gburnham
Mar 31, 07:48 PM
Safari in fullscreen ignores the cmd+L hotkey for jumping to the address bar. That is a pretty huge bug for me... Pretty much removes my ability to use Safari fullscreen. I'm sure they'll catch that quick.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
Also, I don't see an option to always show tabs while in fullscreen mode. They hide unless you mouseover the address bar, which makes tab management in fullscreen a little bit inconvenient. A setting for that would be nice to see added before release!
Finder also seems to occasionally not respond to mouse clicks when it is in the background. I have to activate it from the dock icon before it will respond. That has only happened once or twice though.
That said, everything seems much smoother (not sure about faster, but definitely smoother) and the bugs I have seen have been relatively minor. This should be a pretty awesome OS if I can train myself to use some of the new features/gestures.
richard.mac
Apr 3, 03:19 AM
That's because the 'control' button acts like a four-finger gesture. Same applies to ctrl+left arrow and ctrl+right arrow.
yeah, but for a keyboard ctrl-up to close is how it logically should be.. and i think Apple agreed. the first time i tried it i instinctively pressed ctrl-up again to close.
anyone know if recent files in a closed app's dock menu are new? thats an awesome feature, like Windows 7's jump lists, which i really like.
yeah, but for a keyboard ctrl-up to close is how it logically should be.. and i think Apple agreed. the first time i tried it i instinctively pressed ctrl-up again to close.
anyone know if recent files in a closed app's dock menu are new? thats an awesome feature, like Windows 7's jump lists, which i really like.
FireStar
Oct 30, 01:14 PM
I need a case too :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
I'm looking for a case that can protect from drops/falls and shocks. Screen cover is not necessary, because if the case doesn't come with one I can always buy a separate screen protector.
right now I'm looking at stuff like this case listed on amazon (http://www.amazon.com/Touch-MiniSuit-Diamond-Generation-Chain/dp/B0043L2LRW/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top#productPromotions)
but I don't feel safe with just some random generic case, so does anyone have any recommendations? I've heard otterbox offers good cases with drop/shock protection, but there are none for the itouch 4g right now.
For price, as low as possible, but I would be willing to shell out 30 for a good case (like otterbox!)
oh and did I mention that drop/shock protection is important? :D
any recommendations are good
thx guys
Switcheasy. Not much out yet though. Sad face. :(
Astro7x
Apr 26, 02:40 PM
Wirelessly posted (Iphone: Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
Exactly. While "App Store" is a great term, I'm convinced that if Apple originally called it an "App Shop" that the Microsofts and Amazons would complain about that being a generic term too and want to use it.
How can it be generic if no one had one before apple created there's? Suddenly everyone calls their market place an app store. There've been digital stores for years, and none were app stores.
Exactly. While "App Store" is a great term, I'm convinced that if Apple originally called it an "App Shop" that the Microsofts and Amazons would complain about that being a generic term too and want to use it.
miloblithe
Aug 31, 12:20 PM
http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869
What about this ? :)
Makes me hope that they bring back three levels:
$499 Core Duo 1.66, 60/80GB HD, Combo drive
$599 1.66, 100GB HD, Super Drive
$699 1.83, 100GB/120GB, Super Drive
What about this ? :)
Makes me hope that they bring back three levels:
$499 Core Duo 1.66, 60/80GB HD, Combo drive
$599 1.66, 100GB HD, Super Drive
$699 1.83, 100GB/120GB, Super Drive
WiiMarioHacker
Jun 22, 11:07 PM
I feel justified that this is the main reason we never heard ANY thing about Mac OS X at the keynote AND the WWDC (as far as I know), and each new update seems to be just fixes and security updates. So, I think apple is working on iOS X, or what ever the touch screen Mac OS is.
This is my take on Apple: (semi-off-topic warning)
The way I see it, is that Apple is the technology company of the future. I mean, look at all these other smart phone makers; (exceptions being Google and HTC) they're still "stuck" in the 20th century. With our rapid advancement of technology, Apple's current technology should have been out 3 to 5 years ago. IMO, Apple is just playing "catch up" on a human scale, aka the iPhone 4 is the technology that should have been releasing 3 to 5 years ago.
