kirk26
Apr 20, 06:07 AM
Not a summer update? Surprising.
Not sure if serious. We pretty much knew it wouldn't be a summer update.
Not sure if serious. We pretty much knew it wouldn't be a summer update.
Popeye206
May 4, 05:26 PM
I'm guessing greedy Apple will probably keep 30% of the sales too! :rolleyes:
wHo_tHe
Mar 30, 07:42 PM
This question is primarily because I have a Macbook Air.
If Apple are going to release this via the App Store (assuming the speculation is true), does this mean that you don't have to burn Lion to a disk to install it? Or would I have to transfer it to some sort of USB drive first?
I guess I'm asking if you can just double click it in your downloads folder and run the OS installation from there That is the way Lion works. You just run the downloaded installer from the disk image. No need to burn to DVD or USB. The installer runs for a bit in your current OS, then reboots itself to complete the installation.
If Apple are going to release this via the App Store (assuming the speculation is true), does this mean that you don't have to burn Lion to a disk to install it? Or would I have to transfer it to some sort of USB drive first?
I guess I'm asking if you can just double click it in your downloads folder and run the OS installation from there That is the way Lion works. You just run the downloaded installer from the disk image. No need to burn to DVD or USB. The installer runs for a bit in your current OS, then reboots itself to complete the installation.
ravenvii
May 3, 11:41 AM
Yet more of Don't panic's questions:
you spoke about motivations, does that imply that the "end game" is different between the couple, the wizard and the adventurers? or is it just color?
Yes, their end-game goals are slightly different.
more: how long are the rounds? how large is the map? how long do you envisage this game lasting? is there a built-in clock of any sort?
The rounds are as long as you make it. That's why I require active participation - otherwise they could take forever. There is no built-in clock.
in the original post it said 2 points/turn, 2 turns/round, but in reality it is 1 point/turn? which is forfaited if the villain uses any action in the turn (place monsters/traps, heal, move)?
Every round, the villain gets 2 turns/points. If he moves, he uses one turn. Then he decides to heal, that takes another turn. Then the round is over for him, and when the next round comes, he gets another two turns. If in the previous turn he decides to do nothing, then the next round he will have four turns to play with.
Plutonius' questions:
1) Will it be real time or will it be 2 turns / 24 hours or something in between ?
No, it is two turns. No time limits or any kind of built-in clock.
2) What will our turn orders consist of and do we PM or use the thread (could you please post an example of a couple turns.) ?
The heroes use the thread, the villain PMs the GMs.
Example round:
Turn 1: Heroes discuss amongst themselves and decide to explore the room. They discover a trap that the villain placed and a treasure. They disarm the trap, and grab the treasure (automatic), and because they found a treasure, they level up.
Turn 2: Heroes discuss amongst themselves again, and decide on a door to take. They move to the next room, and meet a level 1 goblin. They fight and easily kill the goblin. The wizard takes one hit because random.org says so.
In the meanwhile, the villain has 3 turns - he has one turn remaining from last round, plus two turns from this round. The villain PMs the GMs saying he wants a lvl 4 gargoyle in that room. The gargoyle costs 3 turns. The villain now has 0 turns, and the gargoyle is placed in the said room.
Round ends.
3) Do we talk to each other through the thread or PMs ?
Everyone talks in the thread. Only the Villain uses PMs.
you spoke about motivations, does that imply that the "end game" is different between the couple, the wizard and the adventurers? or is it just color?
Yes, their end-game goals are slightly different.
more: how long are the rounds? how large is the map? how long do you envisage this game lasting? is there a built-in clock of any sort?
The rounds are as long as you make it. That's why I require active participation - otherwise they could take forever. There is no built-in clock.
in the original post it said 2 points/turn, 2 turns/round, but in reality it is 1 point/turn? which is forfaited if the villain uses any action in the turn (place monsters/traps, heal, move)?
Every round, the villain gets 2 turns/points. If he moves, he uses one turn. Then he decides to heal, that takes another turn. Then the round is over for him, and when the next round comes, he gets another two turns. If in the previous turn he decides to do nothing, then the next round he will have four turns to play with.
Plutonius' questions:
1) Will it be real time or will it be 2 turns / 24 hours or something in between ?
No, it is two turns. No time limits or any kind of built-in clock.
2) What will our turn orders consist of and do we PM or use the thread (could you please post an example of a couple turns.) ?
The heroes use the thread, the villain PMs the GMs.
Example round:
Turn 1: Heroes discuss amongst themselves and decide to explore the room. They discover a trap that the villain placed and a treasure. They disarm the trap, and grab the treasure (automatic), and because they found a treasure, they level up.
