyes:
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 05:21 PM
The only reason to not move to the new OS would be lack of support for current hardware.
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
Or software...bye-bye Rosetta. :(
gugy
Aug 17, 03:56 PM
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
Wow, interesting.
I think Adobe is actually pretty good upgrading their software. As for Photoshop, Illustrator and After Effects they seem to do major upgrades every 18 months. I think is very reasonable. Plus is a normal thing when you are on the top to slow down a little, and frankly I don't think they are doing that.
CS3 will be here next year alongside possibly with After Effects, so what's your problem with Adobe?
As for Microsoft, I agreed that they are very slow when it comes to Office suite for Mac.
Wow, interesting.
I think Adobe is actually pretty good upgrading their software. As for Photoshop, Illustrator and After Effects they seem to do major upgrades every 18 months. I think is very reasonable. Plus is a normal thing when you are on the top to slow down a little, and frankly I don't think they are doing that.
CS3 will be here next year alongside possibly with After Effects, so what's your problem with Adobe?
As for Microsoft, I agreed that they are very slow when it comes to Office suite for Mac.
Multimedia
Jul 29, 12:24 AM
I recall someone here recently reiterating the point that Merom should not use less power than Yonah, but accomplish 20% more work. That was my understanding.
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
Now the claim is being made that a Core 2 Duo Notebook can get longer battery life than a "previous model" notebook, up to 5 hours.
Video: Long-lasting Intel Core 2 Duo notebooks (http://news.com.com/1606-2_3-6100051.html?part=rss&tag=6100051&subj=news)Love this news. Just what I was expecting and one of the main reasons to have waited for Core 2 Duo mobile Macs. :)
Sodner
Apr 8, 07:19 AM
Isn't this hypocritical since Apple has been known to do this in their retail stores too?
Apple has been holding their stock to the next day and opening early if they have any. I think thats a pretty good way to do it rather than having people check in every half hour with a "You get any yet?" This way its simple.
Perhaps BB did something completely different? Kept them for days or weeks. Who knows?!
Believe me Apple WANTS Best Buy to sell iPads. The more places the better. So they must have done something pretty stupid to have pissed off Apple enough to pull their stock.
I say good job Apple!! Beisdes I freakin hate BB.
Apple has been holding their stock to the next day and opening early if they have any. I think thats a pretty good way to do it rather than having people check in every half hour with a "You get any yet?" This way its simple.
Perhaps BB did something completely different? Kept them for days or weeks. Who knows?!
Believe me Apple WANTS Best Buy to sell iPads. The more places the better. So they must have done something pretty stupid to have pissed off Apple enough to pull their stock.
I say good job Apple!! Beisdes I freakin hate BB.
ericinboston
Apr 27, 08:31 AM
I wonder how long this "bug" has existed? You know...the bug that's recording all sorts of other information into the database.
2 years? 4 years?
If it's been longer than a few months, no one will ever believe a)it is a bug b)a bug this severe for privacy concerns, c)that it was never mentioned before as a bug, and d)until the lawsuit has never been on the roadmap to be fixed.
2 years? 4 years?
If it's been longer than a few months, no one will ever believe a)it is a bug b)a bug this severe for privacy concerns, c)that it was never mentioned before as a bug, and d)until the lawsuit has never been on the roadmap to be fixed.
shawnce
Aug 6, 10:59 AM
Almost done packing for the trip to WWDC :D ...it is going to be a busy show, just to many must attend session for the work I do... but it is going to be fun and informative as usual.
I think we are going to get some nice stuff in 10.5 (lot of to be announced sessions still on the calendar for WWDC... in 2004 those got filled in with things like CoreData, CoreImage, CoreVideo, Dashboard, Spotlight, etc.).
I think we are going to get some nice stuff in 10.5 (lot of to be announced sessions still on the calendar for WWDC... in 2004 those got filled in with things like CoreData, CoreImage, CoreVideo, Dashboard, Spotlight, etc.).
Alexsaru
Sep 13, 06:54 AM
I was interested to see that they were unable to max out CPU utilization on all 8 cores in the system. I hope it's due to the software these days not being ready to fully utilize more than one or two cores and not due to OSX's ability to scale to larger core counts. Since that's obviously where we're heading. Does anyone know about the potential for scalability of OSX to large numbers of CPU's/cores? I know some *nix varieties and BSD varieties do this really well, but one wonders if they were thinking this far in the future when they developed OSX. It'll be interesting to see...
Eidorian
Jul 30, 08:55 PM
I'd like to be able to install OS X on it, because the only reason why I'd ever use Windows is for the latest games. Here are the spec's, think this would run OS X nicely? ;-)This is a joke...right?
epitaphic
Aug 18, 09:12 PM
If you don't think you are going to ever use more than one thing at a time, then you are right. But I think most of us here have 10-15 things open at once and do all sorts of things at once. That's the reason for "Spaces" in Loepard.
