Phil A.
Apr 18, 02:48 PM
I'm surprised it's taken this long, to be honest: I've thought for a long time that Samsung's phones in particular are pretty much a blatant rip-off of Apple's industrial design and user interface.
HTC have shown that they can produce an innovative and different interface with their Sense UI, but Samsung seem to just want to rip-off Apples look and feel
HTC have shown that they can produce an innovative and different interface with their Sense UI, but Samsung seem to just want to rip-off Apples look and feel
teme
Aug 7, 02:30 PM
Excellent. Now it's time to wait for the sub-$2000 "Pro" desktop announcement. There's a suspicious gap in their lineup. Mac Pro Cube (http://macprocube.com), perhaps?
I'll wait for that until Paris, and if it isn't available then, I'll buy a PC.
I'll wait for that until Paris, and if it isn't available then, I'll buy a PC.
vartanarsen
Mar 28, 10:45 AM
It's the usual geek misconception of what a device needs. They are all about checklist items. And thus they are missing the fact that a major paradigm shift is occurring in this world where the far larger non-tech audience is now buying tech toys. This audience does not know much about specs, and cares even less. All they care about is cost (Apple is right there in phones), how their apps work (just great on the iPhone), choice of apps (no one has more choice than Apple), and what they have read or heard about (Apple is the advertising leader).
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
Agreed that its not about a checklist. Apple takes time to make sure hardware, software, features, everything, all works together seamlessly in 1 nice neat, durable, elegent piece.
Sometimes, jamming highest specs all into a crappy product is not the answer. What good is an 8 MP camera in a plasticky-phone?
So geeks will continue to stamp their feet and pout about checklists that Apple is "failing" at. The rest of the world will keep happily using their amazing iPhones.
Agreed that its not about a checklist. Apple takes time to make sure hardware, software, features, everything, all works together seamlessly in 1 nice neat, durable, elegent piece.
Sometimes, jamming highest specs all into a crappy product is not the answer. What good is an 8 MP camera in a plasticky-phone?
LoganT
Mar 26, 10:23 PM
Apple will do a point release to support all the new hardware features of the iPhone 5. Like they did with the Verizon iPhone.
AppleMacDudeG4
May 4, 06:43 PM
While I do enjoy downloading apps from the app store since I get the immediacy of not having to drive to the mall, find a parking space, go to the Apple store and then having to drive back home, I do not like the idea of downloading an entire OS over the Internet. The size of the file would mean several hours waiting.
I rather just have a DVD that I can reuse if something goes wrong.
I rather just have a DVD that I can reuse if something goes wrong.
iMacZealot
Jul 30, 01:45 AM
I don't think I've hated any company so passionately as I hate Verizon. I have not one positive word to say about them. If/when Apple announces a phone, I'll pay the early termination fee on my Verizon contract and jump to the carrier with Apple's phone. Hopefully that'll be Cingular.
I have tried all four of the major cell companies in America except for Cingular, although my brother had it and travels a ton (new day, new city) and dropped it. Maybe it's better now.
Sprint has always been reliable for me, although their people will get you into a major frenzy with a $500 phone bill. The international is awful, might I add.
Verizon was reliable, although their network has been terrible. As I've said, I never get 3 bars or above, and I live in Denver! The service will constantly go out whenever I'm in NYC. The phones do seem to be cheap. My Samsung A670 is probably the only non-joke phone they had, and I've been pretty happy with it.
While I was in Sprint practically everyday trying to figure out what the hell I'd do for my trip to Singapore and Cambodia, they swindled me into signing up for 2 new phones and the SIM card for the international one never came! Luckily, my aunt was smart and had phones from T-Mobile with int'l rates of $0.99/min ($1.50 for Sprint, Verizon was even worse). Quite honestly, the voice quality was great, from here to Singapore. The service was really good, too. I'm just going to pay the Verizon termination fee and get a PEBL because I can't deal with the Nation's Most Unreliable network.
I have tried all four of the major cell companies in America except for Cingular, although my brother had it and travels a ton (new day, new city) and dropped it. Maybe it's better now.
Sprint has always been reliable for me, although their people will get you into a major frenzy with a $500 phone bill. The international is awful, might I add.
