apfhex
Jan 9, 03:36 PM
9.41 on the ****.
Nice theory there, but out here in California, Pacific Standard Time, that wouldn't make a bit of sense as the time for the posting of the keynote.
In fact 9:41am PST is nearly the exactly time during the keynote that Steve announced the ****.
Nice theory there, but out here in California, Pacific Standard Time, that wouldn't make a bit of sense as the time for the posting of the keynote.
In fact 9:41am PST is nearly the exactly time during the keynote that Steve announced the ****.
JAT
Apr 17, 01:28 AM
Everything on the original iPhone was already in use by other phones. Apple simply combined them all together in one phone and made it simpler to use. It revolutionized yeah, by simply bringing that stuff to the front of peoples minds.
I'm confused. What are you denying in this post?
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Unless....you really want to. Then you can just root your system and do whatever you want. Like, opening yourself up to malware. That was very popular with the Windows users.
I'm confused. What are you denying in this post?
Apple has by far the most restrictive ecosystem. You can't even load applications that are not approved by Apple.
Unless....you really want to. Then you can just root your system and do whatever you want. Like, opening yourself up to malware. That was very popular with the Windows users.
toromac
Apr 9, 03:56 PM
um just walked into my local Best buy and bought a 16gb ipad 2 Wifi in black. they had like 7 or 8 of each model. interesting... maybe they�re not participating in this so called promotion.
CQd44
Apr 16, 06:41 PM
Ahhhh.... dude... the only Apps that don't really get approved are ones that do things that can cause security risks or just plain trying to steal your information.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Didn't that lady's iAd gallery app get rejected?
also, the Google Voice had problems getting out. And different browsers didn't appear for a long while I thought.
Yeah, I know... there are also Apps that break the rules and get axed, but for the most part, my first point is true. Any legitimate application can get approved.
If you keep up with Android apps, security is one of the their problems. Open? Yes... risky? Yes.
Didn't that lady's iAd gallery app get rejected?
also, the Google Voice had problems getting out. And different browsers didn't appear for a long while I thought.
more...
ctdonath
Oct 1, 08:59 AM
Local people and conservation societies defended the building as a unique witness of the region's architectural development. It's not a particularly pretty building but it's certainly one with some history around it. ... But leaving the building to the elements with no maintenance is in my opinion wrong, immoral and a disregard of what property ownership should be about. ... If Jobs wanted a modern building ... then he should have got his rich ass moved to another large plot and built his modern glassbox there, after he sold Jackling House to somebody who wanted to live in that and respect local conservationist's and planning authorities' wishes.
I appreciate the sentiment. Anything which has outlived its owner[s] should be given some consideration & deference for historical value. One should treat antiques with respect the spirit of its creation and prior ownership, not just abusing/mangling/destroying it out of a sense of "it's mine so I can do what I want with it." Problem is: where to draw the line, and drawing the line is the prerogative of the current owner.
Are the locals & conservators doing so out of genuine concern for the Jackling House? Is it in fact a worthy part of history, or a notable example? or are they closer to naysaying for the self-serving benefits thereof (striving for relevance, trying to keep a billionaire off the street, whatever)? I'm guessing somewhere in the middle: yeah, a mansion of a distinct style is worth consideration for preservation, and those insisting thereon need something to insist thereon lest their relevance evaporate.
Leaving it to rot shows poor character, either by not caring for what one owns (disrespectful of one's own efforts and possessions) or as a tactic against busybodies (a nasty you-can't-make-me tone). It's his, it should at least be in nice enough shape to have lunch or spend a mundane night there. FWIW, I've owned a remote home, so appreciate the annoyance of long-distance maintenance.
Comes down to the fact that it's located in a high-price-tag area, and the value of the land alone exceeds the building's historical value. We don't know if anyone would have paid the millions to live there, and can be sure nobody would have paid the millions to preserve it for its own sake. The only reason AFAIK anybody is taking an interest in it (ex.: we're talking about it here) is that Steve ***** Jobs is about to destroy it. That a tiny number of people may have genuine interest in preserving either Spanish Revival or Jackling artifacts IMHO just does not give enough weight to overrule the house's owner. If they can't come up with enough of their own money (NOT coerced taxpayer-confiscated funds) to buy it outright or at least relocate it, and there isn't any other broad compelling reason (we're talking Jackling here, not Tesla, and Spanish Revival, not F.L.Wright), then fire up the bulldozers. Fact is, there just isn't that much desirable acreage in that region suitable for a billionaire's estate; "go somewhere else" holds little traction when proximity to Apple's campus is vital and there isn't much else suitable.
