boxandrew
Sep 6, 06:22 PM
Yes. I want rentals. I almost never want to see the same movie again, so I won't want to store it.
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
Seems a lot of people are agreeing with this. If they don't have a netflix style rental model then I can't see myself using the movie store at all. If they do have rentals, then I'll say bye-bye to netflix the same day.
Having read all the rumours, I'm not holding out much hope... :(
Rentals are what I would use. At a sufficiently low price, of course. $2 for close to DVD quality would be OK. (I'm less picky about rental quality than purchase quality.)
Seems a lot of people are agreeing with this. If they don't have a netflix style rental model then I can't see myself using the movie store at all. If they do have rentals, then I'll say bye-bye to netflix the same day.
Having read all the rumours, I'm not holding out much hope... :(
DMann
Jan 13, 01:56 PM
I could go a MacBook Xenon (quad core) ;)
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
hot, Hot, HOT!!!!
wizard
Jun 22, 03:39 PM
Let be clear here Touch screens are of limited usefulness in the normal desktop range of activities. You can read about ergonomics for the details or take this Tibit of experience, they are fatiguing to use. I base this on experience in industrial settings where people will often go out of their way to make use of a keyboard, mouse or other entry device instead of the touch screen. Apples quality GUI would have no impact on the negative associated with extensive touch screen usage.
The idea of a layer being used as a replacement for Dashboard has some appeal as currently Dashboard sucks. However this would only work well by emulating an ARM processor which is probably as wasteful as JavaScript. If I was Apple I'd think long and hard about that.
Further I'm not even sure I agree with the premise that a touch facility would be hard to integrate into Mac OS/X. It would seem to me that adding another layer would be more difficult for everybody concerned, especially developers. Their goal maybe an exact emulation of iOS gestures but I'm not even sure that makes sense. You really need a gesture system tailored to the desktop that hives with track pad usage.
So while I can see Apple doing something in this regard I don't think a Touch screen will be there to turn the Mac into an iOS device. Far from it infact. Even if they model the Touch screen interface on the I devices the goals and real usability will be vastly different. Even worst consummer acceptance and use wount be there. Even the geeks will quickly discover that in the vast majority of cases a Touch screen on the desktop sucks.
What will be very interesting is the minority of apps that will benefit from such an interface. It is just that many desktop users will never use such apps so the whole touch screen thing is a bit of a joke. For many users what Apple should be doing is going after voice input/dictation. Put all those cores to work on an AI that can process human language.
Dave
The idea of a layer being used as a replacement for Dashboard has some appeal as currently Dashboard sucks. However this would only work well by emulating an ARM processor which is probably as wasteful as JavaScript. If I was Apple I'd think long and hard about that.
Further I'm not even sure I agree with the premise that a touch facility would be hard to integrate into Mac OS/X. It would seem to me that adding another layer would be more difficult for everybody concerned, especially developers. Their goal maybe an exact emulation of iOS gestures but I'm not even sure that makes sense. You really need a gesture system tailored to the desktop that hives with track pad usage.
So while I can see Apple doing something in this regard I don't think a Touch screen will be there to turn the Mac into an iOS device. Far from it infact. Even if they model the Touch screen interface on the I devices the goals and real usability will be vastly different. Even worst consummer acceptance and use wount be there. Even the geeks will quickly discover that in the vast majority of cases a Touch screen on the desktop sucks.
What will be very interesting is the minority of apps that will benefit from such an interface. It is just that many desktop users will never use such apps so the whole touch screen thing is a bit of a joke. For many users what Apple should be doing is going after voice input/dictation. Put all those cores to work on an AI that can process human language.
Dave
ph_555_shag
Aug 7, 04:56 AM
B&O.... mmmmmm
ill be up with the Aussie crew at a ridiculously early time, probably sleep for a few hours first, Uni tomorrow.... oh the pain!... wish there was a live feed.... DAMN YOU APPLE
7 hours and 1 min to go!
ill be up with the Aussie crew at a ridiculously early time, probably sleep for a few hours first, Uni tomorrow.... oh the pain!... wish there was a live feed.... DAMN YOU APPLE
7 hours and 1 min to go!
macthetiger85
Apr 26, 04:51 PM
I think you are missing the point:
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
� Descriptive for the goods/services;
� A geographic term;
� A surname;
� Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
so a geographic term like, o, let's say, Amazon would fall within that same rule right?
"What are some other reasons for refusing registration?
Registration may be refused if the mark is:
� Descriptive for the goods/services;
� A geographic term;
� A surname;
� Ornamental as applied to the goods"
Source: http://www.uspto.gov/trademarks/basics/BasicFacts_with_correct_links.pdf
App Store is descriptive of what it does. In other words, it sells apps or applications. Therefore, it cannot be trademarked. Apple can use it if they want, but so can anyone else doing the same thing.
