ct2k7
Apr 23, 07:13 PM
Image (http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g158/MouseMeat/thatsnice_cat-1.jpg)
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
His commentary was laughing at the situation, I believe. It is also reported that they stole victim's personal items.
Shoot the messenger.
What of the laughing staff??
His commentary was laughing at the situation, I believe. It is also reported that they stole victim's personal items.
%252000000001.jpg "Justin Timberlake albums")
Whorehay
Nov 10, 05:22 PM
So I can charge more money for 2 platforms! Thats why (I think) the SlingPlayer app will not be universal. If you want to get the iPhone and iPad app it will be $60 instead of $30
And that's exactly why I will buy neither!
And that's exactly why I will buy neither!
Stella
Jul 24, 03:59 PM
come on, Apple! what we're all really waiting for is a mouse with force-feedback. for all these games.
Logitech did that years ago with two range of mice.
Now, they are no where to be seen. They were a gimmic.
Logitech did that years ago with two range of mice.
Now, they are no where to be seen. They were a gimmic.
deannnnn
Apr 23, 06:57 PM
Maybe they're testing this so that when AT&T and T-Mo combine, future iPhones will be able to use the T-Mobile 3G bands, even though the phone would still be exclusive to AT&T (and of course, Verizon).
more...
Wurm5150
Apr 22, 09:28 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
It's WiMax.. iPhone is going to be LTE. Apple is obsessed with thin design. Using two separate chip for 3G and 4G will make things too tight. I'm guessing they want the hybrid chip..
It's WiMax.. iPhone is going to be LTE. Apple is obsessed with thin design. Using two separate chip for 3G and 4G will make things too tight. I'm guessing they want the hybrid chip..
Small White Car
Apr 11, 01:36 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway?
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
more...
twoodcc
Oct 28, 05:30 PM
Congrats whiterabbit on your first bigadv unit. Team outlook looks better, yet we are not out of the woods yet.
i think we've come a long way. and if whiterabbit does bigadv units on this i7 also, then we'll really be looking good
i think we've come a long way. and if whiterabbit does bigadv units on this i7 also, then we'll really be looking good
maclaptop
Apr 13, 06:45 PM
It's all rather moot till they get authentic to the standard, and use Fiber Optics!
Substituting old fashioned wire is so misleading.
A bit faster yes, but nothing like Fiber.
Substituting old fashioned wire is so misleading.
A bit faster yes, but nothing like Fiber.
more...
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:46 AM
Image (http://dailymobile.se/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/HTC-ThunderBolt-vs-iPhone-4-Internet-Speed-Test.jpg)
Uh, no thanks. I don't need a bigger phone print in my pocket.
Just get bigger pockets. :)
Tony
Uh, no thanks. I don't need a bigger phone print in my pocket.
Just get bigger pockets. :)
Tony
Meall
Apr 13, 02:40 PM
Apple is ont in th� mariera where there is small profit. So why a TV set would be I nteresting for them.
Anyone wants an Apple iPod hi-fi?
:eek:
Anyone wants an Apple iPod hi-fi?
:eek:
more...
dernhelm
Oct 19, 07:39 AM
Is there anything really innovative there? I don't think so. Yes, MacPro is an example of beautiful engineering, but there's not much innovation in there.
So what are you expecting? The computer industry hasn't been truly innovative since the first ICs were produced. I suppose you could claim the invention of the mouse was relatively innovative, but certainly not the addition of the keyboard - those had been used in typewriters for years! For the rest of it, all it is is binary mathematics - with short and long term storage - this was all stuff mathematicians had a handle on for millenia. Nothing innovative there right? The internet? Not really innovative, people had been connecting PCs together with serial and parallel cables for years before that. The internet did it better, but so what? To be truly innovative, you must come up with something that no one else has ever done, right?
In case you hadn't noticed, pretty much everything in the computer industry had been done before, or can be seen as an adaption of something else. So by your definition, there are no new ideas and therefore no innovation anywhere. Which leads me to ask, what innovative things are you looking for, that you feel you can criticize Apple for not being innovative enough?
So what are you expecting? The computer industry hasn't been truly innovative since the first ICs were produced. I suppose you could claim the invention of the mouse was relatively innovative, but certainly not the addition of the keyboard - those had been used in typewriters for years! For the rest of it, all it is is binary mathematics - with short and long term storage - this was all stuff mathematicians had a handle on for millenia. Nothing innovative there right? The internet? Not really innovative, people had been connecting PCs together with serial and parallel cables for years before that. The internet did it better, but so what? To be truly innovative, you must come up with something that no one else has ever done, right?
