twoodcc
Nov 23, 04:29 PM
congrats to SciFrog for getting 3 million points!
yeah i don't think we'll get those points back. oh well. i'm also thinking about getting something to fold on as well. i'm wondering, would have a machine and putting in several video cards and running the gpu2 in windows be better? or just an i7 and run bigadv units? i was hoping some i7 systems would go onsale, but i can't really find any under $1,000
yeah i don't think we'll get those points back. oh well. i'm also thinking about getting something to fold on as well. i'm wondering, would have a machine and putting in several video cards and running the gpu2 in windows be better? or just an i7 and run bigadv units? i was hoping some i7 systems would go onsale, but i can't really find any under $1,000
DavidLeblond
Apr 21, 11:35 AM
So...this guy Levinson...he spends all his time breaking down all the data and info in iOS...and then writes a book about all the locations of these files and how to manipulate them?....and he complains how people may easily get hacked?
Hmm... I'm missing something here...
Yeah, you are.
Levinson wasn't the guy complaining about that, he was the forensics guy.
Hmm... I'm missing something here...
Yeah, you are.
Levinson wasn't the guy complaining about that, he was the forensics guy.
mandis
Mar 25, 03:55 PM
At this pace the iPad3 will come close to the PS3 in terms of performance when it is released next year...
I'm really impressed by the increasing performance of the ARM architecture. Mind you all this is coming from a tiny SoC which doesn't require cooling or any substantial power intake.
Impressive indeed!
Maybe we'll be seeing ARM based Desktops by the end of the decade... or sooner?
I'm really impressed by the increasing performance of the ARM architecture. Mind you all this is coming from a tiny SoC which doesn't require cooling or any substantial power intake.
Impressive indeed!
Maybe we'll be seeing ARM based Desktops by the end of the decade... or sooner?
rnelan7
Mar 1, 04:21 PM
Are you living on campus? And if so, they actually let you mount a TV on the wall? :eek: Where do you go?
I live off campus, I later read in my lease I can't attach anything to the wall but the landlord is cool so nothing a little spackle and paint can't fix. Also, I go to the College of New Jersey.
I live off campus, I later read in my lease I can't attach anything to the wall but the landlord is cool so nothing a little spackle and paint can't fix. Also, I go to the College of New Jersey.
Jacquear
Jun 24, 11:14 AM
have fun carrying an iMac :)
Lol! There will be someone who tries it I'm sure
Lol! There will be someone who tries it I'm sure
Evangelion
Aug 29, 09:27 AM
Most benchmarks show the difference between the 1.5 Ghz Solo and 1.66 Ghz Duo to be about 15% for single-core apps (games) and about 30% for dual-core aware apps. So not really more than 100% more performance.
And if you run several apps at once (like most of us do), the increase is quite big indeed. And dual-core/SMP makes the system feel smoother, because no app can consume 100% of CPU-cycles.
Why are people always talking about speed of a single app? How about running several apps at once?
And if you run several apps at once (like most of us do), the increase is quite big indeed. And dual-core/SMP makes the system feel smoother, because no app can consume 100% of CPU-cycles.
Why are people always talking about speed of a single app? How about running several apps at once?
bluewire
Sep 1, 02:08 PM
So is Conroe
I know. :) I agree with you tho, I do want a Conroe in my new iMac. Damn it, 2 more weeks. :(
I know. :) I agree with you tho, I do want a Conroe in my new iMac. Damn it, 2 more weeks. :(
three
Feb 6, 03:57 PM
It has been fairly nice lately so perfect time to get her clean again. Nothing much has changed since the last time I posted, installed a Fujita F5 CAI not too long ago though. I plan on getting BC coils, and new (non fake) wheels fairly soon.
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
http://www.imgur.com/OmeHh.jpg
Built
Apr 2, 09:51 PM
Seriously? You do understand that that is a small sample of folks. Most of whom choose to gripe and moan and not to do things like return it.
Next. Selena Gomez Punched In
JUSTIN BIEBER AND SELENA GOMEZ
justin-ieber-selena-gomez
Selena Gomez#39;s “Wizards of
Justin Bieber, Selena Gomez
Justin Bieber Sends Truckloads
girlfriend Selena Gomez
Justin Bieber sends entire
girlfriend Selena gomez,
Justin Bieber wanted to go
viperguy
Aug 29, 01:55 PM
LoL
The discussion in thinksecret is so fun at the moment, you can't even imagine how.
Basically everyone was talkin about it's video card, how it should be upgraded and things like that
But then these messages came into topic
User1
I think the Mac mini has a future as long as they can get a better video output and a DVR.
User2
It'd be great if they added a nuclear reactor.
User3
Will it include a pony?
Coments? Mine: LOL
The discussion in thinksecret is so fun at the moment, you can't even imagine how.
Basically everyone was talkin about it's video card, how it should be upgraded and things like that
But then these messages came into topic
User1
I think the Mac mini has a future as long as they can get a better video output and a DVR.
User2
It'd be great if they added a nuclear reactor.
User3
Will it include a pony?
