jhedges3
Oct 3, 11:23 PM
I don�t care as much about the Mac Phone any more. We�ve been talking about it for years. And with the exceptions of some phones that can play a song or two or three there has been nothing of the sort. Are we really supposed be filled with glee about an ipod that gets signal?
The level of interest on MR about the Phone (and many other things, new wireless, video pods, etc.) is clearly a reflection of consumer want for advancements in function and form. But again and again Apple never fully addresses these wants.
People on MR were probably buying into the early generations of the ipod. And although there were other mobile media devices that preceded them the ipods seemed like something different. That was October 2001 though. What has happened since? We�ve purchased other ones, which had more storage and different colors, but were the same thing. Do any of you see an end to this any time soon? Do you think the 6G and 7G will be anything but a little bigger and a little brighter? I know you want it to be, but will it be?
And this pattern goes for most of their other devices. Are the current Mac Book Pros much different than say a PowerBook G4 from several years ago? What functionality does the current MBP have that a PB doesn�t or can�t?
That�s only the positive side. The old PBs got crazy hot on your thighs. The new ones do the same. The next will do the same. The old batteries got terrible life after a few months of use. The new ones will be the same way.
Perhaps they have to sell to a broader base now, perhaps their focus is in large part on getting new people, converts. If that�s as true as it has seemed for a while now I�m ready for an Apple 2 to come. The idea wouldn�t be to supplant them. Apple 1 would be better than they are now at selling to the former Compaq buyers of the world. Apple 2 would give everyone on MR everything they want as soon as they want it.
The level of interest on MR about the Phone (and many other things, new wireless, video pods, etc.) is clearly a reflection of consumer want for advancements in function and form. But again and again Apple never fully addresses these wants.
People on MR were probably buying into the early generations of the ipod. And although there were other mobile media devices that preceded them the ipods seemed like something different. That was October 2001 though. What has happened since? We�ve purchased other ones, which had more storage and different colors, but were the same thing. Do any of you see an end to this any time soon? Do you think the 6G and 7G will be anything but a little bigger and a little brighter? I know you want it to be, but will it be?
And this pattern goes for most of their other devices. Are the current Mac Book Pros much different than say a PowerBook G4 from several years ago? What functionality does the current MBP have that a PB doesn�t or can�t?
That�s only the positive side. The old PBs got crazy hot on your thighs. The new ones do the same. The next will do the same. The old batteries got terrible life after a few months of use. The new ones will be the same way.
Perhaps they have to sell to a broader base now, perhaps their focus is in large part on getting new people, converts. If that�s as true as it has seemed for a while now I�m ready for an Apple 2 to come. The idea wouldn�t be to supplant them. Apple 1 would be better than they are now at selling to the former Compaq buyers of the world. Apple 2 would give everyone on MR everything they want as soon as they want it.
R.Perez
Apr 27, 09:35 PM
Feral children think they are animals
Newsflash, homo sapien sapien is just another species of mammal, like any other.
Newsflash, homo sapien sapien is just another species of mammal, like any other.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 9, 06:52 PM
Best Buy isn't having a sale today. And this is a national holiday. Its Victory over the Confederates Day when the US defeated the southern traitors and General Lee surrendered.
benbow
Nov 24, 03:08 AM
17" iMac 2.0Ghz ordered 20 minutes ago.
A check off box at check-out enrolls me in Apple recycling program.
The $101 iMac discount becomes $93 in California because of a state imposed extra tax for new computer monitor purchases. $ goes to local dumps to help pay for the processing of dumped computer gear.
monitor 4-14.9" $6 (MacBook)
monitor 15-34.9" $8 (everything else)
monitor >35" $10 (future iMacs?)
A check off box at check-out enrolls me in Apple recycling program.
The $101 iMac discount becomes $93 in California because of a state imposed extra tax for new computer monitor purchases. $ goes to local dumps to help pay for the processing of dumped computer gear.
monitor 4-14.9" $6 (MacBook)
monitor 15-34.9" $8 (everything else)
monitor >35" $10 (future iMacs?)
Consultant
Apr 25, 11:50 AM
Fake. Display looks like paper / printed.
wnurse
Aug 10, 05:54 PM
Please tell me where I said that I thought that Apple monitors were better than Dell monitors in anything other than asthetics? I have not made any claim anywhere!
