macintel4me
Sep 5, 07:58 PM
ok, just made a quick mockup of what i would like to see announced next week :cool:
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
That with a built-in iPod dock that syncs wirelessly. SWEET!!!! :D
That way you could stream wirelessly or play with whatever is on the iPod.
http://users.pandora.be/blackbox/airport_video.png
and make shure it also works with video_ts folders and avi/divx files (maybe via a front row API for third party developers like VLC?) ;)
this would perfectly complement that itunes movie store
That with a built-in iPod dock that syncs wirelessly. SWEET!!!! :D
That way you could stream wirelessly or play with whatever is on the iPod.
jelloshotsrule
Oct 27, 09:06 AM
How many trees were harmed in the production of their leaflets?
And were they produced on a "non-green" MAC?
:rolleyes:
your logic is brilliant. since they had to use non-green items in spreading their information, then they are hypocrites and shouldn't push for improvement of materials. good point!
of course you ignore that there are many sources of recycled paper, soy based inks, etc etc which their leaflets could very well have been made from (though i don't know for a fact that they were.)
And were they produced on a "non-green" MAC?
:rolleyes:
your logic is brilliant. since they had to use non-green items in spreading their information, then they are hypocrites and shouldn't push for improvement of materials. good point!
of course you ignore that there are many sources of recycled paper, soy based inks, etc etc which their leaflets could very well have been made from (though i don't know for a fact that they were.)
Mac Fly (film)
Sep 4, 08:04 PM
I hope the movies are available in HD. Ever since apple started offering HD movie trailers I've been drooling over the idea of downloading a full length movie in that quality.
I know what you mean, cause that quality is delicious. :)
I know what you mean, cause that quality is delicious. :)
karthi
Sep 19, 04:02 PM
I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
rovex
Apr 30, 05:53 PM
A redesign in 2012?
That seems to align with all the big changes expected for the iPhone, iPad and MacBook pro.
That seems to align with all the big changes expected for the iPhone, iPad and MacBook pro.
George Knighton
Mar 11, 06:47 AM
Wrong. It takes more than a swipe. It requires user interaction.
Yes, it did, but let's be clear: It was the team's choice to need the degree of user interaction that was required. This is why it was patched so quickly...it was a big security hole and when word got out how it could be done, Apple had to move quickly because almost anybody could do it.
Is there nothing AV trolls won't stoop to in their vain efforts to sell their useless software?
Probably not.
But it might backfire on them. I can just imagine that future Apple operating systems might very well include native protection that wold continue to thwart people wanting to sell anti-malware for Apple OS.
Yes, it did, but let's be clear: It was the team's choice to need the degree of user interaction that was required. This is why it was patched so quickly...it was a big security hole and when word got out how it could be done, Apple had to move quickly because almost anybody could do it.
Is there nothing AV trolls won't stoop to in their vain efforts to sell their useless software?
Probably not.
But it might backfire on them. I can just imagine that future Apple operating systems might very well include native protection that wold continue to thwart people wanting to sell anti-malware for Apple OS.
Balli
Aug 29, 05:34 AM
I imagine Santa Rosa would be long gone by summer '08.
Why? Is Santa Rosa not due out around spring / summer 2007? I am sure it will still be around a year after it is released.
Why? Is Santa Rosa not due out around spring / summer 2007? I am sure it will still be around a year after it is released.
stroked
Apr 4, 12:32 PM
Was It really necessary to kill him?
No
Anyone who is trained with a hand gun, is told to shoot to kill. This scum deserved to die.
No
Anyone who is trained with a hand gun, is told to shoot to kill. This scum deserved to die.
mwayne85
Mar 22, 02:32 PM
This is good news... but they REALLY need to get rid of the chin. That would be my dream desktop aesthetically.
Multimedia
Jul 20, 11:27 PM
You don't think Apple would get raked over the coals if they released towers that were slower than the last generation? Conroe is fast, but no way it beats a quad G5. And I don't think a promise of a quad machine later on helps public relations any.
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
Also, doesn't the kentsfield have the same limitation as conroe? That you can only use it in single processor configs? A woodcrest chipset would have a longer life since you'd use the same one for multiple cloverton configs.
Next gen, conroe gets you 2 cores, woodcrest gives you 2 chips for 4 cores.