In case you hadn't noticed, pretty much everything in the computer industry had been done before, or can be seen as an adaption of something else. So by your definition, there are no new ideas and therefore no innovation anywhere. Which leads me to ask, what innovative things are you looking for, that you feel you can criticize Apple for not being innovative enough?
stockscalper
Apr 18, 07:37 AM
While these Sandy Bridge processors are considerably faster in lab benchmarks, they offer no discernible real-world improvement for most users. Having used a MacBook Pro with a C2D and then one of the new Sandy Bridge, I couldn't tell the difference.
As MacBook Air owners know, it's all about the SSD speed for improving the experience for everyday users.
Very true. Plus, turbo mode is mostly marketing hype. It should be called turbo fraud. It doesn't work the way it's advertised, ie, most of the time when you need it to. So, what you're really getting is a 1.4 GHZ computer that's advertised as a 2.3 GHZ one. That's taking marketing hype to the extreme. The only way I would buy a computer with one of Intel's turbo hyped CPU's is if the bottom score met my needs. I would never rely on the hyped theoretical upper score in making my decision and in this case 1.4 GHZ doesn't cut it for me.
As MacBook Air owners know, it's all about the SSD speed for improving the experience for everyday users.
Very true. Plus, turbo mode is mostly marketing hype. It should be called turbo fraud. It doesn't work the way it's advertised, ie, most of the time when you need it to. So, what you're really getting is a 1.4 GHZ computer that's advertised as a 2.3 GHZ one. That's taking marketing hype to the extreme. The only way I would buy a computer with one of Intel's turbo hyped CPU's is if the bottom score met my needs. I would never rely on the hyped theoretical upper score in making my decision and in this case 1.4 GHZ doesn't cut it for me.
more...
mikeschmeee
Apr 8, 07:55 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5024/5601434891_05c08e7522.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5601434891/)
beg_ne
Jul 28, 08:31 AM
I'm curious. Are they really allowed to do this kind of stuff under their Monopoly status? I would think that, "Breaking into a market and losing Billions of dollars to crush your competition and former 'partners' while sustaining your product on your Monopoly money". Might be against some restriction they have. Am I just nuts or is someone asleep at the wheel.
As for their partners I think I'll be lining up for my lawsuit about now. Especially since I'm sure they have to pay to be "PlaysForSure" compliant, and may have shown MS their Software, Hardware and Music Stores in intimate detail to get that compliancy. In one way or another their money and knowledge in part will fund the very thing that MS will try to crush them with.
As for their partners I think I'll be lining up for my lawsuit about now. Especially since I'm sure they have to pay to be "PlaysForSure" compliant, and may have shown MS their Software, Hardware and Music Stores in intimate detail to get that compliancy. In one way or another their money and knowledge in part will fund the very thing that MS will try to crush them with.
more...
Pandaboots
Jan 26, 03:29 AM
I've lost a bit. :( actually quite a lot. I bought at around 170ish a while ago in prepare for the surge of macworld like last year but am at a bit of a loss right now. I think my avatar shows my recent mood.
You haven't lost anything until you actually sell. Maybe this story will help:
Apple was the last stock I bought back during the dot com days of the late 90's/early 2000's. I got burned trying to buy and sell all the dot coms on a daily basis, so I decided that I'd "invest" what I had left in Apple. Anyway, I bought Apple at $49/share in the year 2000. I thought it was a great price for whatever reason. Guess what? The price fell to around $7 within a very short period of time. Go look at a chart and you will see the cliff in which I speak of. However, I didn't lose my cool. I was in it for the long haul, so I maintained my position. I think patience is key to investing. Long story short, I did sell at $200 recently because I wanted to diversify those earnings and made a 720% return on my investment. So essentially, my original investment more than doubled itself each year I owned the stock. Why $200? I don't know, they had been so close to it for a while that it just sounded like a good round number. Anyway, I've had my fair share of doubts throughout my 7 year stint with Apple. I never dreamed Apple would be at $200/share. I've seen huge dips in their price in short periods of time, and I've also seen huge gains too. I've also had the stock split on me too. I've also felt it was doomed and there's no way it could ever do this or ever do that....
Think about what all has happened with Apple since 2000: I've seen OS X launched, the iPod launched, iTunes launched, the switch to flat screens, all the computers they've launched, iLife, iWork, iPhone, :apple:TV, addition of movies and tv shows, etc. etc. So here's why I invested in Apple in 2000:
1) I loved the company
2) I loved their products
3) I got excited about their products
4) I was a proud customer
5) I actually kept up with what was going on with the company (mainly through appleinsider and then macrumors shortly thereafter)
6) I knew Apple was innovative and had good leadership
7) I read all of the magazines related to Apple and talked everyones ear off about Apple
However, I didn't choose Apple because of the iPod (it didn't exist then), or whether or not they expected their 2nd qtr to be better than their all time greatest qtr in history. In a nutshell I chose Apple because I believed in their products/their management team/and their ability to produce a quality product that excites people.