All I said was that tech specs in some places were listed different so something about the panel seems to be different. Yes I bought an Apple monitor, yes I'm an Apple fanboy because I like the look of their electronics, but no I never stated that Apple's monitors were functionally better. On the contrary my statements are to the effect that Dell montiors show functionally better specs, so logically aren't they (not Apple) using the better panel.
Also, what say you to blonde redhead's post about Apple and Dell using different suppliers? Is that correct, or more disinformation.
Get off your soap box, have a cup of tea (or whatever will calm your attitude) and let's have a civil discussion.
Sorry took so late to get back to you..
1. I'm not even sure you were the one that said Dell monitors suck (notice i said "i get annonyed when people.. not I get annonyed when stoid". Anyway, as to different suppliers?.. I was not the one that made that observation/comment. I suppose whoever made that comment can verify for you if that is correct.
All I said was that tech specs in some places were listed different so something about the panel seems to be different. Yes I bought an Apple monitor, yes I'm an Apple fanboy because I like the look of their electronics, but no I never stated that Apple's monitors were functionally better. On the contrary my statements are to the effect that Dell montiors show functionally better specs, so logically aren't they (not Apple) using the better panel.
Also, what say you to blonde redhead's post about Apple and Dell using different suppliers? Is that correct, or more disinformation.
Get off your soap box, have a cup of tea (or whatever will calm your attitude) and let's have a civil discussion.
Sorry took so late to get back to you..
1. I'm not even sure you were the one that said Dell monitors suck (notice i said "i get annonyed when people.. not I get annonyed when stoid". Anyway, as to different suppliers?.. I was not the one that made that observation/comment. I suppose whoever made that comment can verify for you if that is correct.
gkarris
Oct 17, 10:39 AM
Given the same quality decoding hardware, for most movies they shouldn't see any difference at all. Both support the same codecs (MPEG-2, h.264, and VC-1). The first Blu-Ray discs were encoded using MPEG-2, which produced a lower quality image than the VC-1-encoded HD-DVD discs, but newer Blu-Ray discs are using VC-1 as well. The picture should be identical between the two.
The only case I could see where the capacity would affect it would be for longer movies like Lord of the Rings, where the encoded video plus lossless audio may reach the boundaries of HD-DVD. We could conceivably see more compression artifacts or the dropping of higher-resolution audio or commentaries on HD-DVD in these cases, whereas Blu-Ray would have more space. But this shouldn't affect most titles.
Doesn't matter if they are now using the same codec. People's displays are messed up (component vs HDMI, version of HDMI, is the resolution REALLY 1080p?) as well as the players. As far as I'm concerned, the whole thing's messed up....
I posted this in this forum:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=236514
"Wow, I went online to see the pros and cons of each format. When someone posts a pro/con of one system, they post the rebuttle of it on the other....
Like, I heard that Blu-Ray only has MPEG-2 right now, but it is capable of MPEG-4 and studios backing both formats will start releasing Bluray in MPEG-4 since they have to encode the movie in that for HD-DVD anyways.... what about the current Bluray titles?
I heard that Sony does have the dual layer Blurays available, and hybrid DVD/BD available also...
I saw a post of a guy online who actually hooked up his Samsung to a massive HP 60"(?) monitor that actually takes 1080p/24 scan signal (I guess a lot of TVs will take only 1080i and will upscale it to 1080p inside the TV) and he says Bluray is great! Do people actually have this sort of monitor?
Then, there's this whole 1080p/24 discs and if you want 1080p/60 Bluray has to take 1080p/24 go to 1080i/60 then to 1080p/60... what?
Then, I heard that the HD-DVD players if you have a 720p set that the player will take a 1080i disc, down it to 480p, then up it to 720p. They recommend to make the player output 1080i and have your set take it down to 720p (which my projector won't do, it just takes any signal you give it and shows that).
Wow, I'm now sooooo confused, I'm going to watch my Laserdiscs and Betamax for a while....."
The only case I could see where the capacity would affect it would be for longer movies like Lord of the Rings, where the encoded video plus lossless audio may reach the boundaries of HD-DVD. We could conceivably see more compression artifacts or the dropping of higher-resolution audio or commentaries on HD-DVD in these cases, whereas Blu-Ray would have more space. But this shouldn't affect most titles.