This is my take on Apple: (semi-off-topic warning)
The way I see it, is that Apple is the technology company of the future. I mean, look at all these other smart phone makers; (exceptions being Google and HTC) they're still "stuck" in the 20th century. With our rapid advancement of technology, Apple's current technology should have been out 3 to 5 years ago. IMO, Apple is just playing "catch up" on a human scale, aka the iPhone 4 is the technology that should have been releasing 3 to 5 years ago.
RayLancer
Oct 2, 10:36 AM
Actually I kind of like my gel case. It perfectly fits and makes the back look great. I intended to wait for the belkin's clear hard case to come out, but now I'm going to order the full set of this gel case and it's still cheaper.
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0357.jpg
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0358.jpg
Where did you get yours from? I ordered one off ebay and it was horribly warped, both of them. It was pretty loose and stretched so it wouldn't fit my iPod at all.
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0357.jpg
http://i603.photobucket.com/albums/tt114/longasau/IMG_0358.jpg
Where did you get yours from? I ordered one off ebay and it was horribly warped, both of them. It was pretty loose and stretched so it wouldn't fit my iPod at all.
tychay
Nov 28, 08:09 PM
I have no idea where you got that one from. The original Xbox never made a profit. Microsoft is deliberately selling the Xbox 360 at a loss to capture marketshare. However, the PS3 and Ninetindo Wii are selling like hotcakes, are latest big things, and have the buzz. The best laid plans ...
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
I think the first statement is correct or close to it. They may have had a single profitable quarter when Halo 2 was released. I'm not sure because they bury games in a Microsoft Entertainment and Devices Division. Which includes their smartphone stuff (now that it has stopped bleeding money) and their profitable and acclaimed mice, keyboards, and other stuff (all manufactured by other companies, sort of like Dell, but with a nicer design).
The second part I believe is now wrong. I think the XBox 360 is no longer a loss lead, though that might change as there is some speculation that they will be dropping the price to undercut Sony soon. I believe the fact that it is no longer a loss lead is causing a confounding with the "360 is profitable" commentaries here.
Another commenter mentioned how smart it was was the XBox had a hard drive on it. I’d say if it is so smart why did Microsoft remove it in the base model 360? I’ll point out that this happened because the price of hard drives do not get any cheaper! In fact the price of commodity hardware design doesn’t get any cheaper! Huh? Hard drives get bigger, not cheaper. Processors and chips get more powerful, not cheaper.
What went on is that successive iterations of the Playstation and Playstation 2 would allow Sony to combine chips to reduce the price (and make smaller PSOne and slim-cased Playstation 2). This outlet wasn't available to Microsoft because of their design which is why the XBox was a losing money for it's entire run and Sony played games by dropping their price before it ever turned a profit.
Those two things are "of a piece". While commodity hardware was an interesting idea, it was a failure. Which is why the XBox 360 is not built from commodity PC hardware. The hard drives are a necessary evil of the "Live" strategy so they're left in as an option and bundled with the Playstation 3. That's why these 6G consoles are expensive and not dropping in price fast.
Right now all this is moot since the thing to watch is the Sony gamble on a blue laser. Obviously it will get cheaper fast, but the question is how fast and how cheap? The horrible yields on the Cell processor isn't helping things.
Currently, the XBox 360 has sold very consistently at around 1.5 million units a quarter. The XMas quarter last year had supply issues and only sold .9 million units. That's hardly dominating. In fact, I think the Playstation 2 outsold the 360 in each of those quarters even though the device is six years old. Let's put some numbers here. Last year over 100 million Playstation 2’s had been sold, six months ago, they were selling 380k/month. The XBox 360 sold 6 million units since it's introduction over a year ago, six months ago they were selling 300k/month, they had fixed the channel problems that plagued the release.