So, I guess what you have to ask yourself is, in the next 7 years where will Apple be as far as products and innovation? Only thing I know is since re-investing in them in December at $182, they've released :apple:TV 2, movie rentals, Macbook Air, Time Capsule, an 8 core mac pro and a pink nano (lol). I think Apple is poised and ready to dominate other markets now..pfft iPod, that's so 5 years ago, blah blah blah, Apple owns the market and will maintain their dominance, now it's time for them to dominate in the movies and the phones and hopefully in computers.
If you think they are done, then I'd be worried and sell your shares as soon as you can. If you still believe in Apple, like I do, average down your shares while you can and hold on. At these prices right now, Apple can easily double in value again. They are better positioned than ever to take on their competition. All my 7 reasons above are as true today as they were 7 years ago and 7 years prior to that. :)
You haven't lost anything until you actually sell. Maybe this story will help:
Apple was the last stock I bought back during the dot com days of the late 90's/early 2000's. I got burned trying to buy and sell all the dot coms on a daily basis, so I decided that I'd "invest" what I had left in Apple. Anyway, I bought Apple at $49/share in the year 2000. I thought it was a great price for whatever reason. Guess what? The price fell to around $7 within a very short period of time. Go look at a chart and you will see the cliff in which I speak of. However, I didn't lose my cool. I was in it for the long haul, so I maintained my position. I think patience is key to investing. Long story short, I did sell at $200 recently because I wanted to diversify those earnings and made a 720% return on my investment. So essentially, my original investment more than doubled itself each year I owned the stock. Why $200? I don't know, they had been so close to it for a while that it just sounded like a good round number. Anyway, I've had my fair share of doubts throughout my 7 year stint with Apple. I never dreamed Apple would be at $200/share. I've seen huge dips in their price in short periods of time, and I've also seen huge gains too. I've also had the stock split on me too. I've also felt it was doomed and there's no way it could ever do this or ever do that....
Think about what all has happened with Apple since 2000: I've seen OS X launched, the iPod launched, iTunes launched, the switch to flat screens, all the computers they've launched, iLife, iWork, iPhone, :apple:TV, addition of movies and tv shows, etc. etc. So here's why I invested in Apple in 2000:
1) I loved the company
2) I loved their products
3) I got excited about their products
4) I was a proud customer
5) I actually kept up with what was going on with the company (mainly through appleinsider and then macrumors shortly thereafter)
6) I knew Apple was innovative and had good leadership
7) I read all of the magazines related to Apple and talked everyones ear off about Apple
However, I didn't choose Apple because of the iPod (it didn't exist then), or whether or not they expected their 2nd qtr to be better than their all time greatest qtr in history. In a nutshell I chose Apple because I believed in their products/their management team/and their ability to produce a quality product that excites people.
So, I guess what you have to ask yourself is, in the next 7 years where will Apple be as far as products and innovation? Only thing I know is since re-investing in them in December at $182, they've released :apple:TV 2, movie rentals, Macbook Air, Time Capsule, an 8 core mac pro and a pink nano (lol). I think Apple is poised and ready to dominate other markets now..pfft iPod, that's so 5 years ago, blah blah blah, Apple owns the market and will maintain their dominance, now it's time for them to dominate in the movies and the phones and hopefully in computers.
If you think they are done, then I'd be worried and sell your shares as soon as you can. If you still believe in Apple, like I do, average down your shares while you can and hold on. At these prices right now, Apple can easily double in value again. They are better positioned than ever to take on their competition. All my 7 reasons above are as true today as they were 7 years ago and 7 years prior to that. :)
Lesser Evets
Apr 11, 03:10 PM
It's a great step. I can't imagine needing more speed than a Thunderbolt connection, for the next decade, IMO. Most people don't specifically need such speed, but it is good to have. As for professional use for large files and video editing: boffo. Looks brilliant.
more...
aibo82
Mar 29, 08:22 AM
There won't be iPhone 5!
It will be the launch of the White iPhone 4 to fall in line with the White iPad 2!
With an A5 chip and called the iPhone 4S! That's it ready for iOS 5 then we'll see the major spec bump next year! (iphone5)
iPad 2 got bad cams because of the thinness bull if they stick an 8mp cam in the new iPhone in a few months I'll be **** as they could of stuck the 5mp ones in iPad 2 and fattened it up 1mm!
;)
It will be the launch of the White iPhone 4 to fall in line with the White iPad 2!
With an A5 chip and called the iPhone 4S! That's it ready for iOS 5 then we'll see the major spec bump next year! (iphone5)
iPad 2 got bad cams because of the thinness bull if they stick an 8mp cam in the new iPhone in a few months I'll be **** as they could of stuck the 5mp ones in iPad 2 and fattened it up 1mm!