Coments? Mine: LOL
Object-X
Nov 27, 08:26 PM
Well, see... there's this little thing called market analysis and listening to the people you sell things to. I highly doubt Apple was sitting around going "we need to release something new because its been months. I know! How about a different monitor size!"
Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?
Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
Why not reduce the 20" to $399? Why should they when they seem to be selling just fine at where they are?
Dell is putting IMAGINED price pressure on Apple with their monitors. Selling cheaper crap will cost you less.
IMAGINED?
Let's look at the facts.
20" Apple $699 - Dell $399
23" Apple $999 - Dell $799 (24")
30" Apple $1999 - Dell $1499
Those are real numbers. Dell has brighter specs, more connection options, and with the 23" they have a 24" that's still $200 cheaper.
What imaginary planet are you on? $300, $200, and $500 difference in price respectively. That's real money. And it pressures people into considering a Dell. (Bad Apple!) All you are really getting for those extra hundres of dollars is a display that looks nice with your mini, MBP, or MP.
You claim that Apple's monitors are selling well, but you have no facts to back that up. Apple doesn't post their sales numbers for products like this so you're just making it up. Those sales numbers could suck a$$ and you wouldn't know. And I believe they do suck, but Apple won't tell you that, it sucks because they want them to suck. Keep reading.
I believe Apple does this to encourage people to buy iMacs. If your willing to pony up $2400 or more on a Mac Pro then maybe an extra $500 doesn't bother you for the two 30" displays your going to use, and if all you can afford is mini Apple doesn't seem to mind you buying that Dell monitor. By pricing the monitors several hundred more than they are really worth, you are now in the iMac price range. I bet if you could see and add up the numbers, buying a mini and an over priced cinema display gives Apple the same profit margin as an iMac. Apple doesn't have a mid range tower. Again, because they want to sell you an iMac. By keeping their product line simple they reduce costs; making one widget as apposed to five different widgets is cheaper. But that limits choice.
I have an iMac, but I really don't want one. I want a mid-range tower and an external monitor. I'm not alone either. Apple's monitor price is a "choice incentive". It may help their bottom line, but it limits my choice. And since I hate Windows I'm forced into Apple's program. This is really what people are complaining about here. They want a mini and 20" cinema for under $1000, and I want a 23" and tower for under $2000, not a 24" iMac!
So, back to a 17" cinema. Why would Apple do this? I don't think they will. A 17" iMac is only $899. That's where they make their money, oh, and people like me willing to pay premium because we value esthetics.
ErikGrim
Apr 4, 07:26 PM
Safari now seems to be better at registering clicks when going back and forth (using the image preview).
EDIT: Spoke too soon. Still annoying image preview (at least I've learnt to recognise them now) that you can't click before the page goes to white and then reloads. Come on apple, at least make non-interactive previews greyed out with a spinner or something (like resuming apps).
EDIT: Spoke too soon. Still annoying image preview (at least I've learnt to recognise them now) that you can't click before the page goes to white and then reloads. Come on apple, at least make non-interactive previews greyed out with a spinner or something (like resuming apps).
rxse7en
Nov 29, 03:25 PM
Ws there any mention of iTV's HD capabilities?
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
Your point is that you cannot find such a trademark as "app store" in the standard character format because "app store" is too general right? The other person posted that "pet store" would be a ridiculous example of this.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
Ok fair enough. Pet store was registered in the stylized or design format.
But your basic argument against Apple is that they cannot use app store as a trademark in the broader text format because it is too general. But this is not the only example of such a thing.
If this is the case then Apple Store will be thrown out too. It is the same type of trademark. Two words, not one and not preceded by "the".
App Store
Apple Store
The other argument is that "app" is too generic and that the term was around prior to the trademark. I do not believe this is valid either as "app" may have existed but was not widely used. The argument would have been used agains the prior trademark of "appstore" in that case.
One thing is for sure. Our opinions will have no bearing on the final outcome.
You define the lexicon of the overall society?
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
• Descriptive for the goods/services;
• A geographic term;
• A surname;
• Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 26, 02:38 PM
I am a current law student who has concentrated in IP, particularly trademark law.
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.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
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.
It was my understanding that Apple filed in 2008 and got some level of approval in early 2011. I imagine it is analogous to a "patent pending".
I imagine this case will then bear on the final full approval of the trademark.
Apple should file for "The App Store" in the interim as well as "appstore". The latter is used by amazon.
ezekielrage_99
Aug 16, 10:49 AM
I would like wireless upload for an iPod but I really have the quality of wireless headphones.
Chef Medeski
Jan 1, 07:58 PM
Pretty excited about this Stevenote.
* iTV
* Leopard
* iLife '07
The rumored stuff this year is all retarded. "Maybe we'll all get Apple phones!" And maybe I'll give a flying #$%^ at a rolling donut. I have a phone, and I spend approximately 3 minutes on it per month. My wife and I are thinking of going prepaid for this reason. The last thing I'm going to do is buy a danged smartphone.
Gah. It's all silly.
A phone is best used to make phone calls not for music. If you want to listen to music theres a nano... I dont like the idea of putting them together compromising each other.
Phone Compromises:
Worst reception or larger size due to the added multimedia.