Gen after that, kentsfield gets you 4 cores, cloverton gets you 2 chips for 8 cores. There's room for both chipsets for at least the next two generations, and I wouldn't be surprised if it continues beyond that.Maybe I misunderstood your post, I thought you meant releasing conroe machines and not shipping quads until months later. If that were the case, people would inevitably compare the new towers to the G5 quads, regardless if they were intended to replace those models.
I think the reason they haven't announced woodcrest towers is because they want to wait for WWDC, and because the line will be split between woodcrest and conroe. It wouldn't make sense to announce half the tower lineup, people would assume that was it and react accordingly.I believe this is the correct analysis. I am in full agreement with Milo. Good job M. :)
theelysium
May 3, 04:11 PM
Because the iMac Display mode apparently is Thunderbolt-dependent, not backward compatible with DisplayPort-only systems, I wonder if this means you will be able to daisy-chain iMacs? For example, have one iMac in the center as the master; two iMacs (one on either side) each connected via Thunderbolt to the center, acting as two displays. Then, could you slave two more Cinema Displays (or any DisplayPort monitor, even more iMacs!) from those two 'outer' iMacs for a total of five displays? Apple said in the first generation of ThunderBolt systems that they could support two displays per Thunderbolt port with daisy-chaining, and AMD's chips can support up to 6 displays.
You could just use teleport http://www.abyssoft.com/software/teleport/
You could just use teleport http://www.abyssoft.com/software/teleport/
jonnyb
Apr 20, 09:57 AM
When did 'reached out' become a better phrase to use than simply 'contacted'?
cere
Apr 14, 01:33 PM
"You mean like FW was faster than USB and USB2? And yes, it will work with any USB device. You think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? Really?"
^ You implying it will be DOA. For someone criticizing reading comprehension I sure have to do a lot of work for you.
Here's the gist of your worthless posts:
Insult
Insult
Strawman argument
Insult
What a joke.
I was asking you what I thought would be an easy question for you to answer. I'll ask again, it will work with any USB device, do you think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? I'll wait.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle difference from a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.
^ You implying it will be DOA. For someone criticizing reading comprehension I sure have to do a lot of work for you.
Here's the gist of your worthless posts:
Insult
Insult
Strawman argument
Insult
What a joke.
I was asking you what I thought would be an easy question for you to answer. I'll ask again, it will work with any USB device, do you think that is an incentive for drive vendors to invest in it? I'll wait.
And I've posted no strawman arguments. I didn't insult you either. It was an observation. Reading difficulty is a problem, sure, but it is a a challenge that many people face. I am hopeful that those with this limitation can better themselves perhaps by taking some courses. Dialog is always better with someone that understands and can follow the discussion.
To properly recap, I believe it could be a repeat of FW and it could end up being considered 'Mac only'. I know it is subtle difference from a claim it will be DOA (well, subtle like a baseball bat, I guess), but it shouldn't be this difficult for you to understand. You are really, truly, picking the wrong fight. I think we actually agree on a lot of points. I'd like it to succeed, but can see things that might be obstacles. You don't see those as obstacles or perhaps don't see them at all. But, really, stop arguing against things I never said.
Benjy91
Mar 22, 01:34 PM
Like Squirrels you must store these "Mac" rumor articles, for the cold, iOS rumor months to follow. ;)
Chundles
Oct 13, 03:32 AM
I agree, this thing is not about doing something good, it's about buying a gimmick that says to everyone "I gave to charity" while in reality you were not spending one dime more than you would have spent on the gimmick that you wanted to buy anyway. What kind of shite is this where you just want to show around that you're a good person while in reality you couldn't get your thumbs out of your butt to donate anything at all, not even 10 bucks. It's called VANITY, not Charity. Write a small check for crying out loud if you want to do something, it's even deductable, and attach the receipt to your favourite shirt so everyone can see if you feel so strongly about it.
This ipod thingy is about you feeling good, not about much else. To you it feels like a 200 Dollar donation, also might help you to convince yourself to buy yet another gadget..pardon me, do some charity for africa, apple's sales go up a bit, they'll make a little less money on the ipod, 10 bucks (which may however be deductable, I don't know) but basically will benefit from it too because they sold a couple more at a slightly lower but still pretty good profit margin. Sure, some bucks go to Africa but let's be honest here: Apple makes more money, the consumer gets to wear a stylish gimmick with good-person-tag at no extra charge... now that's some serious altruism there.
