sejanus
Aug 7, 06:18 PM
Does anyone know if this systems absolutely *REQUIRES* ECC RAM?
ECC is very expensive!
ECC is very expensive!
ViviUO
Apr 23, 07:08 PM
I really REALLY hope they do not use that ugly picture as the default background when Lion is retail.
Megaman
Sep 11, 01:20 PM
With USB2, which transfers to iPod about the same speed as FW.
No its not. Fast, but not as fast.
No its not. Fast, but not as fast.
thenewperson
Mar 29, 09:10 AM
I think Apple will probably have the same deal as Amazon.
Amazon just beat them to the punch with this launch.
The deal from Apple will be that you will get 5GB when you open a account in Mobile Me and you will pay $20 for 20GB of space.
This might be the revamp that everyone is talking about with Mobile Me.
What do you guys think?
I think you're right.
Amazon just beat them to the punch with this launch.
The deal from Apple will be that you will get 5GB when you open a account in Mobile Me and you will pay $20 for 20GB of space.
This might be the revamp that everyone is talking about with Mobile Me.
What do you guys think?
I think you're right.
w_parietti22
Jul 30, 01:16 AM
Please dont call it an "iPhone" that is so... no. if it was called iPhone I dont think that I would buy it. if it was MacPhone Pro or something like that than maybe... ;). No but please dont name it either of those. Come up with something new and original.
NAG
Apr 25, 10:17 AM
Am I the only one who thinks it's not a big deal? Your carrier tracks your phone all the ff-ing time. Google has the SSL beta now, but until recently they tracked your every move.
And with the patriot act the telecos let the government move in and access data without warrants. Yet everyone seems fine with this. However, the instant your phone has a database of cell phone towers it is something nefarious. Sigh. It really would be nice if the real privacy concerns were addressed and not this low hanging fruit of a cache on your phone.
And with the patriot act the telecos let the government move in and access data without warrants. Yet everyone seems fine with this. However, the instant your phone has a database of cell phone towers it is something nefarious. Sigh. It really would be nice if the real privacy concerns were addressed and not this low hanging fruit of a cache on your phone.
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
KnightWRX
May 6, 07:37 AM
Microsoft isnt switching over to just ARM. They're just making Windows compatible on ARM. For their Windows 8 Tablets most likely.
Bingo, surprising it took 10 pages for someone to point out the obvious. It was starting to get funny reading about "Windows 8 on ARM!" as if that points to anything as far as laptops/desktops go.
It's not like Windows running on something other than x86 or x86_64 is surprising anyhow. Windows NT had ports to PPC, MIPS, Alpha and more recently ia64 during it's long history (that dates back to 1993).
Bingo, surprising it took 10 pages for someone to point out the obvious. It was starting to get funny reading about "Windows 8 on ARM!" as if that points to anything as far as laptops/desktops go.
It's not like Windows running on something other than x86 or x86_64 is surprising anyhow. Windows NT had ports to PPC, MIPS, Alpha and more recently ia64 during it's long history (that dates back to 1993).
nasty devil
Apr 24, 12:46 AM
Are the current iMacs not retina enough? Lol
But I wouldn't mind, if prices are the same :D
But I wouldn't mind, if prices are the same :D
tipdrill407
Aug 7, 10:03 PM
Uh, that's the point: you shouldn't have to 'pay more' - it should be standard, and shouldn't raise the price-point, if other manufacturers can do it.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
I don't get the apologists who defend every questionable component from Apple by saying 'well, I don't want to pay extra in the base price' (for a reasonable amount of RAM or for a decent videocard) - demand more from Apple.
Ask why you can't have a $2500 flagship desktop with a graphics card that didn't cost Apple $40, why Apple can't eat the extra $45 to offer their consumer items with a usable amount of RAM standard.
The base model offers more than enough features for a pro to work blazingly fast. The graphics card is adequate for A LOT of things, except maybe hardcore gaming. But again Apple never intended the Mac Pro to be used for shooting ppl.
Yvan256
Jul 30, 09:33 AM
Really, guys. How many times have we been through this?
As many times as "Apple is switching to Intel", I'd guess.
[...] Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. [...] The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
It's true in Canada, too. I went with a 3-years contract with Bell Mobility and my phone (a LG something) was free.
As many times as "Apple is switching to Intel", I'd guess.
[...] Americans are used to getting free or cheap phones when they sign up for a carrier contract. [...] The way I understand it, the rest of the world pays full retail everytime they want a new phone. Is this right?
It's true in Canada, too. I went with a 3-years contract with Bell Mobility and my phone (a LG something) was free.
alent1234
Apr 7, 11:23 AM
apple was supposed to have bought up all the smartphone displays as well, yet it's easy to buy an Atrix, Inspire or any other android phone. manufacturers just use screen sizes that apple doesn't use
QCassidy352
Sep 15, 08:18 PM
before the imac update I thought a new GPU was a given. Now I'm not sure. If this is nothing but a processor change, that's going to be one of the most disappointing updates in years.
dethmaShine
Apr 7, 10:22 AM
^This.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Yes, they have been to the most part and some times have been a bitch.