Buttons are geared towards music instead of calls and stuff that is useful for making calls.
iPod Compromises:
Shorter battery life than iPod
No Line-out for superior audio quality.
Worst navigation for selecting songs.
I like a great phone and a great iPod. Not an alright phone and alright iPod in one place so I cant just carry one or the other.
* iTV
* Leopard
* iLife '07
The rumored stuff this year is all retarded. "Maybe we'll all get Apple phones!" And maybe I'll give a flying #$%^ at a rolling donut. I have a phone, and I spend approximately 3 minutes on it per month. My wife and I are thinking of going prepaid for this reason. The last thing I'm going to do is buy a danged smartphone.
Gah. It's all silly.
A phone is best used to make phone calls not for music. If you want to listen to music theres a nano... I dont like the idea of putting them together compromising each other.
Phone Compromises:
Worst reception or larger size due to the added multimedia.
Buttons are geared towards music instead of calls and stuff that is useful for making calls.
iPod Compromises:
Shorter battery life than iPod
No Line-out for superior audio quality.
Worst navigation for selecting songs.
I like a great phone and a great iPod. Not an alright phone and alright iPod in one place so I cant just carry one or the other.
SpookTheHamster
Jan 12, 10:45 AM
Love those BMW's..and that colour is awesome!
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
At least someone likes the colour. Even I'm not sure about it, but it's definitely unique.
ranviper
Jan 5, 12:21 AM
My jeep is currently in shop getting
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
evilgEEk
Sep 9, 09:04 PM
Can you put them side by side and run some comparisons?
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
Since I'm home for the evening and didn't see your post until now, I can't give you any specific side-by-side tests, but I can give you a rough estimate of the speeds.
Overall, the Dual G5 is faster, not by a landslide by any means, but it is faster. Of course the G5 has 1.5 gigs of RAM vs. the mini's 512K, and the G5 has a 1Ghz BUS speed vs. the 667Mhz of the mini. If I were to slap in 2 gigs of RAM in to the mini then I'm sure I would see a little more performance, but I think the G5 would still be faster.
But the mini is still very zippy, no beachballs or waiting on Apps, very fast and clean for average use. Now if I were to do some Photoshop or, say, FCP comparisons, I'm sure the G5 would clean up in those areas.
I'm really happy with the purchase though, it's perfect for what I need it to do.
Oh, I installed Windows XP via BootCamp and after having to burn an illegal copy of my legal disc (the retail disc was bad) I got it running with no problems. I must say, this mini is the fastest Windows machine I've ever had.
ibook30
Jul 14, 12:25 AM
I'm not so sure that 802.11n will necessarily be out as soon as we think. .
I agree - sadly. I believe the 802.11n will be slower to market than I would like - but am somewhat excited that Bluray is on it's way. I don't look forward to the format wars, but think bluray is a step towards a much bigger trend in high capacity portable media technology.
As long as tech companies find a way to incorporate these technologies in the market place,,. in other words I think the biggest obstacle to the advances in portable storage media will be tech companies apprehension to adopt technology that makes current offerings or recent offerings obsolete... complicated market but it could be the biggest obstacle to advancement.
I agree - sadly. I believe the 802.11n will be slower to market than I would like - but am somewhat excited that Bluray is on it's way. I don't look forward to the format wars, but think bluray is a step towards a much bigger trend in high capacity portable media technology.
As long as tech companies find a way to incorporate these technologies in the market place,,. in other words I think the biggest obstacle to the advances in portable storage media will be tech companies apprehension to adopt technology that makes current offerings or recent offerings obsolete... complicated market but it could be the biggest obstacle to advancement.
Peterkro
Mar 19, 04:37 PM
Nice edit. CNN was first. :p
The edit wasn't supposed to suggest the Beeb got it first it's just where I saw it. There really isn't a "we got if first" thing in news reporting, stuff tends to come first on the wire services and video comes from essentially auction centres (I know of two one in Atlanta and one in London ) which within seconds sells "exclusive" images on the open market.Al Jaz gets something and it's on Beeb/Cnn etc within minutes for example.
The edit wasn't supposed to suggest the Beeb got it first it's just where I saw it. There really isn't a "we got if first" thing in news reporting, stuff tends to come first on the wire services and video comes from essentially auction centres (I know of two one in Atlanta and one in London ) which within seconds sells "exclusive" images on the open market.Al Jaz gets something and it's on Beeb/Cnn etc within minutes for example.
DMann
Jan 13, 01:56 PM
I could go a MacBook Xenon (quad core) ;)
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
turbineseaplane
Jun 22, 02:08 PM
Exactly. When did the keyboard and mouse become public enemy number 1? These technologies have been perfected over years and years of real use.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Yeah. This story does absolutely nothing for me.
My interest in "touch screen desktops" is so low I can't even describe it.
If Apple introduces a touch iMac it's clearly a money grab, to sucker the public into thinking touch is somehow superior when in fact it is vastly inferior on a desktop monitor.
Yeah. This story does absolutely nothing for me.
My interest in "touch screen desktops" is so low I can't even describe it.