Doesn't matter if they are now using the same codec. People's displays are messed up (component vs HDMI, version of HDMI, is the resolution REALLY 1080p?) as well as the players. As far as I'm concerned, the whole thing's messed up....
I posted this in this forum:
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=236514
"Wow, I went online to see the pros and cons of each format. When someone posts a pro/con of one system, they post the rebuttle of it on the other....
Like, I heard that Blu-Ray only has MPEG-2 right now, but it is capable of MPEG-4 and studios backing both formats will start releasing Bluray in MPEG-4 since they have to encode the movie in that for HD-DVD anyways.... what about the current Bluray titles?
I heard that Sony does have the dual layer Blurays available, and hybrid DVD/BD available also...
I saw a post of a guy online who actually hooked up his Samsung to a massive HP 60"(?) monitor that actually takes 1080p/24 scan signal (I guess a lot of TVs will take only 1080i and will upscale it to 1080p inside the TV) and he says Bluray is great! Do people actually have this sort of monitor?
Then, there's this whole 1080p/24 discs and if you want 1080p/60 Bluray has to take 1080p/24 go to 1080i/60 then to 1080p/60... what?
Then, I heard that the HD-DVD players if you have a 720p set that the player will take a 1080i disc, down it to 480p, then up it to 720p. They recommend to make the player output 1080i and have your set take it down to 720p (which my projector won't do, it just takes any signal you give it and shows that).
Wow, I'm now sooooo confused, I'm going to watch my Laserdiscs and Betamax for a while....."
Burgess07
Apr 29, 02:35 PM
http://forums.macrumors.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=283485
Damn :(
Damn :(
Counterfit
Aug 8, 12:03 AM
You can't fill up your tank by engine braking in an internal combustion motor. ;) :(
AppliedVisual
Oct 17, 11:01 AM
HD DVD for movies and Blu-Ray for data. Problem solved.
Um, no....
At 30GB max on HD-DVD, even with a good VC1 transfer, 3 hour and longer features must start sacrificing quality to fit. In other words, films like "Titanic" are going to run into the same shortcomings on HD-DVD as they did with DVD.
There's other reasons to choose BluRay and this whole format war would be compltely non-existant had Sony released their product nearly a year ago when they first promised and if it had actually worked. Now they keep fumbling the ball and losing out to an inferior format at every turn.
In the end, we'll see universal players as a solution, but I doubt HD-DVD vs. BluRay will be solved before the next big format comes along. All the pieces are in place to manufacture a universal player, but Sony's Blu-Ray licensing agreements specifically forbid the inclusion of support for HD-DVD, DVD-Audio and other competing formats on the same device. It's questionable whether or not this is legal, Sony and Philips tried it with DVD+R and the exclusive licensing failed. It will only be a matter of time before someone challenges the Sony licensing. Unfortunately, the few companies already in the best position to produce a universal player (Samsung, Panasoic, LG, etc...) are already Blu-Ray allies. So it may take a bit more time.
Personally, I would rather just have digital downloads from a high speed download service and store them on my own storage whether it is on DVDs, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD as data. For large downloads, I would like to go to a local video store and download them to my laptop using Firewire 800/400 or USB but that is probably too far in the future.
Direct downloads would definitely be welcome, as long as there is the option to write them to some form of tangible media like an optical disc. There's also the issue of download times and quality. A top-notch VC1 transfer on HD-DVD or BluRay at 1080p is going to occupy 25+ GB of space. That's a significant download for any conventional broadband connection. VC1 or H.264 versions of films at near-DVD quality like we'll find in the iTunes store are OK compared to DVD and are a good start, but I think we're still just a couple years away from it really happening with HD on a broad scale. The infrastructure is being constructed now, products like iTV, iPod and yes even the Zune, will pave the way for this to happen. So we're on our way...
I think ultimately what will happen is films/videos will become entirely on-demand. Users will be able to connect directly to major studios and have on-demand access to their entire catalog of every film ever created. Sites like iTunes will still serve a purpose as a portal or gateway to access multiple catalogs from different studios all in one place with a common interface. Probably still several years off and broadband and widespread wireless access methods need to be enhanced a bit, but this is no doubt where we're headed.