Unfortunately, most posters here think Apple always acts in the best interests of its customers. Kind of cute, actually.
Yes, they have been to the most part and some times have been a bitch.
flopticalcube
May 4, 03:49 PM
The entire idea of restoring from a Time Machine backup has always been illogical to me.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
Indeed, which is why I also do a Carbon Copy Clone once in a while. Most people, for some reason, just use Time Machine. Maybe they never have encountered a catastrophic disk failure. Seems like a big risk to take.
If Time Machine backs up everything, then it backs up whatever problems you had that resulted in your need for restore.
Time Machine has limited real use, and its basically limited to accidentally deleting things.
Indeed, which is why I also do a Carbon Copy Clone once in a while. Most people, for some reason, just use Time Machine. Maybe they never have encountered a catastrophic disk failure. Seems like a big risk to take.
ghostface147
May 4, 03:55 PM
As long as "preferred" doesn't mean the only way to get it, I'm good.
itcheroni
Apr 19, 11:36 AM
That's like saying that I need to read the whole Bible instead of you just telling me why you're a believer.
That's all we're asking. Just tell us why you believe something to be true.
If you inspire us enough, maybe we'll crack open that Bible.
A better analogy would be a scientist trying to explain to a Christian scientist why evolution makes more sense than a strict interpretation of the Bible. Or Galileo (was it him?) trying to convince people that the Earth revolved around the Sun.
By the way, speaking of being convinced, I looked back on some of my posts from 2008 and can't believe the crazy things I believed back then. Nobody took my aside and explained things to me. I went and found sources on my own. I don't know how to explain a lot of different concepts that hinges on each other that will be utterly convincing in 100-200 words. It took me a few years to unlearn all the crap I learned in economics classes in college. I can't do the same for you in a few minutes.
That's all we're asking. Just tell us why you believe something to be true.
If you inspire us enough, maybe we'll crack open that Bible.
A better analogy would be a scientist trying to explain to a Christian scientist why evolution makes more sense than a strict interpretation of the Bible. Or Galileo (was it him?) trying to convince people that the Earth revolved around the Sun.
By the way, speaking of being convinced, I looked back on some of my posts from 2008 and can't believe the crazy things I believed back then. Nobody took my aside and explained things to me. I went and found sources on my own. I don't know how to explain a lot of different concepts that hinges on each other that will be utterly convincing in 100-200 words. It took me a few years to unlearn all the crap I learned in economics classes in college. I can't do the same for you in a few minutes.
IntelliUser
Nov 28, 03:10 AM
awful program
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
I wouldn't mess with the Bootcamp partition, regardless of the AV.
http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
I wouldn't mess with the Bootcamp partition, regardless of the AV.
http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
Vegasman
Apr 26, 04:50 PM
And next week there will be a new survey that says the opposite. These reports are getting old. Must be a slow news day.
Unlikely...
Unlikely...
Amnak
Apr 7, 11:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
I'd like to know when apples ever had real pressure to do anything, they do what they want when they want and they DGF
I'd like to know when apples ever had real pressure to do anything, they do what they want when they want and they DGF
Rodimus Prime
Apr 10, 06:40 PM
Or when you reach an actually high math class you simply express division as a fraction.
Most of the time I do express them as a fraction but for something like this I would write it exactly as it was original shown. Why because / tells me it is a normal divide not a fraction.
Most of the time I do express them as a fraction but for something like this I would write it exactly as it was original shown. Why because / tells me it is a normal divide not a fraction.
lilo777
Apr 18, 03:36 PM
In this topic, people pretend to be IP lawyers to justify their own pre-held positions. Fun.
With regards to the actual topic, Apple would not win in court, but Samsung will settle for a not insubstantial sum. It really is that simple.
Samsung can easily do that. Pay Apple and then get their money back by raising the prices on RAM and flash memory (because their cost base grew as a result of patent litigation)
With regards to the actual topic, Apple would not win in court, but Samsung will settle for a not insubstantial sum. It really is that simple.
Samsung can easily do that. Pay Apple and then get their money back by raising the prices on RAM and flash memory (because their cost base grew as a result of patent litigation)
G5Unit
Aug 7, 01:52 PM
Keep dreaming.
Perhaps for a PowerBook G5?
Perhaps for a PowerBook G5?
Chris5488
Apr 24, 03:49 AM
Note that the 3200x2000 wallpaper is form factor 16/10 and not 16/9!
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
Does this means Apple will be reverting to widescreen 16/10 displays instead of the tv-widescreen 16/9? Wouldn't be bad :D
I really hope the new iMac will have such a screen, and comes with a decent GPU like the HD6970m or the HD6950m for the top 27" iMac.
No comments:
Post a Comment