As I start to peek "over the hill", my perspective of preserving works is changing. Much has sentimental value, but little warrants outright indefinite preservation. Jackling was one man, long gone; time for his spiritual successor in business success and industrial influence to take his place and leave a new mark.
I appreciate the sentiment. Anything which has outlived its owner[s] should be given some consideration & deference for historical value. One should treat antiques with respect the spirit of its creation and prior ownership, not just abusing/mangling/destroying it out of a sense of "it's mine so I can do what I want with it." Problem is: where to draw the line, and drawing the line is the prerogative of the current owner.
Are the locals & conservators doing so out of genuine concern for the Jackling House? Is it in fact a worthy part of history, or a notable example? or are they closer to naysaying for the self-serving benefits thereof (striving for relevance, trying to keep a billionaire off the street, whatever)? I'm guessing somewhere in the middle: yeah, a mansion of a distinct style is worth consideration for preservation, and those insisting thereon need something to insist thereon lest their relevance evaporate.
Leaving it to rot shows poor character, either by not caring for what one owns (disrespectful of one's own efforts and possessions) or as a tactic against busybodies (a nasty you-can't-make-me tone). It's his, it should at least be in nice enough shape to have lunch or spend a mundane night there. FWIW, I've owned a remote home, so appreciate the annoyance of long-distance maintenance.
Comes down to the fact that it's located in a high-price-tag area, and the value of the land alone exceeds the building's historical value. We don't know if anyone would have paid the millions to live there, and can be sure nobody would have paid the millions to preserve it for its own sake. The only reason AFAIK anybody is taking an interest in it (ex.: we're talking about it here) is that Steve ***** Jobs is about to destroy it. That a tiny number of people may have genuine interest in preserving either Spanish Revival or Jackling artifacts IMHO just does not give enough weight to overrule the house's owner. If they can't come up with enough of their own money (NOT coerced taxpayer-confiscated funds) to buy it outright or at least relocate it, and there isn't any other broad compelling reason (we're talking Jackling here, not Tesla, and Spanish Revival, not F.L.Wright), then fire up the bulldozers. Fact is, there just isn't that much desirable acreage in that region suitable for a billionaire's estate; "go somewhere else" holds little traction when proximity to Apple's campus is vital and there isn't much else suitable.
As I start to peek "over the hill", my perspective of preserving works is changing. Much has sentimental value, but little warrants outright indefinite preservation. Jackling was one man, long gone; time for his spiritual successor in business success and industrial influence to take his place and leave a new mark.
swingerofbirch
Sep 25, 02:19 PM
I was hoping for at least version 1.6.
1.5 is a little too little, a little too late.
1.5 is a little too little, a little too late.
more...
bikertwin
Sep 25, 03:51 PM
Technically my POWERMAC G4 can run iMovie, Keynote, and other mac software. RUNNING and FUNCTIONING (at a reasonable speed) are two totally different things. iPhoto takes a day to get going. I can't imagine aperture.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle.
Just a thought.
I wouldn't get too excited about Aperture running on 'lighter' hardware such as MacBooks or Mac minis. I think the idea is that, rather than doing hardcore raw file processing on these lightweight hardware products, you'd just have your JPEG-preview-only Aperture library on these machines. So the really speedy functionality on this lightweight hardware would be limited to organizing, sorting, searching, slideshows, etc. of pre-generated JPEG previews.
I doubt we'll be doing hardcore bulk raw processing on a Mac mini, even with Aperture 1.5. But I wouldn't mind if we could.
Anyway... I don't want to ruin anybody's happy day, but the reality is, if you don't have the latest and greatest Apple Machine, the current software runs pretty slow.
Go to the Apple store (yes, this means some of you will have to leave your apartment) and try running this software on a mac mini. Don't get depressed when it takes your entire lunch break to start the software. Forget about moving stacks of photos around and editing. As I mentioned... I had problems with the G5 QUAD and the original aperture at my Apple Store in Seattle.
Just a thought.