Um, no....
At 30GB max on HD-DVD, even with a good VC1 transfer, 3 hour and longer features must start sacrificing quality to fit. In other words, films like "Titanic" are going to run into the same shortcomings on HD-DVD as they did with DVD.
There's other reasons to choose BluRay and this whole format war would be compltely non-existant had Sony released their product nearly a year ago when they first promised and if it had actually worked. Now they keep fumbling the ball and losing out to an inferior format at every turn.
In the end, we'll see universal players as a solution, but I doubt HD-DVD vs. BluRay will be solved before the next big format comes along. All the pieces are in place to manufacture a universal player, but Sony's Blu-Ray licensing agreements specifically forbid the inclusion of support for HD-DVD, DVD-Audio and other competing formats on the same device. It's questionable whether or not this is legal, Sony and Philips tried it with DVD+R and the exclusive licensing failed. It will only be a matter of time before someone challenges the Sony licensing. Unfortunately, the few companies already in the best position to produce a universal player (Samsung, Panasoic, LG, etc...) are already Blu-Ray allies. So it may take a bit more time.
Personally, I would rather just have digital downloads from a high speed download service and store them on my own storage whether it is on DVDs, Blu-Ray, HD-DVD as data. For large downloads, I would like to go to a local video store and download them to my laptop using Firewire 800/400 or USB but that is probably too far in the future.
Direct downloads would definitely be welcome, as long as there is the option to write them to some form of tangible media like an optical disc. There's also the issue of download times and quality. A top-notch VC1 transfer on HD-DVD or BluRay at 1080p is going to occupy 25+ GB of space. That's a significant download for any conventional broadband connection. VC1 or H.264 versions of films at near-DVD quality like we'll find in the iTunes store are OK compared to DVD and are a good start, but I think we're still just a couple years away from it really happening with HD on a broad scale. The infrastructure is being constructed now, products like iTV, iPod and yes even the Zune, will pave the way for this to happen. So we're on our way...
I think ultimately what will happen is films/videos will become entirely on-demand. Users will be able to connect directly to major studios and have on-demand access to their entire catalog of every film ever created. Sites like iTunes will still serve a purpose as a portal or gateway to access multiple catalogs from different studios all in one place with a common interface. Probably still several years off and broadband and widespread wireless access methods need to be enhanced a bit, but this is no doubt where we're headed.
bryanc
Oct 19, 02:39 PM
Vista will definitely change the landscape, but what effect this will have on Apple's fortunes, and the popularity of OS X is difficult to predict.
I think that there are a lot of people out there who are putting off upgrading until they see what this new landscape looks like. They've got systems in place that, while good enough for the time being, aren't great, and they'd like to see a significant improvement. These folks are running XP SP2 on two year old Dells or something like that... so they're looking to upgrade in the next 6 months, and they've heard a lot of good things about Apple and OS X and they're tempted, but they're going to wait and see how Vista turns out.
If Vista is a dog, and gets a lot of bad media attention out of the gate (this will be exacerbated if Apple can release a Leopard that makes Vista pale in comparison), a lot of these upgraders-in-waiting are going to be pushed over the edge and will buy mac-minis or new mac laptops, knowing that they can fall back to Vista if OS X doesn't work out for them.
If Vista is brilliant, and Leopard turns out to be just a minor upgrade of Tiger, most of these upgraders-in-wating will just buy another Dell like they always have.
The most likely scenario is somewhere in the middle... Vista will get mixed reviews, but will be viewed a a very significant improvement over XP, and Leopard will be a significant improvement over Tiger, but will only have a few features that Vista lacks, and some of the upgraders-in-waiting will take the plunge, but the more conservative will stick with the devil-they-know. As a result, the number of OS X installs will continue to grow, but it won't break the crucial 10% market share that makes it a 'mainstream' OS.
Cheers
I think that there are a lot of people out there who are putting off upgrading until they see what this new landscape looks like. They've got systems in place that, while good enough for the time being, aren't great, and they'd like to see a significant improvement. These folks are running XP SP2 on two year old Dells or something like that... so they're looking to upgrade in the next 6 months, and they've heard a lot of good things about Apple and OS X and they're tempted, but they're going to wait and see how Vista turns out.