Hooray to those that, the next time they will be confronted with some reporting on Aids in Africa, will be able to caress that small, hard bulge in their pocket (red iPod!), touching it and whispering "I did my share to solve the problem".
Who cares if it's vanity? I'd rather somebody buy a Red iPod and feel good about themselves, be able to brag to their friends and show off to the community than for the same person to otherwise do nothing.
As long as it's legal I'm pretty sure the folks in charge of the aid money don't care where the money's coming from. I don't think the AIDS sufferers in Africa give a rat's arse that the money that helps their problems comes from rampant western consumerism - they're just happy to have some help.
I think it's a good idea.
This ipod thingy is about you feeling good, not about much else. To you it feels like a 200 Dollar donation, also might help you to convince yourself to buy yet another gadget..pardon me, do some charity for africa, apple's sales go up a bit, they'll make a little less money on the ipod, 10 bucks (which may however be deductable, I don't know) but basically will benefit from it too because they sold a couple more at a slightly lower but still pretty good profit margin. Sure, some bucks go to Africa but let's be honest here: Apple makes more money, the consumer gets to wear a stylish gimmick with good-person-tag at no extra charge... now that's some serious altruism there.
Hooray to those that, the next time they will be confronted with some reporting on Aids in Africa, will be able to caress that small, hard bulge in their pocket (red iPod!), touching it and whispering "I did my share to solve the problem".
Who cares if it's vanity? I'd rather somebody buy a Red iPod and feel good about themselves, be able to brag to their friends and show off to the community than for the same person to otherwise do nothing.
As long as it's legal I'm pretty sure the folks in charge of the aid money don't care where the money's coming from. I don't think the AIDS sufferers in Africa give a rat's arse that the money that helps their problems comes from rampant western consumerism - they're just happy to have some help.
I think it's a good idea.
vvswarup
Apr 30, 09:49 PM
Microsoft doesn't really play in the consumer / gadget / toy market, which simply means that you don't get to see most of their products unless you work in a corporate data center. And unlike Apple, Microsoft -has- data center / server products that people WANT to use and that are years ahead of the pack (Sharepoint Portal Server, Exchange Server, SQL Server, Terminal Services, just to name a few) - and a LOT of their RD goes there.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
This sounds like "sour grapes."
Also, nobody here should kid themselves - Microsoft still OWNS the desktop and office suite markets. Around a BILLION computers run their software, and even most Macs are dead in the water without Microsoft Office and/or Microsoft Windows (in Boot Camp, Parallels, Fusion, VirtualBox).
That's the whole point. Microsoft owns the desktop and office suite markets, yet, Microsoft is unwilling to move on to markets that have more potential to grow.
So Apple was more profitable in the last quarter. Big deal. Somebody with enough time on their hands might want to analyze the spending behavior and amount of staff and level of salaries to find out -WHY- that was the case. Maybe the guys at Microsoft have higher salaries and more vacation. Maybe Ballmer put more money into RD and marketing than in the last quarter. Maybe they bought more startups than before.
Nice try, but you're dead wrong here. Apple already beat Microsoft in revenue a couple of quarters ago. So don't even try to chalk it up to Apple being "cheap." Apple has already beaten Microsoft in Revenue.
Actually, who cares. Both companies are extremely profitable, but Microsoft has been profitable for a couple of decades more than Apple (who almost died in the 1990s while Microsoft was making more money than anybody else).
Now this is trying to make light of the matter. Apple beat out what was once the world's largest tech company. When Apple's market cap surpassed Microsoft's, people called Apple overvalued. They still call Apple overvalued. Now, Apple has beaten Microsoft in profits.
TheKrillr
Sep 5, 05:57 PM
Strange, the movie store is the thing that I am least excited about :confused: But I still hope for new imac and/or mbp.
Why is it everyone says "Ooooh i want a new macbook pro!"? I personally like the macbooks much better. The keyboard is nicer IMO, and I prefer the smaller size and the solid-color as opposed to the metallic finish.
I want a new Macbook, but ONLY if they upgrade the one i ordered last tuesday... >.>
Why is it everyone says "Ooooh i want a new macbook pro!"? I personally like the macbooks much better. The keyboard is nicer IMO, and I prefer the smaller size and the solid-color as opposed to the metallic finish.