I wouldn't get too excited about Aperture running on 'lighter' hardware such as MacBooks or Mac minis. I think the idea is that, rather than doing hardcore raw file processing on these lightweight hardware products, you'd just have your JPEG-preview-only Aperture library on these machines. So the really speedy functionality on this lightweight hardware would be limited to organizing, sorting, searching, slideshows, etc. of pre-generated JPEG previews.
I doubt we'll be doing hardcore bulk raw processing on a Mac mini, even with Aperture 1.5. But I wouldn't mind if we could.
wmmk
Aug 13, 10:59 PM
The 20" is still way over-priced.
yeah, but it has an apple logo and is made of brushed metal. if you don't like to pay for design, run unix on a homebuilt PC in a square plastic case.
yeah, but it has an apple logo and is made of brushed metal. if you don't like to pay for design, run unix on a homebuilt PC in a square plastic case.
more...
Branskins
Apr 29, 05:59 PM
Considering the Finder, where a slider had 3+ options to select, the user would eventually get frustrated. They could have kept it and added the same blue colour to the text or option being selected.
Why do we assume that the person using it is an idiot? What was so confusing about it? It takes two seconds to get use to it.
I think inverted scrolling has the potential to confuse people more and is probably harder to get use to.
Why do we assume that the person using it is an idiot? What was so confusing about it? It takes two seconds to get use to it.
I think inverted scrolling has the potential to confuse people more and is probably harder to get use to.
johndallas999
Apr 25, 01:34 PM
I don't get the fascination with a marginal bigger screen, if I need a bigger screen I get my iPad.
It's just a preference thing. I don't think it's the way everyone feels but that's like saying, I don't understand why people think 3.5" screen is plenty. People have different tastes/opinions. I would certainly prefer a larger screen if the phone size can be kept the same size.
It's just a preference thing. I don't think it's the way everyone feels but that's like saying, I don't understand why people think 3.5" screen is plenty. People have different tastes/opinions. I would certainly prefer a larger screen if the phone size can be kept the same size.
more...
SavMan
Oct 11, 09:42 PM
Jetson, I'm glad I'm taking your word, as someone who doesn't even own a 5G iPod, over my own, someone who sees 50-60 iPods a day. I couldn't possibly know better.
The fact remains: The acrylic used on the 5G is the same as the 4G.
The fact remains: The acrylic used on the 5G is the same as the 4G.
Timepass
Aug 1, 04:26 PM
I have always thought Apple would eventually open up it's DRM of their own free will. At this time, there is no serious competitor to the iPod/iTunes combo. Should serious competition arise, perhaps sometime Zune, the iPods inability to play music from other sources will be a competitive disadvantage.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
However, as a philosophical issue, I have a problem with any government interfering like this in a free market! Sometimes such interference is necessary to prevent harm to the public, but I don't see where this is the case with the iPod. It doesn't cause injury to the user, ( if you heed the volume warnings ), and there are alternatives. Those who don't like iPod/iTunes locking them in to one player are fully free to use the alternatives!]
It is a fine line. But really apple is flirting with needing the goverment to step in. Goverment waits to long to do anything and the damage is permant and compition is hurt for years to come. A good example is M$ got nailed for it but that didnt change the fact that it made the software the domante force on the market and they didnt have to give up the market share they took.
a completely free market is bad plan and simple. So is the other direction of the goverment controling everything. it has to be a balance bettween the 2. I am of the opinan that it is getting to the point in just DRM that it is getting close to the time where the goverment needs to step in and help clean up some of the mess before it gets out of hand and all they can do at most is damage control. Right now there is still time to prevent the damanage from happening. Apple got there market share power and now they are getting near to virtual monoploly standing in both the mp3 player market and online music store. Once you cross those lines and become a virtual monoploly in a market the rules change. No longer is using the power in one market to effect the other legal. (so Apple cannt use iTMS to effect ipod sales and ipod to effect iTMS sales as it does now.)
I also like to point out as people say pull out of those country you have to rememeber that they are just the first countries to pass these laws and THEY WILL NOT BE THE LAST. So should apple pull out of every country that pass those laws. Some how I think that is stupid idea. I expect in the next few years to see all of the EU have laws forcing open DRM and now you are talking about a large enough market that it really will effect the bottom line. And at some point the US is going to pass laws forcing open DRM. Now think about it. Apple can burn there bridges now or releliez this is where the market is heading weather they like it or not. Now either move now and deal or pay the price in permate damage down the road.
more...