We all probably have 15+ apps running at any time, but its very rare to have more than two hammering the CPU (unless its "automated" like with handbrake/toast). That is of course, unless you find yourself editing video whilst designing a website whilst laying out a book whilst writing some music whilst watching superman at the same time. ;)
We all probably have 15+ apps running at any time, but its very rare to have more than two hammering the CPU (unless its "automated" like with handbrake/toast). That is of course, unless you find yourself editing video whilst designing a website whilst laying out a book whilst writing some music whilst watching superman at the same time. ;)
yg17
Apr 28, 03:47 PM
I think it is absolutely appalling that you people are calling anyone who just wanted proof that Obama is qualified, per the constitution, to be president (being born in America) a racist. That is an awful big accusation and personally I can't believe the administration at MR allows that kind of talk.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
1. McCain was born outside of the US and no one demanded proof.
2. No one demanded proof of eligibility for past presidents.
3. Obama released a birth certificate back before the election and people still claimed he was born in Africa
4. There is not a single piece of evidence to suggest he was born somewhere besides Hawaii - a US state
5. Obama is black. McCain and all of our past presidents are not.
No, it's not a stretch at all to accuse birthers of being racist.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
1. McCain was born outside of the US and no one demanded proof.
2. No one demanded proof of eligibility for past presidents.
3. Obama released a birth certificate back before the election and people still claimed he was born in Africa
4. There is not a single piece of evidence to suggest he was born somewhere besides Hawaii - a US state
5. Obama is black. McCain and all of our past presidents are not.
No, it's not a stretch at all to accuse birthers of being racist.
Westside guy
Aug 11, 02:27 PM
Hmm... maybe I stand corrected on this - see paragraph three (or four, if you count bullet points as a paragrapn).
T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular and Acquire California/Nevada Network and Spectrum (http://www.t-mobile.com/company/PressReleases_Article.aspx?assetName=Prs_Prs_20040525&title=T-Mobile%20USA%20to%20End%20Network%20Venture%20with%20Cingular%20and%20Acquire%20California/Nevada%20Network%20and%20Spectrum)
I was curious; so I went into my V600's network settings and found a Cingular network. I registered with it, and was able to make a call.
I don't understand why this isn't automatic though. I don't always have coverage at times when my Cingular-using office mate does.
T-Mobile USA to End Network Venture with Cingular and Acquire California/Nevada Network and Spectrum (http://www.t-mobile.com/company/PressReleases_Article.aspx?assetName=Prs_Prs_20040525&title=T-Mobile%20USA%20to%20End%20Network%20Venture%20with%20Cingular%20and%20Acquire%20California/Nevada%20Network%20and%20Spectrum)
I was curious; so I went into my V600's network settings and found a Cingular network. I registered with it, and was able to make a call.
I don't understand why this isn't automatic though. I don't always have coverage at times when my Cingular-using office mate does.
DavidLeblond
Aug 26, 04:08 PM
The 1.83 & 2.00GHz for iMacs (if they use merom) and MacBooks and the 2.16 and 2.33 for the 15 & 17 MBPs respectively. Its that simple.
That doesn't make sense, marketing wise. If they do anything to the MacBooks and iMacs they would at least bump their speeds. It doesn't matter f the 2GHz Merom chip is faster than the 2GHz Yonah chip, the consumers don't give a crap about the chip... they want to see "them GHz numbers" go up.
That doesn't make sense, marketing wise. If they do anything to the MacBooks and iMacs they would at least bump their speeds. It doesn't matter f the 2GHz Merom chip is faster than the 2GHz Yonah chip, the consumers don't give a crap about the chip... they want to see "them GHz numbers" go up.
Nuck81
Dec 10, 04:37 AM
But, I DO love all types of cars. I just don't think they all have a place in a RACING game.
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
The game doesn't have to be only 700hp exotics, that isn't what I'm saying. There have been PLENTY of wildly varied cars throughout history that would be fun to drive, on a track, in a racing game. The VW K�belwagen and Citro�n DS, for example, aren't some of them.
It says right on the front of the box "The real DRIVING simulator" not "the real racing simulator"
Eidorian
Jul 27, 10:08 AM
"...Core 2 Duo chips need less electricity, drawing just 65 watts compared to the Pentium 4�s 95 watts and Pentium D�s 130 watts"
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310
Good Lord - does anybody know what the G5 is? I'd imagine that the elaborate cooling system in the current G5 towers probably won't be needed it it's running anything like the D's...
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=219310
MrCrowbar
Jul 27, 06:50 PM
Ok, here goes. (Quick pass)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
http://img161.imageshack.us/img161/3350/macminidblwidepk4.jpg
Eeek. Not so sure I like that.
Hmmm... maybe with just one slot?
http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/4436/macminidblwideunislotvr9.jpg
A little better. I personally prefer the taller narrower one, though.
Actually I like the one with 2 slots. Perfect for all those people wanting 2 drives. :-)
fener
Aug 27, 08:08 AM
Expect new Merom-based macs, and a new iPod, on September 18th.