I want a new Macbook, but ONLY if they upgrade the one i ordered last tuesday... >.>
Bonte
Sep 5, 02:23 AM
I just want a cheap Mini and a way to put games in FrontRow, why not sell small games via iTunes?
ayzee
Mar 24, 06:32 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8F190 Safari/6533.18.5)
Nice to see a substantial rumor to keep us going for the next few weeks. I've been waiting to upgrade from my 2008 C2D iMac for the last 6 months.
I have a plasma running off my iMac for home theatre purposes, and I must say it really struggles now with 1080p content. iMovie is unusable and my big iphoto library freezes constantly. When trying to access My 1.5TB iTunes library the beachball greats me with every click.
Still this iMac would be perfect for your average user.
My biggest wish would be the SSD for a quick start up, I just hate to see 1k worth of kit being sluggish!
I also love the way the apple displays look, if apple could somehow rid the iMac of the aluminium chin it would look so much better
They should also come with 8gb ram as standard, especially the i7
Nice to see a substantial rumor to keep us going for the next few weeks. I've been waiting to upgrade from my 2008 C2D iMac for the last 6 months.
I have a plasma running off my iMac for home theatre purposes, and I must say it really struggles now with 1080p content. iMovie is unusable and my big iphoto library freezes constantly. When trying to access My 1.5TB iTunes library the beachball greats me with every click.
Still this iMac would be perfect for your average user.
My biggest wish would be the SSD for a quick start up, I just hate to see 1k worth of kit being sluggish!
I also love the way the apple displays look, if apple could somehow rid the iMac of the aluminium chin it would look so much better
They should also come with 8gb ram as standard, especially the i7
MagnusVonMagnum
Mar 17, 06:36 PM
The Safari exploit launched a Mac OSX program. How is that NOT an "OS" issue? The exploit could have just as easily told the Mac to delete a directory on the hard drive, for instance. So it's not just Safari that's an issue but the fact that OSX would let Safari execute a program outside the browser.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
I'd like to know where this idea that "many have tried" to create viruses and/or malware for OSX comes from. How do you know what people have done or tried? I'm not saying Unix is easy to exploit, but I know darn well it's not invulnerable. If they held an OS hacking event with a prize, I'm sure someone would prove my point for me.
And this idea that nothing can be done on the Mac until a virus or other malware exploit shows up on a news site is absurd. There are plenty of tools out there, for instance, to point out dangerous web sites that could be a threat to a computer. Most OSX users wouldn't bother to install one if one was offered to them because they believe themselves invulnerable. So why worry about visiting a malware site? Some exploits are potentially cross-platform (adobe flash, for example). Again, I say most OSX users are far too comfortable in a foolish belief that they are not in danger from anything out there.
cube
May 3, 11:49 AM
...that if each Thunderbolt port can support six daisy chained pieces of kit, if each one of those was a TB-equipped 30" monitor, we could have a 27" iMac with a 13-screen setup and 387" of screen real-estate?!! I need to buy a bigger house!!!!
Thunderbolt is DisplayPort 1.1a - DisplayPort 1.2 has daisy chain and much more bandwidth than a TB channel.
Even with DP 1.2, the bandwidth of one port is only enough for two 30" displays.
You can only run one 30" display from each Thunderbolt port.
Thunderbolt is DisplayPort 1.1a - DisplayPort 1.2 has daisy chain and much more bandwidth than a TB channel.
Even with DP 1.2, the bandwidth of one port is only enough for two 30" displays.
You can only run one 30" display from each Thunderbolt port.
TrollToddington
Apr 22, 01:42 PM
I do hope that processor speed bump will not be the only change in the new MBAs. However, looking at Samsung 9 's pricepoint and what it offers makes me feel discouraged that Apple will put larger SSDs in the new MBAs.
Perhaps the new selling points will be:
- much faster processors - closing the gap to the 13" MBP
- increased battery life - 5:30-6 hours on 11", > 7 hours on 13"
I think it's unlikely that we see larger SSDs as standard on MBA until IB
Perhaps the new selling points will be:
- much faster processors - closing the gap to the 13" MBP
- increased battery life - 5:30-6 hours on 11", > 7 hours on 13"
I think it's unlikely that we see larger SSDs as standard on MBA until IB
ciTiger
Apr 28, 04:06 PM
This was a long time coming!
But I hope MSFT stays in the race... Competition is good...
But I hope MSFT stays in the race... Competition is good...
Sobering
Sep 4, 03:32 PM
New iMacs? Are you freakin kidding me? I just bought a damn iMac and now there is already new ones! Pffff...
0 comments:
Post a Comment