Consider this: Nintendo sold 600,000 Wiis in the last eight days. Given the scarcity of the Playstation 3 and the popularity and addictiveness of WiiSports and Zelda, they should easily crush that .9 million opening quarter of the 360. And consider this: each unit at a profit with a number of titles putting money directly in Nintendo's pocket.
I'm not claiming that the Wii will beat the 360. I'm just pointing out that according to sales numbers, the 360 is no iPod, is not trending to an iPod, will never be an iPod. The iPod sits on 75% market share. The closest thing to an iPod in the entertainment market is the Playstation 2.
Which is a big distraction from the point. And what is the point? That the XBox is a bad analogy. It is best to consider their Windows CE->Smartphone Microsoft play to see that the Zune is a bad idea. How many years and failed ideas have there been (Windows CE, Windows Mobile, PocketPC, etc. etc.)? How many billions sunk (some years more than the entire capitalization of the PDA market)? How much marketshare? 6% of smartphones, 60% of the dead-end PDA market, and most of the dead ATM teller market (because IBM did a phased pull out, not because Microsoft "won"). And even those markets are being eaten by Linux faster than Windows.
The only thing we can learn from the XBox and Microsoft is that Microsoft pees on their partners (NVidia) at the earliest opportunity. But we already knew that as soon as the Zune didn't support Plays For Sure.
Gump
Dec 29, 03:17 AM
Why doesn't Apple just team up with Nintendo and release an iTV/iTunes channel for the Wii?
The Wii already has internal WiFi built in capable of streaming. To top it off, a SD memory card slot as an additional source for playing movies....seriously, releasing an iTV when people already have a cable box, Tivo, DVD player, & video game machine.........pointless.
The Wii already has internal WiFi built in capable of streaming. To top it off, a SD memory card slot as an additional source for playing movies....seriously, releasing an iTV when people already have a cable box, Tivo, DVD player, & video game machine.........pointless.
jav6454
Mar 24, 04:09 PM
What history? Developing crappy integrated graphics?
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
You got it wrong.
Zacate, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
I missed writing "SMALL performance edge".
My assessment is not based on a small performance edge. It is based on Fusion enabling a whole new set of functionality thanks to OpenCL and DirectX 11 class hardware.
I established my preference BEFORE watching that video. That Sandy Bridge performs so poor in that demo just confirms my choice.
You got it wrong.
Zacate, Brazos and pretty much every Fusion platform does not compete against Sandy Bridge. No...
It competes against Intel's Atom platform. Atom CPU offerings beat the many of the offerings on the AMD side. However, on the GPU side, AMD has got Intel really well.
Anandtech did a nice little article on this. They found the whole Fusion concept and implementation as a whole beats Intel's Atom implementation overall for the HTPC. However, down to specifics, well I just discussed it.
CRAZYBUBBA
Jan 11, 07:59 PM
added a line to the article...
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
"- It will be called the MacBook Air"
arn
worst-name-ever. i hope that it's anything but "macbook air"
designed
Mar 23, 11:36 AM
33 mins per frame with the iMac i7? That seems awfully fast. 25k PPD. That looks like the time of a 3Ghz 8 core previous generation Mac Pro.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
Actually I'm using a Mac Pro with a 8-core 2,26GHz setup.
blilly
Nov 28, 10:40 AM
It's far too early to make comparisons . . . . the competition is good and I think even Apple enjoys the challenge. I don't like this "us vs. them" attitude that seems to be so pervasive with the Zune . . even more, it seems, than with the OS wars . . . .
LimeiBook86
Apr 19, 12:08 PM
My iMac is a bit over 5 years old, perfect time for an upgrade! :) All I'd like is a Thunderbolt port and a decent graphics chipset, I'm sure everything else will be fine. And a heck of a lot faster than my 2GHz Core Duo! Come on Apple, show us what you've got. :D
Ted Witcher
Mar 22, 05:40 PM
Oh, wait, I see. Voyager.
Mainyehc
Nov 28, 01:51 PM
Because they fear the iPod and what it — and its ecosystem — may potentially evolve into; becoming a platform in its own right, particularly with the convergence of multimedia in the home.