Simple. Apples' current sale for students on getting a MAJOR discount on iPods when you buy a new mac, ends on Friday the 15th. Thus, the following monday, will come the new updates. They wouldn't release before, because they would be cutting their profits even more than they are now.
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
Simple. Apples' current sale for students on getting a MAJOR discount on iPods when you buy a new mac, ends on Friday the 15th. Thus, the following monday, will come the new updates. They wouldn't release before, because they would be cutting their profits even more than they are now.
Not true.
Recent years, updates came right before the end of the promotion.
Tomaz
Aug 7, 07:10 PM
Did anyone else think it was odd that many of the features seemed so poorly presented. We didn't actually get to see anything new in Spotlight. And no new features of the actual Dashboard were even discussed.
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
It just doesn't seem that Leopard is as far along as Tiger was when previewed even though Leopard is suppose to ship in the spring just as Tiger did.
Maybe they moved the spotlight bar to the top left and don't want MS to do the same before the Vista release ;)
Denarius
Mar 22, 03:22 PM
A government in power is responding against a rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
If a rebellion sprang up in the United States, our government would respond with force as well.
"Slaughtering his own people" sounds a little propogandish to me. Are you saying that Qaddafi is taking people who have no connection to the rebellion at all and slaughtering them?
How can any government meet armed internal rebellion without qualifying as "slaughtering their own people"?
It wasn't a rebellion when it first started, it was an unarmed march protesting against the number of people in Benghazi that had just disappeared in Benghazi over many years. They had some footage from the start of the protests on BBC's Panorama last night showing the march. Some guys in yellow builder's hats came in with a mixture of sticks and guns and started killing people at random, which is when it started escalating into a full-blown rebellion.
Billy Boo Bob
Nov 28, 11:02 PM
1 Random artist finds inspiration and writes a song
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
2 Artist decides his song is so good that he/she records it in a professional studio (which he can rent) so the sound quality is superb
3 Artists logs into the iTMS and publishes his song
4 Artists gets $ from every song sold and the iTMS charges the artist for the distribution
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.
The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend.
Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label.
Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.
In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.
fivepoint
Mar 22, 12:56 PM
Precisely. The UN mandate is to enforce a no-fly zone, amongst other things, tasks that are particularly suited for certain nations. I'm no gung-ho supporter of this action in Libya, but it strikes me as similar to Bosnia, with the real political pressure coming particularly from France for very real reasons.
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
Expect the overt US involvement to rapidly scale back soon.
Did Ronald Reagan get a go-ahead from Congress in 1986 for attacking Libya?
No he did not. It was a mistake then, it is a mistake now. The only difference is, I oppose it in all circumstances, regardless of who's president. You only oppose it when it's a Republican in office.
Wait a second. Wait a second. You are trying to compare the media's portrayal of GWB over about SEVEN years, TWO wars, and HOW MANY lies to Libya and less then ONE WEEK. The Lybia thing has been going on for about a day or so. In the FIRST days of the Afghanistan war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? In the FIRST days of the Iraq war, did you hear ANY mainstream media criticizing GWB? Democrats were falling all over themselves to support the President and the need to get those WMDs, which is why after almost 6 years, it was a defining issue of the presidential campaign. The candidates 5 years later were all explaining why they supported one war then, but not now after all the lies were exposed, or how they were against it all along. Not to mention Afghanistan after 7 years. There were a few, unlike now, where there are a lot.
This is THE FIRST WEEK of this thing, and NBC nightly news had their entire story about: criticism from congress; inability of white house to deal with that problem, partly because in Brazil; late involvement; involvement here but not in Somalia, Congo, etc..., risk that Ghaddafi would survive this and remain in power; lack of real Arab support and weak coalition; and fact that opposition is disorganized, poorly armed and leaderless, and probably won't be able to win without military support on the ground.
That's pretty hard reporting, and I'm very happy Congress is being critical. Almost everything Fivepoint, the GOP and the Democrats who are speaking out have said is a valid concern. They should have done this during week ONE of Afghanistan, and Iraq. I know I don't want another one of those.
(edit) Yesterday, NPR was talking about Candidate Obama vs. President Obama, and pointed out Candidate Obama's statements about ONLY CONGRESS CAN DECLARE WAR. They discussed, at length, prior presidents assumption of power, Obama's use of it and how guest couldn't imagine a new president opposed to a power like this giving it up. So, maybe you should watch some NBC, ABC, CBS and listen to some NPR. Mind you, in FPs defense, I spent 16 hours in the car since this all started, so I've probably heard every story...
bad03xtreme
Apr 25, 02:28 PM
I should have become a lawyer.
soldierblue
Apr 20, 02:51 PM
Apple filed similar suits again HTC and Nokia last spring. You'll notice that the ITC is not favoring Apple's claims.
Benjy91
Apr 27, 09:06 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Of course, anyone who doesnt like this idea, is a communist who hates America and Freedom.