Turn 2: Heroes discuss amongst themselves again, and decide on a door to take. They move to the next room, and meet a level 1 goblin. They fight and easily kill the goblin. The wizard takes one hit because random.org says so.
In the meanwhile, the villain has 3 turns - he has one turn remaining from last round, plus two turns from this round. The villain PMs the GMs saying he wants a lvl 4 gargoyle in that room. The gargoyle costs 3 turns. The villain now has 0 turns, and the gargoyle is placed in the said room.
Round ends.
3) Do we talk to each other through the thread or PMs ?
Everyone talks in the thread. Only the Villain uses PMs.
CommodityFetish
Apr 5, 08:30 PM
Hmmm... I think I'll go jailbreak my iPod touch now.
Maybe then I can get a toggle switch for wifi on my home screen. :rolleyes:
Maybe then I can get a toggle switch for wifi on my home screen. :rolleyes:
Rot'nApple
Apr 25, 09:35 AM
"We don't track anyone."
Sent from your backyard.
:D :D :D
Shouldn't that be "Received in your backyard... no wait, your kitchen..., no wait, your bathroom... hmmm, hmmm, hmm, hm, hmm,... hey wash your hands now that you are finished!... now received out the front door, getting into car... did you know your license has expired?... Just help'n you out... :rolleyes: :eek:
Could you please explain the necessity of the passive location-tracking tool embedded in my iPhone?
Reply: Oh yes they do.
Not much in the way of explanation from Steve...
Guess that e-mailer is probably learning the ins and outs of his new Droid...
/
/
/
Sent from your backyard.
:D :D :D
Shouldn't that be "Received in your backyard... no wait, your kitchen..., no wait, your bathroom... hmmm, hmmm, hmm, hm, hmm,... hey wash your hands now that you are finished!... now received out the front door, getting into car... did you know your license has expired?... Just help'n you out... :rolleyes: :eek:
Could you please explain the necessity of the passive location-tracking tool embedded in my iPhone?
Reply: Oh yes they do.
Not much in the way of explanation from Steve...
Guess that e-mailer is probably learning the ins and outs of his new Droid...
/
/
/
Yamcha
Mar 29, 02:09 PM
Are you serious? who cares about ipods & battery shortages when there is a crysis =/..
rmwebs
Apr 20, 03:22 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-gb) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
Agreed. I moved from my good ol' 3Gs to a ZTE-Blade a few months ago and have to say that despite the general black/grey colors that android apps seem to be forced to use with the UI, the 'desktop' of the phone is much more elegant and usable than the iPhone's. I'd really like to see Apple open up the API's a little more and maybe even allow us to completely swap out their homescreen for custom app based ones. It works well on the droids.
I think Apple needs to concentrate more on improving iOS rather than adding a faster processor. Tbh I'm pretty fed up of my iPhone 4 as the is just looks boringly simple. Not everybody wants the same old os on every device. I think it's the omnia 7 next for me so I can have a change.
Agreed. I moved from my good ol' 3Gs to a ZTE-Blade a few months ago and have to say that despite the general black/grey colors that android apps seem to be forced to use with the UI, the 'desktop' of the phone is much more elegant and usable than the iPhone's. I'd really like to see Apple open up the API's a little more and maybe even allow us to completely swap out their homescreen for custom app based ones. It works well on the droids.
ptysell
Apr 7, 10:58 AM
Ehh, purposeful or not (as a sabotage)...not good news for iPad competition:( Which isnt good news for us iPad users...Apple needs constant pressure to release revolutionary products.
The iPod hasn't see ANY competition in the past 10 years and they seem to be doing fine with pushing that product line.
The iPod hasn't see ANY competition in the past 10 years and they seem to be doing fine with pushing that product line.
Tonsko
Dec 15, 04:25 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; de-de) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
Sophos does not seem to display these characteristics. That I've noticed.
The big deal is that i do not want buggy, resource stealing software on my mac. Simple as that.
Sophos does not seem to display these characteristics. That I've noticed.
EricNau
May 3, 09:48 PM
I don't have the time to write an exhaustive response to this magnum opus, but I'm going to leave with a few concluding points:
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
I believe the discussion of body temperature has reached a senseless level. I disagree with your claim that body temperatures in celsius are more difficult to remember, and I don't believe there's any substatial evidence to support this claim. Regardless, Celsius seems to work just fine for the entire world (...practically), unless you know something about European mothers that I don't.
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
I see no reason why baking with a scale is impractical. It's not what you're used to, but that doesn't reflect upon the merits of a metric system.