Yes, I though about it... It was a rhetorical question of sorts, anyway. ;)
I'm also figuring they are afraid of the "Halo effect" (pun intended :D), as that'd explain the whole shebang. They were ALWAYS afraid of losing their leadership on the PC market, and that their iron-like grip would turn loose. The problem is, they grew lazy, and are preety much aware of that, as their delays in delivering Vista prove.
"So, let's just try to find some other markets to tap into, 'just in case' ", they probably thought...
That explains the XBox, the WebTV, Windows CE, Windows Mobile, and whatnot. The Zune is just the latest iteration of that behaviour, and more specifically an attempt at stopping the advance of Apple, the iPod, and ESPECIALLY the Mac/OS X platform (while your theory certainly seems interesting, iTV won't be such a threat to Microsoft as it'll most likely be fully compatible with a Windows PC running iTunes, as are the iPod and Airport Express... But it's a valid point, nonetheless :cool: ). iPod+iTunes users can buy a Mac and keep using their nice Apple gear (and even Windows if they really must), while becoming hooked up to the rest of their iLives at the same time, whereas Zune users... well, they can hook up in basements and squirt around, and that preety much sums it up. Or they can suck up and throw them in their drawers and buy an iPod "the next time", which is the most likely scenario.
So this seems to be just a desperation move by M$, in anticipation, but the media (or the market, for that matter) doesn't really get it... In preety much the same way that they didn't get it in when the iPod was initially launched. <manic speech> Five years from now, we'll be laughing our a**es off at yet some other random M$ failure, and fondly remembering the Zune as the beginning of the end. Muhahahahaha </manic speech>... :p
Yes, I though about it... It was a rhetorical question of sorts, anyway. ;)
I'm also figuring they are afraid of the "Halo effect" (pun intended :D), as that'd explain the whole shebang. They were ALWAYS afraid of losing their leadership on the PC market, and that their iron-like grip would turn loose. The problem is, they grew lazy, and are preety much aware of that, as their delays in delivering Vista prove.
"So, let's just try to find some other markets to tap into, 'just in case' ", they probably thought...
That explains the XBox, the WebTV, Windows CE, Windows Mobile, and whatnot. The Zune is just the latest iteration of that behaviour, and more specifically an attempt at stopping the advance of Apple, the iPod, and ESPECIALLY the Mac/OS X platform (while your theory certainly seems interesting, iTV won't be such a threat to Microsoft as it'll most likely be fully compatible with a Windows PC running iTunes, as are the iPod and Airport Express... But it's a valid point, nonetheless :cool: ). iPod+iTunes users can buy a Mac and keep using their nice Apple gear (and even Windows if they really must), while becoming hooked up to the rest of their iLives at the same time, whereas Zune users... well, they can hook up in basements and squirt around, and that preety much sums it up. Or they can suck up and throw them in their drawers and buy an iPod "the next time", which is the most likely scenario.
So this seems to be just a desperation move by M$, in anticipation, but the media (or the market, for that matter) doesn't really get it... In preety much the same way that they didn't get it in when the iPod was initially launched. <manic speech> Five years from now, we'll be laughing our a**es off at yet some other random M$ failure, and fondly remembering the Zune as the beginning of the end. Muhahahahaha </manic speech>... :p
poppe
Jul 14, 12:08 PM
From Wiki:
Holographic disks: standards with 200 and 300 GB storage are under development and prototypes expected in 2008
I've heard about Mac users waiting, but 5 years for most likely the first consumer device if lucky, 6 for probably first computer device. 2012.... yes exactly when I wanted to buy my next laptop after the next four I plan to purchase.
As I said they aren't attacking the Consumer market because they have no Backing. Who can beat Sony when Sony pay's best buy to Disply the blue rays and HD-DVD no longer is displayed?