Verizon was reliable, although their network has been terrible. As I've said, I never get 3 bars or above, and I live in Denver! The service will constantly go out whenever I'm in NYC. The phones do seem to be cheap. My Samsung A670 is probably the only non-joke phone they had, and I've been pretty happy with it.
While I was in Sprint practically everyday trying to figure out what the hell I'd do for my trip to Singapore and Cambodia, they swindled me into signing up for 2 new phones and the SIM card for the international one never came! Luckily, my aunt was smart and had phones from T-Mobile with int'l rates of $0.99/min ($1.50 for Sprint, Verizon was even worse). Quite honestly, the voice quality was great, from here to Singapore. The service was really good, too. I'm just going to pay the Verizon termination fee and get a PEBL because I can't deal with the Nation's Most Unreliable network.
navguy
Jan 4, 10:12 AM
There are numerous Youtube videos using the car kit, some that are dash mounted, and it seems to make no difference. I understand its more of a "line of sight" issue so as long as the mount is visible to the sky you're fine. I get mine by Fedex today and I'm mounting it to the dash so I'll let you know how it all works for me.
thanks for the feedback. that would be great.
some of the behavior of the mount that i'm noticing (by using the TomTom car kit free app) is that from a cold start, the mount takes about 20-30 seconds to achieve a satellite fix ... seems longer than the 3GS which makes sense because the mount doesn't have assisted GPS (cellular triangulation help) ...
BUT i'm curious whether the satnav apps are waiting on the mount's fix or taking first availalble? ... i would hope they'd wait on mount since ultimately it should have more precision since it's called 'enhanced' GPS, but how can you tell for sure?
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
thanks for the feedback. that would be great.
some of the behavior of the mount that i'm noticing (by using the TomTom car kit free app) is that from a cold start, the mount takes about 20-30 seconds to achieve a satellite fix ... seems longer than the 3GS which makes sense because the mount doesn't have assisted GPS (cellular triangulation help) ...
BUT i'm curious whether the satnav apps are waiting on the mount's fix or taking first availalble? ... i would hope they'd wait on mount since ultimately it should have more precision since it's called 'enhanced' GPS, but how can you tell for sure?
one thing i've tried is to remove the iPhone from the mount after navigating and see if it disrupts the GPS signal w/in the satnav app ... i would expect there to be a switch over to internal GPS and see a small disruption ... but i'm not getting a disrupted signal ... can't be sure one way or the other
JesterJJZ
Apr 21, 04:52 PM
Here's a quick scale / mockup
Does not like.
Does not like.
boncellis
Aug 11, 02:05 PM
I've said all along the imac will get conroe. With woodcrest in the mac pro, I'd say it's pretty well guaranteed. The imac only got a laptop processor because it was the only choice. From here on out it'll get the desktop processor it deserves.
I also think the macbook will get merom sooner rather than later. The two lines will still be differentiated by size, screen res, casing, backlit keys, dedicated graphics, and express card slot. The macbook needs to compete against PC laptops, not the macbook pro. The processors will pretty similar on the G4 laptops before intel (1.33/1.42 for the ibook, 1.5/1.67 for the powerbook) and yet there were still plenty of compelling reasons to go for the powerbook. Same thing still applies.
Your rock solid reasoning has won me over. I wasn't sure about what chips would be used where, but I think you have me convinced.
I just hope the Mini sees an upgrade relatively soon inasmuch as the phantom mid-range tower has yet to materialize. I may have to break down and get the Yonah one.
I also think the macbook will get merom sooner rather than later. The two lines will still be differentiated by size, screen res, casing, backlit keys, dedicated graphics, and express card slot. The macbook needs to compete against PC laptops, not the macbook pro. The processors will pretty similar on the G4 laptops before intel (1.33/1.42 for the ibook, 1.5/1.67 for the powerbook) and yet there were still plenty of compelling reasons to go for the powerbook. Same thing still applies.
Your rock solid reasoning has won me over. I wasn't sure about what chips would be used where, but I think you have me convinced.