JRoDDz
Mar 17, 08:22 AM
Bottom line is this kid probably got fired and is now liable for $300 bucks, is seen as a thief by his family, friends and ex-coworkers, will probably hold a guilt trip for some time and probably start him down the road of failure. All this kid was doing, was trying to work at a job. Something admirable. But it's all ok. Because you have your iPad2 at a discounted price. enjoy yourself.
John Purple
Jan 15, 02:41 PM
another thing people should keep in mind is...why release all new products at one event when you can stagger the release and keep interest over a longer period of time.
i.e macbook pro updates are coming, just like most of things people want (although SOME of the things some people want are just downright crazy), but it wont happen at once, and its gonna take a while!
I hope they will not delay MBP to avoid canibalism with MBA.
i.e macbook pro updates are coming, just like most of things people want (although SOME of the things some people want are just downright crazy), but it wont happen at once, and its gonna take a while!
I hope they will not delay MBP to avoid canibalism with MBA.
more...
JKK photography
Apr 12, 06:48 AM
That's not entirely true. When you buy a new mac you get iLife, with a new PC, you get office, windows live suite (ilife competitor), other apps including anti-virus. So you can't say that "ou can't do absolutely anything with Windows out of the box without downloading extra software."
You get the same or similar level of functionality when buying a new computer. Apple gives you iLife, PCs you get office, and other stuff.
You get trials. Not actual copies, unless you pay for the license.
There is a big difference there.
You get the same or similar level of functionality when buying a new computer. Apple gives you iLife, PCs you get office, and other stuff.
You get trials. Not actual copies, unless you pay for the license.
There is a big difference there.
Nitrocide
Apr 15, 07:37 PM
The design is nice and I honestly wouldn't doubt that Apple might make the new iphone similar to this since the macs and the ipad are taking that turn, however like others have said, this is a fake because the aluminum would block the 3G receiver. Unless Apple magically found a way to get around that issue! which would be AMAZING!
Here is an idea, because the apple logo is black plastic, why not put the 3G receiver behind the Apple logo? ;)
Because they have enough issue with reception when the whole back is plastic. On my existing phone if you cover the relatively small aerial part with your hand reception gets a kicking drastically, im guessing the apple logo is generally covered when your holding the phone for a call.
Here is an idea, because the apple logo is black plastic, why not put the 3G receiver behind the Apple logo? ;)
Because they have enough issue with reception when the whole back is plastic. On my existing phone if you cover the relatively small aerial part with your hand reception gets a kicking drastically, im guessing the apple logo is generally covered when your holding the phone for a call.
more...
maflynn
Apr 11, 08:29 AM
Also Aero Peek,
control-tab and windows (command key?)-tab offer some cool ways to swap around active applications.
MS has done a lot of good work with the UI, in terms of polish and making it look very nice. Apple on the other hand still lacks a complete consistent look and feel. Just look at iTunes and the horizontal traffic lights.
Apple has a long history of implementing UI guidlines and then breaking them in their own apps. OSX itself exhibits this, though with SL, its gotten better.
control-tab and windows (command key?)-tab offer some cool ways to swap around active applications.
MS has done a lot of good work with the UI, in terms of polish and making it look very nice. Apple on the other hand still lacks a complete consistent look and feel. Just look at iTunes and the horizontal traffic lights.
Apple has a long history of implementing UI guidlines and then breaking them in their own apps. OSX itself exhibits this, though with SL, its gotten better.
MykullMyerz
Mar 17, 09:02 AM
Bull. I had a girlfriend in high school get fired from OfficeMax for being $100 off where she had been working for almost a year. Unfortunately some guy came in that day, paid for two computers and a printer with $100 bills (total was something like $2500, as this was the late 90's). She counted it twice, but apparently one was missed. Corporate policy stated that she could only be off by less than $5 at the end of her shift.
She didn't pocket the money and her manager knew that she didn't, but she still lost her job. Company policy.
Would I like to get an iPad for half price? Absolutely, but ONLY if it was because the company was selling it for half price. I pay what I am supposed to pay.