If Vista is a dog, and gets a lot of bad media attention out of the gate (this will be exacerbated if Apple can release a Leopard that makes Vista pale in comparison), a lot of these upgraders-in-waiting are going to be pushed over the edge and will buy mac-minis or new mac laptops, knowing that they can fall back to Vista if OS X doesn't work out for them.
If Vista is brilliant, and Leopard turns out to be just a minor upgrade of Tiger, most of these upgraders-in-wating will just buy another Dell like they always have.
The most likely scenario is somewhere in the middle... Vista will get mixed reviews, but will be viewed a a very significant improvement over XP, and Leopard will be a significant improvement over Tiger, but will only have a few features that Vista lacks, and some of the upgraders-in-waiting will take the plunge, but the more conservative will stick with the devil-they-know. As a result, the number of OS X installs will continue to grow, but it won't break the crucial 10% market share that makes it a 'mainstream' OS.
Cheers
Digitalclips
Oct 1, 10:54 AM
If I touch it on the southwest corner will it not work? ;)
You have to grip it hard silly.
You have to grip it hard silly.
Music_Producer
Jan 12, 08:35 AM
You see, this is my point. Zero criticism. Steve Jobs ***** on a stage and you all gather around to share the love.
If it's an iPod first then why's it got such ****** capacity? Why's it called the iPhone? Seriously, are you a genuine music producer that's happy to walk around with just 8 gigs worth of music?
I don't carry around a 400 gig seagate hard drive - I carry around a 60 gig iPod because it does a great job. I don't have whatever phone you were talking about because I don't need a phone with a crappy mp3 player - I have an iPod. I'm guessing the price you quote is without a contract too.
This thing costs so much because Jobs knows you people will buy anything he tells you to. Seriously people, is it so bad to question things?
Revolution? Tell me when it starts.
As a genuine music producer I have more than enough devices to listen to music on. I actually, don't like the quality of mp3s/aacs.. whatever. You do realize how slim the phone is right? Oh.. yes, its an ipod, and a phone.. and a fully functional internet device.
The point here is not that people can question something.. it's that people automatically attack a product without even realizing that it's the best out there. And I don't automatically praise every Apple product there is. If something is worth the praise, then yes, it's called for.. and rightly so.
Rather, the people who post 'what? its only got 8 gb? pffft.. its only got safari? pfft.. photo management? bah humbug.. quad gsm? crap.. 2 megapixel cam? not impressed'
I want YOU to come up with the phone of your dreams, keep it slim so it looks like a phone and not a Palm Treo piece of rock.. and make it priced comparable to other phones.. or rather, a little lower than the other high-end phones out there. I swear, everyone here obviously has the skills to manufacture a high-end phone out of their a$$.
COMPARE this phone to the other high-end phones.. and THEN talk. I did buy fancy phones.. Palm Treos were a nightmare. I hate Motorola's UI.. Sony Ericsson and Nokia were the only functional phones. But I saw the iPhone's UI.. features, etc.. and the price is right. I'm not buying the iphone simply because it's an apple product. If sony had made a phone like this.. I would have bought it as well.
With every popular product.. or creative company.. comes along a bunch of retards who think every other brand out there is better. I will forever be grateful to OS X simply because of the productivity it provides, which is good for me and my career. A phone with OS X and features comparable to other top notch phones (and better)? I'm sold.
And by the way.. this is MACrumors. Yes, we mac addicts do share the love. I'm getting the feeling that people who can't afford this stuff.. seem to do the most whining and bit@ching, and find every possible flaw there is.
I prefer that technology to be made larger and turned into... anti crash aircraft, aircraft that flies on anti gravity and by definition will never crash.
A bunch of floating speakers, who cares! Noise pollution man!
Um, my point in the first place was that people would say "Wow.. how the hell did they manage to make speakers that float in the air" .. as in a physical feat that is impossible to achieve. I'm sure if I saw something levitate.. for e.g. speakers.. or for your sake.. anti-crash aircraft.. I wouldn't say 'EW'
This is a discussion related to phones.. and the ipod combo.. and hence that example.