I just hope the Mini sees an upgrade relatively soon inasmuch as the phantom mid-range tower has yet to materialize. I may have to break down and get the Yonah one.
myca
Apr 5, 02:42 PM
Much of it is the automatic association that "jailbreak = pirated apps" which for many of us is not the case. I have spent $52 on apps in the last 3 weeks of having iPad... they're making a killing off me. Even with all of the apps I have, I can't stand looking at the device's home screen with an inch of space between each app, and it drives me nuts that I am limited to how many icons i can put in each folder. IF I can't jailbreak this thing in the next week, it's going back to the store, and I'll buy the Xoom. It solves all the issues. Would rather stay with Apple because the hardware is so much better than android, but I have to be realistic, software is what makes any device (hence why I like my Mac so much)
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
I tip my hat to you that you still buy your software when Jailbroken phones can easily use pirated software.
This is one of the reasons that Apple (and the console manufacturers to name a few) are so careful with creating these closed systems. It's been pretty much statistically proven with the PSP that the ease of hacking the device made software sales suffer dramatically: a 2.95 tie ratio, compared to the DS 4.5 ratio which itself has been plagued by piracy. Whereas the wii, 360 and PS3 all have a tie ratio of over 7. So it's understandable that when a company relies on revenues from software through things like the app store, or licensing fees in the case of the console makers, they want a closed system that they can control to avoid the problems sony had with the PSP.
The more Apple go down the road as selling their ios devices as media/gaming consumption devices the more they will want a solid closed system. Which I'm fine with, as my iPhone is a phone, with a few apps on it and it plays my music, if apple ever tried this on their actual computer OS I'd have to brush up on my Windows skills pretty darn quickly.
Of note the PSP has sold over 60 million but is still deemed a failure, in part due the terrible tie ratio.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
callme
Mar 27, 05:29 AM
These companies can just float away on their clouds. Cloud-based would make sense if there was wireless and cellular completely covering the nation/world... using cloud at this time would castrate their share of market. I take "cloud-based" rumors as pure rumors at this time. Maybe in 2020 it will be feasible, and no doubt it is being developed. However, by 2020 we will have 1TB iPads. What's the point of cloud, then? Control? Observation?
There are a lot of reasons. One would be the release of a top-engineered product in October to compete with other products set to compete with the iPad2 at that time. Those pads seem to have this lPad1 spec sheet behind them. If Apple wants to crush competition they should do dual releases for a couple years and constantly update hardware and software to trounce the others which might ruin their grip on the market.
Physical USB? With a computer that can connect through a dock? What's the big deal? iPads only have 32GB. What would be the use of some giant connector? iPad will do without clunky, redundant additions for a while.
iPads actually have 64GB models.
There are a lot of reasons. One would be the release of a top-engineered product in October to compete with other products set to compete with the iPad2 at that time. Those pads seem to have this lPad1 spec sheet behind them. If Apple wants to crush competition they should do dual releases for a couple years and constantly update hardware and software to trounce the others which might ruin their grip on the market.
Physical USB? With a computer that can connect through a dock? What's the big deal? iPads only have 32GB. What would be the use of some giant connector? iPad will do without clunky, redundant additions for a while.
iPads actually have 64GB models.
The Toon Master
Sep 11, 02:07 PM
My friend, who's cousin works at apple, says that he told him that Movies will be available soon, and an onslaught of new tv shows. The movies would be divided by comedy, horror, etc, and movies include Boogyman, Exorcism of Emily Rose, and he said that apple was trying to get the Inyuasha Movies as well. Ptricing might be 3-5 dollars
rememeber, none of this has been confirmed by apple
rememeber, none of this has been confirmed by apple
firestarter
Mar 29, 08:41 AM
Seems strange that they're not rolling this out to iDevices. I can't see them having to hand over 30% of the revenue to Apple - this looks like more of a Dropbox competitor.
Possibly Apple's launch of a competitor is imminent, and Amazon just doesn't think that they can compete on Apple's home turf?
I hope this is true. Could be quite useful.
Possibly Apple's launch of a competitor is imminent, and Amazon just doesn't think that they can compete on Apple's home turf?
I hope this is true. Could be quite useful.
milozauckerman
Jul 21, 11:05 PM
Apple can't not update at least the top-end MacBooks. Dell & Co. will be putting Core 2 in comparably priced machines - $1299/1499 - as the price breaks down similarly to Core Duo chips.