Well, in that case, I think your girlfriend's manager and her employer were being a-holes. I've had several friends who have had jobs as cashiers at a plethora of different retail outlets, and 80% of them have made the unfortunate mistake of coming up short on their register. Not one of them ever got fired. The worst that happened was a friend was suspended without pay for a week while they investigated the incident, but when they found no evidence of malicious intent, they closed the case and brought him back on board. But, I guess it depends on the company.
She didn't pocket the money and her manager knew that she didn't, but she still lost her job. Company policy.
Would I like to get an iPad for half price? Absolutely, but ONLY if it was because the company was selling it for half price. I pay what I am supposed to pay.
Well, in that case, I think your girlfriend's manager and her employer were being a-holes. I've had several friends who have had jobs as cashiers at a plethora of different retail outlets, and 80% of them have made the unfortunate mistake of coming up short on their register. Not one of them ever got fired. The worst that happened was a friend was suspended without pay for a week while they investigated the incident, but when they found no evidence of malicious intent, they closed the case and brought him back on board. But, I guess it depends on the company.
rcandre2
Jul 21, 03:13 PM
Apple Apple Apple... or should I say Steve Steve Steve...
What you are doing right now is what a psychologist would call "diverting." You are simply trying to take away the focus of your own iPhone 4's faults and place everyone's attention on other brands that we do not care about. You admitted you screwed up (congratulations, that is a great first step). Now it is time to take another baby step and fix the problem... your problem... the iPhone 4.
What you are doing right now is what a psychologist would call "diverting." You are simply trying to take away the focus of your own iPhone 4's faults and place everyone's attention on other brands that we do not care about. You admitted you screwed up (congratulations, that is a great first step). Now it is time to take another baby step and fix the problem... your problem... the iPhone 4.
skoker
Jan 9, 04:51 PM
Awesome Running smooth. We're the first in line so its smooth. Keynote coverage and ***removed**** release.
THANK YOU!
You must be either excited or ignorant, spoiler ;)
THANK YOU!
You must be either excited or ignorant, spoiler ;)
flopticalcube
Nov 26, 05:21 PM
No, but it was fun! Was thinking about getting a MB for a few months, now I had no excuse! :)
Fearless Leader
Jan 14, 04:14 PM
The first bit was funny for this teenage, but this was nothing for a "Journalist" to be doing.
Ommid
Apr 25, 11:52 AM
Curiouser and curiouser.
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
It would be 4S ;)
If it's a fake, whoever did it did a pretty interesting job on it.
It looks plausible.
I mean we had:
iphone 3g
iphone 3gs
why not
iphone 4
iphone 4gs
Which would give incentive for people to go for the white one I guess.
then the 5 comes out later?
It would be 4S ;)
tny
Nov 16, 04:26 PM
Do they have to remake a new "Universal Binary?" Because aren't the current UB's for Intel and PPC? Please tell me they wont. I don't wnat to have to wait again for new UB's
No. The AMD processors we're talking about have the same instruction set as the Intel processors Apple is currently using; in fact, the 64 bit extensions were written by AMD, not Intel (Intel's original 64-bit solution is Itanium, which on the seamier side of the computer trade - for instance, in the Register - is called the Itanic, because it is still sinking; eventually, Intel was forced to adopt AMD's extensions because the architecture is more compatible with the Pentium/x86 architecture).
Such a switch would be comparable in terms of technological impact to the switch from IBM for the G3 to Motorola for the G4, and then to IBM for the G5.
Now, if Apple switched to Intel Itanium or (if it were ever released again) the Digital Alpha, yes, a new form of Universal Binary would be needed. I suspect that the Cell processor is not completely compatible with the G5, so it's possible that a switch to Cell would require a new form of UB, too.
No. The AMD processors we're talking about have the same instruction set as the Intel processors Apple is currently using; in fact, the 64 bit extensions were written by AMD, not Intel (Intel's original 64-bit solution is Itanium, which on the seamier side of the computer trade - for instance, in the Register - is called the Itanic, because it is still sinking; eventually, Intel was forced to adopt AMD's extensions because the architecture is more compatible with the Pentium/x86 architecture).
Such a switch would be comparable in terms of technological impact to the switch from IBM for the G3 to Motorola for the G4, and then to IBM for the G5.
Now, if Apple switched to Intel Itanium or (if it were ever released again) the Digital Alpha, yes, a new form of Universal Binary would be needed. I suspect that the Cell processor is not completely compatible with the G5, so it's possible that a switch to Cell would require a new form of UB, too.