;)
cms2
Apr 15, 01:59 PM
no
yech. :(
yech. :(
louis Fashion
Apr 26, 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by Darlo770
Should have bloody known >
Originally Posted by louis Fashion
Well they won't be charging me.
You wouldn't consider paying $20 per YEAR?
No, I pay Verizon, I pay COMCAST, I have my music on my iPods/iPad/Imacs another monthly fee is just one bridge too far. If you need it/want it bless you. I have to draw the line somewhere
Should have bloody known >
Originally Posted by louis Fashion
Well they won't be charging me.
You wouldn't consider paying $20 per YEAR?
No, I pay Verizon, I pay COMCAST, I have my music on my iPods/iPad/Imacs another monthly fee is just one bridge too far. If you need it/want it bless you. I have to draw the line somewhere
arjaosx
Apr 13, 03:03 PM
I don't want to join in the bandwagon of naysayers who think they know Apple very well because none of us actually do.
Instead, I'll look at how it can possibly be true.
First point: The iPhone was released amidst a sea of dumb smartphones but did this fact stop Apple from dominating and changing the market, so I a crowded market a deterrent to Apple to re-introduce TV to the world? NO
Second point: The way TV is done by current competitors and Apple themselves, is that the focus is being heavily shifted to go through the web, which of course traditional media firms don't like. But what if you have an appliance that connects the way it did to traditional networks but once contents gets in you can control it the way you want. Apple is about user experience, maybe they have developed a way to make traditional TV more fun and interactive to use.
Third point: Apple is an electronic appliance company now more than ever and have been eyeing on capturing the living room for a while now. The TV is the center of the living room and instead of plugging in on to one why not make an actual set, that way you cut out competition from more established appliance manufacturers?
Fourth point: Apple already has a game console which is considered the hub of home entertainment, it's called iPad.
So is it still impossible for Apple to bring out a TV? NO. So let's just wait for new information to come.
Instead, I'll look at how it can possibly be true.
First point: The iPhone was released amidst a sea of dumb smartphones but did this fact stop Apple from dominating and changing the market, so I a crowded market a deterrent to Apple to re-introduce TV to the world? NO
Second point: The way TV is done by current competitors and Apple themselves, is that the focus is being heavily shifted to go through the web, which of course traditional media firms don't like. But what if you have an appliance that connects the way it did to traditional networks but once contents gets in you can control it the way you want. Apple is about user experience, maybe they have developed a way to make traditional TV more fun and interactive to use.
Third point: Apple is an electronic appliance company now more than ever and have been eyeing on capturing the living room for a while now. The TV is the center of the living room and instead of plugging in on to one why not make an actual set, that way you cut out competition from more established appliance manufacturers?
Fourth point: Apple already has a game console which is considered the hub of home entertainment, it's called iPad.
So is it still impossible for Apple to bring out a TV? NO. So let's just wait for new information to come.
thadoggfather
Apr 28, 08:27 PM
some comparisons with my iResQ back:
http://i.imgur.com/gJSle.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Xd8yb.jpg
:)
http://i.imgur.com/gJSle.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/Xd8yb.jpg
:)
YoNeX
Nov 4, 11:07 AM
I'm on a PPC but plan to go MacTel next year when Adobe releases Universal versions of Creative Suite. I have some questions about VMware & Parallels if you don't mind me adding it to the thread:
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
1. Do they require Windows partitions, and if so how much disk space is needed?
2. If a partition is needed, can you run the partition on an external drive so as to free up space on your internal? (I'll be using a MacBook Pro so that's why I ask).
3. Can anyone tell me anything about syncing a Palm device with Parallels or VMware? In particular I'm wondering how easily (if at all) I could sync my Treo with Windows apps as well as OS X apps. This would be huge to me.
thx.
1. Currently VMware fusion only allows you to do to create a VMware image. This acts as like a virtual hard drive, so you would then have to partition accordingly. There is a network install, but VMware has not enabled the feature (to my knowledge).
2. See above
3. You should be able to sync with it, because like Parallels and VMware it allows you to connect it to the XP just by checking a tab to tell it to connect to it. So no issues here.
The main feature it is lacking for me right now is the shared folder. This would be very uself for some of the stuff that I would be doing.
BigReg
Jul 28, 10:16 AM
APPLE doesn't have much in a choice about keeping patents secret. We (the over-curious consumers) are the ones making all the hype for them.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
This is where you are *very* uninformed and making assumptions. I work for a Fortune 100 company and I have a patent pending that is *not* visible in a search for patent applications. The only time they must become visible is when they are issued. In pending state, they very much *do* have a choice.
Don't panic
Apr 26, 03:59 PM
so it's plutonius with 5.
hopefully you guys are right (although that would make me and appleguy prime suspects).
what are the little arrows next to the quote button?
hopefully you guys are right (although that would make me and appleguy prime suspects).
what are the little arrows next to the quote button?