If it's an iPod first then why's it got such ****** capacity? Why's it called the iPhone? Seriously, are you a genuine music producer that's happy to walk around with just 8 gigs worth of music?
I don't carry around a 400 gig seagate hard drive - I carry around a 60 gig iPod because it does a great job. I don't have whatever phone you were talking about because I don't need a phone with a crappy mp3 player - I have an iPod. I'm guessing the price you quote is without a contract too.
This thing costs so much because Jobs knows you people will buy anything he tells you to. Seriously people, is it so bad to question things?
Revolution? Tell me when it starts.
As a genuine music producer I have more than enough devices to listen to music on. I actually, don't like the quality of mp3s/aacs.. whatever. You do realize how slim the phone is right? Oh.. yes, its an ipod, and a phone.. and a fully functional internet device.
The point here is not that people can question something.. it's that people automatically attack a product without even realizing that it's the best out there. And I don't automatically praise every Apple product there is. If something is worth the praise, then yes, it's called for.. and rightly so.
Rather, the people who post 'what? its only got 8 gb? pffft.. its only got safari? pfft.. photo management? bah humbug.. quad gsm? crap.. 2 megapixel cam? not impressed'
I want YOU to come up with the phone of your dreams, keep it slim so it looks like a phone and not a Palm Treo piece of rock.. and make it priced comparable to other phones.. or rather, a little lower than the other high-end phones out there. I swear, everyone here obviously has the skills to manufacture a high-end phone out of their a$$.
COMPARE this phone to the other high-end phones.. and THEN talk. I did buy fancy phones.. Palm Treos were a nightmare. I hate Motorola's UI.. Sony Ericsson and Nokia were the only functional phones. But I saw the iPhone's UI.. features, etc.. and the price is right. I'm not buying the iphone simply because it's an apple product. If sony had made a phone like this.. I would have bought it as well.
With every popular product.. or creative company.. comes along a bunch of retards who think every other brand out there is better. I will forever be grateful to OS X simply because of the productivity it provides, which is good for me and my career. A phone with OS X and features comparable to other top notch phones (and better)? I'm sold.
And by the way.. this is MACrumors. Yes, we mac addicts do share the love. I'm getting the feeling that people who can't afford this stuff.. seem to do the most whining and bit@ching, and find every possible flaw there is.
I prefer that technology to be made larger and turned into... anti crash aircraft, aircraft that flies on anti gravity and by definition will never crash.
A bunch of floating speakers, who cares! Noise pollution man!
Um, my point in the first place was that people would say "Wow.. how the hell did they manage to make speakers that float in the air" .. as in a physical feat that is impossible to achieve. I'm sure if I saw something levitate.. for e.g. speakers.. or for your sake.. anti-crash aircraft.. I wouldn't say 'EW'
This is a discussion related to phones.. and the ipod combo.. and hence that example.
ShakyJay
Dec 23, 11:29 PM
I wouldn't believe it. They allegedly don't tell their own stores anything because they feel they can't trust the staff (who are mostly college aged kids) not to post glamour it on their facebook, etc. No way would they tell another company like Radio Shack especially this early
Trust me Verizon employees do not know if they are getting the iPhone 6 months in advance...The boss's don't trust them to change out light bulbs in their stores, why would they give them critical data that could change their stocks????
Trust me Verizon employees do not know if they are getting the iPhone 6 months in advance...The boss's don't trust them to change out light bulbs in their stores, why would they give them critical data that could change their stocks????
JackAxe
May 2, 05:35 PM
Hopefully it'll fix the bug I get when I want to have a song on repeat, seems to ignore the first song played and then it works on the second :(
You should submit that to Apple here;
http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
And keep on it everytime there's an update and no resolve. I sent them several feedbacks about Apple Lossless skipping, which they eventually resolved.
You should submit that to Apple here;
http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
And keep on it everytime there's an update and no resolve. I sent them several feedbacks about Apple Lossless skipping, which they eventually resolved.
ChrisTX
Apr 25, 07:30 PM
Bigger sensor requires bigger lens and bigger lens requires bigger housing. With Apple, you are not going to get this. If you look for bigger sensor -check Nokia or Sony phones.
While I agree to an extent, Engadget put the iPhone 4 against a majority of the major smartphone's and the only one to even come close in camera quality was the Nokia N8.