This is pretty much saying that Microsoft is going to trademark Operating System. Both Microsoft and Apple make operating systems. What Windows is is a type of operating system. Windows does not describe the product.
Example:
Shop that sells windows cannot trademark "Window Seller" because it describes precisely what the shop does. It is generic + descriptive = no trademark.
so a geographic term like, o, let's say, Amazon would fall within that same rule right?
rjohnstone
Apr 26, 01:31 PM
It mostly has to do with if it is confusing. Apple has a trade mark on "App Store" to sell applications through an online store. Amazon is using "Appstore" and is selling applications through an online store. Apple has a pretty strong case that Amazon is infringing on their trademark. If Amazon used "Appstore" for a chain of tire rotating store, Amazon could probably be in the clear. As it stands they are too close in intended use. Microsofts strategy is to invalidate the trademark. It's up to the USPTO to decide on the trademark.
Apple doesn't have the trademark yet.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
Apple doesn't have the trademark yet.
It's still in the opposition phase. ;)
logandzwon
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
At the end of the day, I believe this is going to court.
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
I think the heart of the case will be hinged on proving if "app store" and/or "appstore" was in common use before apple applied for the TM. It does not matter in the least what "app" is short for, or what it means, or who used it for what. Only "appstore" or "app store."
If they were to concede it was unique, but argue that it is NOW generic, I'd think they'd lose, (because Amazon and Microsoft seem to be ones generalizing it.)
poppe
Sep 1, 01:48 PM
I think all those that want a 23" iMac that is chinless better hope for a Merom. I think conroe would be to hot, or does conroe run pretty cool?
Heck regardless if we get a chinles iMac and it runs pretty hot we'll get forums like this (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=229182)
Heck regardless if we get a chinles iMac and it runs pretty hot we'll get forums like this (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=229182)
PodHead
Dec 1, 10:35 PM
The concept of internet based content is very attractive, bandwidth issues aside. I pay too much money for too many channels I don't need/want. And I don't want to watch when NBC tells me too. A selective subscription to the media I'm interested in is just what I want. The lowered cost associated with online distribution versus a whole network of channels being pumped into every home opens the door for the little guys with very focused content to get stuff out there, just like podcasts, and hopefully make enough money to keep improving their material.
Very interesting point. With video podcast, everyone can have a TV show. Imagine that...independent T.V. Much like indie music.
Very interesting point. With video podcast, everyone can have a TV show. Imagine that...independent T.V. Much like indie music.
WilliamBos
Apr 9, 04:40 PM
Manual (stick) shift cars are rare today and I'm wondering how many people still know how to drive them. How did you learn and do you have a desire to own one?
I sure can. Learnt on a Massey 35 before I was 10!! My last car, a 2000 sunfire was a stick. I would not own a small auto car.back in my trucks again: I would not mind a ZF6 Dmax/8.1 truck. But those days are gone, so autos are fine for me.
I sure can. Learnt on a Massey 35 before I was 10!! My last car, a 2000 sunfire was a stick. I would not own a small auto car.back in my trucks again: I would not mind a ZF6 Dmax/8.1 truck. But those days are gone, so autos are fine for me.
peharri
Aug 19, 08:24 AM
You step into your car. The bluetooth receiver in your dashboard automatically detects the presence of your iPod. The finger controls on the steering wheel switch from controlling radio stations to stepping through playlists etc. It "just works". No cables. No need to even take the iPod out of your pocket or bag.
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
That's why I want wireless. Well, one of the reasons.
Of course, the bluetooth feature's great and all, but it's the 802.11g support I love using. I walk into the office, and suddenly the playlists of all of my collegues who run iTunes appears on screen. Another collegue has his own wireless iPod, and his playlists appear too. It's just like iTunes's shared playlist feature, only it's on my iPod too. It's nice enough having everyone's iTunes playlists in iTunes, but this really takes it to a dimension where it becomes truly useful.
That's why I want wireless, well, one of the reasons.
But, you know, I have my own music tastes, and there are only two or three fellow classical music fans in the office. I could listen to the radio, but only the NPR station here does classical, and that's only part of the time. Still, there are a bunch of netradio classical radio stations, so I can expose myself to even more sources, and I'm not limited by the relatively conservative selection of my collegues and friends. I go to the root menu, Radio Stations -> Favorites -> Classical 24, and now I'm receiving streamed audio from across the country.
That's another reason why I want wireless.