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8370
This link says 2006
http://www.engadget.com/2005/04/18/inphase-announces-300gb-holographic-discs/
This says 2006 for 300 GBS/ 2009 for 1TB
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/24/maxell_holo_storage/
"Late 2006"
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/80850/holographic-discs-set-for-retail-next-year.html
2006...
http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=69424&cat_id=581
2006...
http://www.layersmagazine.com/beta/article/holographic-discs-set-for-retail-next-year.html
2006...
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Optware-Announces-200GB-Holographic-Discs-for-2006-10859.shtml
2006 - for 200 gbs
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1785630,00.asp
2006...
http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,95446,00.html
2006... though this was written (2004) so...
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1311642.cms
2006...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1821012,00.asp
2006..
From Wikipedia (your source) - "160 times the capacity of single-layer Blu-ray Discs, and about 8 times the capacity of standard computer hard drives with space that accounts for year 2006 standards. Optware is expected to release a 200 GB disc in early June of and Maxell in September 2006 with a capacity of 300 GB and transfer rate of 20 MB/sec [3] [4].
londe and lack hair
Black Hair With Blonde
Holographic disks: standards with 200 and 300 GB storage are under development and prototypes expected in 2008
I've heard about Mac users waiting, but 5 years for most likely the first consumer device if lucky, 6 for probably first computer device. 2012.... yes exactly when I wanted to buy my next laptop after the next four I plan to purchase.
As I said they aren't attacking the Consumer market because they have no Backing. Who can beat Sony when Sony pay's best buy to Disply the blue rays and HD-DVD no longer is displayed?
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn8370
This link says 2006
http://www.engadget.com/2005/04/18/inphase-announces-300gb-holographic-discs/
This says 2006 for 300 GBS/ 2009 for 1TB
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/11/24/maxell_holo_storage/
"Late 2006"
http://www.pcpro.co.uk/news/80850/holographic-discs-set-for-retail-next-year.html
2006...
http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/article.jsp?article_id=69424&cat_id=581
2006...
http://www.layersmagazine.com/beta/article/holographic-discs-set-for-retail-next-year.html
2006...
http://news.softpedia.com/news/Optware-Announces-200GB-Holographic-Discs-for-2006-10859.shtml
2006 - for 200 gbs
http://www.extremetech.com/article2/0,1558,1785630,00.asp
2006...
http://www.computerworld.com/hardwaretopics/storage/story/0,10801,95446,00.html
2006... though this was written (2004) so...
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1311642.cms
2006...
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1821012,00.asp
2006..
From Wikipedia (your source) - "160 times the capacity of single-layer Blu-ray Discs, and about 8 times the capacity of standard computer hard drives with space that accounts for year 2006 standards. Optware is expected to release a 200 GB disc in early June of and Maxell in September 2006 with a capacity of 300 GB and transfer rate of 20 MB/sec [3] [4].
ranviper
Jan 5, 12:21 AM
My jeep is currently in shop getting
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
1) new tires
2) oil and filter change
3) new brakes
4) inspection
It's an 05' Liberty 4WD and I love the thing. Ill clean it up and post some pics tomorrow. :cool:
EscobarFilms
Mar 26, 12:30 AM
umm ok.. so why ios doesnt support full hd? will the new ios 5 will support full hd?
SoraLimit
Sep 20, 07:58 PM
I have no idea haha.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
I was also looking at some 3g Leather Cases (those are my favorite style) is there any reason they wouldn't work with my 4g? For example, this one looks good:
http://www.amazon.com/DLO-HipCase-Leather-Folio-touch/dp/B000WOIFO2
but would my 4g fit in there?
The new iPod touch is more thinner and narrow compared to the 3rd gen. It's just gonna wobble around the cases if you did that.
KnightWRX
May 2, 05:12 PM
With so many people using iOS nowadays, making the deletion process consistent throughout all hardware can ultimately be more logical and intuitive. This is Apple leveraging the ecosystem in a way to make PCs easier to use through familiarity. And this is a strong selling point for non computer users or for Windows users to switch to Mac. People who just never "got" computers or only familiar with Windows but know how to operate their iPhone, iPod Touch, or iPad (and there are MANY people like that) would benefit greatly from this direction.