Apple doesn't want switchers going "hmmm, I can get a MacBook for <x> or a Dell with a better newer processor for the same."
Apple doesn't want switchers going "hmmm, I can get a MacBook for <x> or a Dell with a better newer processor for the same."
supmango
Nov 2, 12:54 PM
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
Agreed, nothing like this is ever "free".
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
Agreed, nothing like this is ever "free".
moet_01
Aug 12, 05:31 PM
The promo has nothing to do with new launches...they are completely independent and serve a public that is not interested nor in need of a cutting-edge notebook. The combo MB x iPod is wonderful for most, and it will be attractive even if the Merom notes are in the market.
Right and they will be updated when there ready. The updated Books will not be a qualifying Mac for the Free iPod.
Right and they will be updated when there ready. The updated Books will not be a qualifying Mac for the Free iPod.
Mechcozmo
Nov 26, 01:18 PM
Apple should give it full capabilities, about a 12" enclosure, and a durable case and we have ourselves a new toy and I've got my 12" PB replacement!
I'd buy that... but the 15" MacBook Pro would probably offer too much extra power for me versus a tablet. The touchscreen is great, but I wouldn't want a half-baked computer.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
I'd think it is more for drawing. Web-browsing is also very enjoyable with a touch-screen; just tap to follow a link. With Ink (handwriting recognizer in OS X) you could enter in a URL pretty easily.
I'd buy that... but the 15" MacBook Pro would probably offer too much extra power for me versus a tablet. The touchscreen is great, but I wouldn't want a half-baked computer.
Why would I want to waste my time learning shorthand (which makes the assumption that TPCs could handle various forms of shorthand) so I could do through writing what I can already do at 70+ WPM via typing. And with typing, it solves the whole problem of handwriting recognition, because there ISN'T ANY.
I'd think it is more for drawing. Web-browsing is also very enjoyable with a touch-screen; just tap to follow a link. With Ink (handwriting recognizer in OS X) you could enter in a URL pretty easily.
bobbytallant
Mar 28, 11:25 AM
I guess the later release of the next gen iPhone would make sense at least, in terms of the release of the white iPhone 4.
When Philip Schiller said the white iPhone 4 would arrive 'this spring', many questioned the logic, given the 'impending' Summer release of the iPhone 5.
The timing of this release obviously makes makes more sense now (if this latest rumor is true lol).
When Philip Schiller said the white iPhone 4 would arrive 'this spring', many questioned the logic, given the 'impending' Summer release of the iPhone 5.
The timing of this release obviously makes makes more sense now (if this latest rumor is true lol).
Stevamundo
Nov 29, 05:30 PM
i never had any problems with the Boot Camp Partition until this
mac ran fine and i need to use Windows for certain programs
Did you even bother to read this link that someone posted for you cav23j? http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
mac ran fine and i need to use Windows for certain programs
Did you even bother to read this link that someone posted for you cav23j? http://openforum.sophos.com/t5/Sophos-Anti-Virus-for-Mac-Home/Slow-down-when-scanning-Work-around-now-available/td-p/295
rovex
Apr 20, 01:03 AM
Keeping the same design is a wise choice, i reckon they Will make it thinner still.
ZorPrime
Nov 26, 12:34 AM
i hope apple comes out with a shoe phone, something the pink panther or inspector gadget would use.
Very retro.. ;)
Very retro.. ;)
noahtk
May 4, 06:40 PM
In 3 years there will be no "PREFERRED" anything with Macs. Everything that is installed on Mac will come from the App Store. It WILL BE the EXCLUSIVE method of loading ANYTHING on Macs. OS X will become exactly like iOS and ALL of you will just happily accept it. I expect to see statements on Macrumors like "Oh how wonderful it is that Steve is looking after us and protecting us from the evil world of Malware that those crappy PC's get. Thanks Steve for looking out for us and our elegant, delicious, sexy, and magical devices"......
Pretty much...
Pretty much...
0815
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Maybe now Apple realizes that they must allow some things on their devices like themes. Or not...
What makes you think this? Because Toyota pulled it after Apple asked them friendly to do so?
What makes you think this? Because Toyota pulled it after Apple asked them friendly to do so?
No comments:
Post a Comment