To all of you saying "I can't see why anyone would want wireless", I can't see why you wouldn't want wireless. Small scale sharing. Automatic integration with music systems. Net radio. What's not to love? And for what, a couple of dollars in chips, some improved firmware, and probably the same amount of battery life (given you'll not be running the hard drive)?
eawmp1
Apr 21, 11:21 AM
Is Al Frankin running for president again? :rolleyes:
steadysignal
Apr 25, 10:28 AM
Time to hide my iPhone file from the wife:rolleyes:
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
Seriously......privacy issues seem all over the place in this digital age....here is another example.
I guess we need a law disclosing if such and such device tracks you and needs to disclose that to you clearly via a warning label/other....
will a law stop the data from being used against you?
HBOC
Jan 5, 02:29 PM
Evos are awesome cars! How fast is your model 0-60
Oh, and I'm gonna try to get pics of the smoked tails on my G37S (not pictured in my first post)
EDIT:
Back of my car
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e137/SaMaster14/IMG_0212.jpg
Nice car man. I had a P10 G20 with JSPEC Sr20DE and that thing would run low 15s with an automatic!
Springtime Easter Holiday
Free+springtime+wallpaper
This beautiful wallpaper is
This beautiful wallpaper is
Wallpapers Springtime in
Oh, and I'm gonna try to get pics of the smoked tails on my G37S (not pictured in my first post)
EDIT:
Back of my car
http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e137/SaMaster14/IMG_0212.jpg
Nice car man. I had a P10 G20 with JSPEC Sr20DE and that thing would run low 15s with an automatic!
Benguitar
Nov 23, 08:04 PM
you planning on treating them rough?
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
Not really, The reason I spent the money on Oakleys is because from what I've read and seen, Oakley's are tough and will last you years. But also if I travel and don't wish to wear them I want to put them somewhere where they will not be crushed, or drowned, or broken.
I'm also planning on going into the Coast Guard, So if/when I travel or etc, I want to take great care of my equipment & personal belongings.
uh...
that seems awful clunky as a container for a pair of sunglasses...
I got that size because it was the smallest water proof size, I also plan on getting another pair someday.
When I spend $200.00 on a pair of sunglasses, When they are not on my head, I want them put away.
MacSA
Sep 6, 12:46 PM
The 1.6 - 1.8 chip upgrade on the high end Mini looks more like something we would have seen during the PPC days. :mad:
ezekielrage_99
Oct 23, 09:58 AM
So Macbooks next tuesday :confused:
miles01110
Sep 6, 08:48 AM
Hmm... the Mini still has no Core 2 Duo? That does not sound too promising for MacBook (Pro) updates... unless Apple only wants to use the Core 2 Duo for the high end laptops (MacBook Pro) of course... Or are they waiting untill Leopard has been released?
I didn't think they would put the Core 2 Duo in the mini before the MBP.
I didn't think they would put the Core 2 Duo in the mini before the MBP.
ghostshadow
Oct 27, 11:37 PM
Speck just released a bunch of cases last month. Roughly 3 weeks ago. So they are pretty new.
DavidLeblond
Aug 16, 07:34 AM
Compete with Zune? Seriously? Zune is even on Apple's radar?
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Let me get this straight, maybe I'm mistaken. Is this the same Zune that was announced that it will "play music! videos! games! ... wait... no, we changed our minds... no games. And videos? Yeah we can't quite get that to work, it won't do that either. But it plays music! And looks like an iPod... except its a tad on the fugly side...."
Please. Apple already has something to compete with this, its called the iPod. Who needs wireless??
Irishman
Apr 20, 08:18 AM
A 6800m would be a downgrade. Keep in mind the current imac with the 5750 is actually a 5850m. 6850m is a downgrade from a 5850m, though only slightly. There are only two cards they could use that are upgrades over the current one and that's the 6950m and the 6970m.
I would also hope for the 3.4ghz i7-2600 sandy bridge processor.
Fixed!
I would also hope for the 3.4ghz i7-2600 sandy bridge processor.
Fixed!
Benguitar
Nov 26, 04:02 PM
Lighten up, guy.:)
I know, :p
I didn't know they had Lego Games on the iPad.....
:eek: Want.
I know, :p
I didn't know they had Lego Games on the iPad.....
:eek: Want.
Homy
Jan 3, 09:39 AM
iMac 17" is not in stock anywhere in european Apple Stores and other web shops. Ships after 3 days, it says. In Canada all iMacs ship after 3-5 days.:cool:
tilman
Aug 30, 09:40 AM
Fry's Electronics is advertising Core Solo Mini's for $499 today. "Some demo, some open box". That is usually a sign that they are clearing out their remaining stock of an item.