Too bad it hurts usability in the end. Let's face it, Apple themselves have said that what works on laptops/desktops doesn't on tablet/smartphones and vice versa and now it seems they are making the same mistakes Microsoft did trying to cram Windows on touch tablets, except they are doing it on their laptop/desktop OS.
The touch UI paradigm (and UIKit) doesn't work on a laptop/desktop where you have a trackpad/mouse.
Too bad it hurts usability in the end. Let's face it, Apple themselves have said that what works on laptops/desktops doesn't on tablet/smartphones and vice versa and now it seems they are making the same mistakes Microsoft did trying to cram Windows on touch tablets, except they are doing it on their laptop/desktop OS.
The touch UI paradigm (and UIKit) doesn't work on a laptop/desktop where you have a trackpad/mouse.
SeaFox
Dec 28, 02:23 AM
Here is your quote SeaFox.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
You are an condescending individual and take my post out of context.
You can't please all of the people all of the time.
"I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly."
I stand by the statement. WebTV failed because at the time everyone had CRT TVs, which are much blurrier than a computer monitor. Even if you are using a new plasma screen set you have to account for how you use your device. One sits in front of their monitor by a couple feet. This makes 12 point text readable. Now, step back from this thread about six feet or so, however far you usually sit from your TV, and you'll see why. Even if you're viewing the screen at the real resolution of the HD set (1920x1080 for the real nice sets) you're still not going to be wanting to read long passages to text from your TV. Kinda like people don't like reading books in their entirety one screen at a time in Acrobat.
When you ask a home entertainment device to perform the functions of a regular computer you're adding all sorts of complexity and starting down a slippery slope. Let's say Apple added the ability to view Word files to the iTV. Someone would complain that they couldn't edit them. Same with iMovie files. Now you have to add that functionality. Then someone would say "well, what about image files? I can already watch my iPhoto library, why can't I do color and brightness/contrast correction?"
This is exactly the same thing that comes up about the iPod and the Apple Phone. Yeah, the iPod has no built-in FM tuner, no voice memo ability, no built in recording ability, built in FM transmitter for the car, ect. And adding these features would make the interface more complicated, when one of the things that makes the iPod such a hit is it's simplicity. Why do current music playing phones suck? Because the player functionality is hidden under a bunch of unintuitive menus, just like most of the other bells and whistles that may have influenced you to buy the phone to begin with. It's the current state of overly complicated interface design that gets people excited about Apple entering the cell phone market.
Edit: Also, one last point. If you put too much functionality into the iTV that is normally relegated to a regular Mac, then charge less for the iTV, you're going to eat into sales of the Mac Mini. Apple wouldn't do this, and this is the main reason I don't think you'll see the ability to open Word files or surf the Net with the iTV, that and it just sounds like a weird feature to have in a set top box.
If you've got your Mini hooked up to your TV and its working good for you I applaud you. The iTV is clearly not aiming for your type of consumer. I've read articles about setting up Minis as PVR's with HD sets, and invariably the indivdulal has some difficulty finding a monitor resolution and refresh rate the HD set will play along with at first, and actual use of the device is hobbled by needing a wireless keyboard or similar. Apple is aiming for the average TV watching consumer with the iTV, who I can tell you from personal experience are not nearly as smart.
bigandy
Nov 27, 01:56 PM
i would like to see this display option.
however, as stated, coming from DigiTimes this could just be hot air. :rolleyes:
however, as stated, coming from DigiTimes this could just be hot air. :rolleyes:
rdowns
Apr 21, 12:43 PM
Amazing that a thread on whether or not a person CAN drive a stick shift car has turned into a full blown debate on the merits of automatic vs manual transmissions. Personally I think this argument is similar to the Mac vs PC argument that has gone on for years, ultimately they're different, and a person should be able to use whichever one (or both) they choose for their own personal reasons. In both cases, transmissions and personal computers, they have their good points and their bad points. To each their own...
This is MacRumors. Members will argue everything.
This is MacRumors. Members will argue everything.