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
Written weights are more accurate. What's problematic is that there's an additional requirement for measuring volumes of dry goods. Flour must be measured after sifting, brown sugar must be packed, etc. Not only does weighing dry goods eliminate the need to standardization of volume, but it's always going to be more accurate.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
As balmaw explained, it doesn't really matter what you call a pint of beer at a bar. Every culture and language has their own name for it.
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
If you ask for a "cup of water" at a restaurant, will you be given exactly 8oz? I don't think so.
Most cups hold more than a cup. So, in the absence of a measuring cup, there's really no need for such a designation. So, assuming we do away with the customary system, why do you need a word to describe 8oz of water? You would stop thinking in cups and start thinking in quarter liter intervals (which is equally, if not more, convenient).
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
I believe milk in Germany is bought by the liter, though I'm sure European members here could elaborate on that.
You might find purchasing milk by the liter cumbersome, but it works well for them.
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
Beer is served in metric quantities all over the world. ...And there are plenty of names for it that aren't "pint." Additionally, I assure you that an American pint of beer is served with less precision than 25ml from bar to bar.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
And metric units, too, are used the world over to describe household amounts.
Also, dividing 300ml (though, I find it interesting that you keep choosing to compare metric units to customary units, since this is counter-productive) can easily be rounded to 38 or even 40ml, which is precise enough even for baking.
Though it's entirely a moot point. Metric recipes are normalized to "easy" measurements, just like American recipes are normalized to the nearest cup or 1/2 for items like flour and sugar.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
I don't find the customary system practical. To the contrary, I find it convoluted with no consistency.
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
I've witnessed many students struggle with it. When you grow up using Fahrenheit, feet, miles, inches, cups, teaspoons, etc. you get a sense of what each one means; you can "feel" it. The same can't be said about the metric system for most Americans, and it's extremely difficult to teach yourself what each unit intuitively represents as a high school student, for example.
It's something many of us will never get. Kilometers, Celsius, liters, centimeters, etc. will always "feel" foreign because of the units we were raised with at home. We owe our kids better.
42streetsdown
May 6, 01:54 AM
No.. They make mobile processors. Low power usage.
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
It still wouldn't be worth the software fragmentation that would take place. Plus, Intel has continued to make their possessors more power efficient.
If you read the article again, it ays the rumor is for laptops. Very doubtful apple will move the desktop line to an ARM processor as there is nothing that competes with the current tech.
For laptops (specifically the air), the move may make sense. I don't see apple moving the whole macbook pro line to ARM. maybe the airs and the regular macbooks.
It still wouldn't be worth the software fragmentation that would take place. Plus, Intel has continued to make their possessors more power efficient.
WildGuess
Apr 7, 09:31 AM
They can have my screen. It only bleeds on the edges. Still enough real estate for a seven inch model.
jayducharme
Apr 24, 02:52 PM
I just checked my current desktop pictures folder. The images are 2560x1600, and they're only about 1 mb each. So it's really not much more of a leap to get to 3200.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 2, 01:39 PM
you have got to be CRAZY to think that he's going to intro an ipod at WWDC, when MW Paris is right around the corner! MW Paris in september is pretty much ALWAYS when they intro ipods and consumer products this time of year.
I am still a bit curious why the last iPod-updater had text strings such as: "t_feature_app_PHONE_APP, kPhoneSignalStrength,
clPhoneCallModel,
clPhoneCallHistoryModel,
prPhoneSettingsMenu",
if an iPhone isn't around the corner. It doesn't make sense to include that unless the iPhone is very close to be released.
Besides, wouldn't it be beneficial, in terms of new apps, to let the developers know that the iPhone was about to be released very shortly?
I am still a bit curious why the last iPod-updater had text strings such as: "t_feature_app_PHONE_APP, kPhoneSignalStrength,
clPhoneCallModel,
clPhoneCallHistoryModel,
prPhoneSettingsMenu",
if an iPhone isn't around the corner. It doesn't make sense to include that unless the iPhone is very close to be released.
Besides, wouldn't it be beneficial, in terms of new apps, to let the developers know that the iPhone was about to be released very shortly?
Unspeaked
Jul 21, 08:57 PM
People, they only released the MacBooks two months ago!
They're not gonna upgrade them in a matter of weeks.
It'll be the new chips in the Pro models, and AT BEST a slight speedbump to the Black MacBook (maybe the 2.16 GHz chip)...
They're not gonna upgrade them in a matter of weeks.
It'll be the new chips in the Pro models, and AT BEST a slight speedbump to the Black MacBook (maybe the 2.16 GHz chip)...
Eduardo1971
Mar 29, 10:09 AM
Okay, nice, guys. This is MacRumors, not AmazonRumors. Who gives a crap about Amazon? Move along now.
Please look up the word myopic. You sound like a classic example.
Please look up the word myopic. You sound like a classic example.
number9
May 7, 10:36 AM
I would welcome this. I enjoyed the features during the free trial period, but couldn't justify $99 per year for it. Since then they've added Back to My Mac, the Find my iPhone feature, and improved its reliability, so I would love to have access to it again, minus the cost. On top of what I pay for cellular service, another 9 bucks a month just seemed inconvenient.
flottenheimer
May 9, 10:46 AM
Have Apple ever posted any MobileMe numbers?
Number of users? Revenue? Gigabytes stored? Growth?
Anything...
Number of users? Revenue? Gigabytes stored? Growth?
Anything...
JAT
Apr 5, 04:42 PM
It's: "Do not buy iPhone. Go with Android." That's how I see it. Companies like Toyota will have no choice but to double their efforts in serving Android users.
0 x 2 = 0
Something tells me "jail broken community" grossly overstates the size of this segment of the population.
Mega corporation A asks Mega corporation T to stop messing with a key product outside the terms of use and Mega corporation T is more interested in having good ongoing relations with a potential major technology partner than it is in five anti-conformist iconoclasts. File this in not really news.
QFT.
Silly people. No one OWNS an iPhone. They own the right to use the iPhone. Welcome to the new world where buying a product does not mean that you can do what you want with it. You can only do what the manufacturers say you can do with it.
Sarcasm online is fun. But you do realize this is correct for software or other media, and not true for hardware. Right?
0 x 2 = 0
Something tells me "jail broken community" grossly overstates the size of this segment of the population.
Mega corporation A asks Mega corporation T to stop messing with a key product outside the terms of use and Mega corporation T is more interested in having good ongoing relations with a potential major technology partner than it is in five anti-conformist iconoclasts. File this in not really news.
QFT.
Silly people. No one OWNS an iPhone. They own the right to use the iPhone. Welcome to the new world where buying a product does not mean that you can do what you want with it. You can only do what the manufacturers say you can do with it.
Sarcasm online is fun. But you do realize this is correct for software or other media, and not true for hardware. Right?
Mad Mac Maniac
Mar 26, 09:57 PM
as long as it is a solid enough update, I'll be happy :)
LegendKillerUK
Mar 27, 12:19 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
Based on history the 3GS will still be in for updates along with the iPad. Performance on the other hand...
MorphingDragon
May 6, 06:45 AM
I'm not surprised about people getting overhyped. Just look the "3D" thread here.
Like I understand the benefits the new design could bring, its just that I'm a bit cynical when it comes to CPU enhancements, especially after Cell B.E. and the original Phenom architecture.
Intel's hype machine is also very efficient. :rolleyes:
Like I understand the benefits the new design could bring, its just that I'm a bit cynical when it comes to CPU enhancements, especially after Cell B.E. and the original Phenom architecture.
Intel's hype machine is also very efficient. :rolleyes:
DeeEss
Apr 27, 09:00 PM
This is great news but it won't replace the desktop top model altogether. I would say a majority of users would want it on their desktop rather than in a rack although, come to thikn of it if it meant a dedicted and modular storage rack then I'd probably go that route. I would imagine you could just take off the handles or it be optional altogether. Either that or they abandon handles and have internal hand slots, for want of a better phrase. Im sure the designers at Apple could utilize the slots for cooling chimneys or something.
I was actually hoping it would be bigger, have more internal bays. 2 more would be fantastic. But I guess this just opens up the possibility of a dedicated and modular expansion rack for storage via thunderbolt.
As for Mac Pro dying, it just isn't going to happen. Anyone who has used an iMac in professional situations where they hit the wall of limitation knows that they need a Mac Pro. While iMacs have always being tempting I would never buy another one for what I do since the last one I owned a 500Mhz Graphite DVse. They won't open up iMacs because they need to separate the am/consumer and pro markets.
I was actually hoping it would be bigger, have more internal bays. 2 more would be fantastic. But I guess this just opens up the possibility of a dedicated and modular expansion rack for storage via thunderbolt.
As for Mac Pro dying, it just isn't going to happen. Anyone who has used an iMac in professional situations where they hit the wall of limitation knows that they need a Mac Pro. While iMacs have always being tempting I would never buy another one for what I do since the last one I owned a 500Mhz Graphite DVse. They won't open up iMacs because they need to separate the am/consumer and pro markets.