While I agree to an extent, Engadget put the iPhone 4 against a majority of the major smartphone's and the only one to even come close in camera quality was the Nokia N8.
Willis
Oct 10, 06:26 PM
argh... enough with the speculation. these guys are shooting blanks.
Rocketman
Nov 16, 05:50 PM
If you recall, at the 1-06 unveiling of the intel Macs (or maybe it was the conference call Q&A), Steve stated AMD made really good server chips, but Apple makes consumer products.
Perhaps Apple is doing an AMD based blade, or iTV, or some "appliance" product.
The rumour is unlikely to be true however.
Rocketman
Perhaps Apple is doing an AMD based blade, or iTV, or some "appliance" product.
The rumour is unlikely to be true however.
Rocketman
faroZ06
Apr 8, 02:16 PM
I told you the rumor was false. The other article had a really cheapo source...
roadbloc
Apr 11, 08:07 AM
What are those features?
What is that 'UI'?
What kind of usability?
Aero Snap. The new superbar. Expandable start menu. The Office ribbon. Stable as a rock OS. Just to name a few.
I agree with Maflynn. Where as Vista was rather dire, Windows 7 beats Snow Leopard. Only by a fraction, which is why I'm still happy using Snow Leopard, but it is still better. Windows has matured considerably, whereas OS X still feels a little juvenile like XP does.
What is that 'UI'?
What kind of usability?
Aero Snap. The new superbar. Expandable start menu. The Office ribbon. Stable as a rock OS. Just to name a few.
I agree with Maflynn. Where as Vista was rather dire, Windows 7 beats Snow Leopard. Only by a fraction, which is why I'm still happy using Snow Leopard, but it is still better. Windows has matured considerably, whereas OS X still feels a little juvenile like XP does.
arn
Jan 9, 02:35 PM
sorry about the spoiler in the ticker guys
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
I'm sitting here trying to do updates... that one was a mistake on my part.
Really sorry. I removed it. we'll still post the link when it comes.
arn
bushido
May 4, 08:25 AM
lol at those "u signed the contract" blablabla, its not like u have a choice, it should be left out from the damn contract u sign from begin with just like here in germany :D
robotfist
Apr 5, 04:07 PM
This is possibly the dumbest thing Apple has ever done.
I can't WAIT to go browsing though this list of stupid banner ads! I wonder if I can collect them all???!!! I LOVE pop up windows in my browser and I've always wanted to be able to view them at anytime, without having to go to annoying websites just to get each one to load. Now I can have a crap ton of banner ads right at my fingertips!!! THANKS APPLE!!!
I hope they release a pro version of this app for the Mac OS!! Maybe they will incorporate a version inside the mail program that allows me to see ads for VIAGRA and STOCK OPPORTUNITIES IN AFRICA in cover flow!!!
I can't WAIT to go browsing though this list of stupid banner ads! I wonder if I can collect them all???!!! I LOVE pop up windows in my browser and I've always wanted to be able to view them at anytime, without having to go to annoying websites just to get each one to load. Now I can have a crap ton of banner ads right at my fingertips!!! THANKS APPLE!!!
I hope they release a pro version of this app for the Mac OS!! Maybe they will incorporate a version inside the mail program that allows me to see ads for VIAGRA and STOCK OPPORTUNITIES IN AFRICA in cover flow!!!
tigress666
Apr 25, 12:14 PM
I actually really dislike the borderless look. I hope they don't do this. A larger screen is one thing I really don't need. If I want a big screen, I'll get an iPad.
Actually, I do think having some border is good, but I don't think it looks bad. In fact, the more I look at it especially compared with the iphone 4, the more I think it looks *better* (in comparison the 4's sides and top and bottom look too thick). Of course it probably doesn't help that's a white iphone (I don't like the white iphone in general).
I think in black I'd probably be neutral between the two (black doesn't look as bad with that thickness I think).
And if they don't change the resolution, I still don't see much point. You're not really getting more screen real estate. I suppose it will be a little easier on the eyes to have bigger text/icons. But would that really make that much of a difference on that front either?
Actually, I do think having some border is good, but I don't think it looks bad. In fact, the more I look at it especially compared with the iphone 4, the more I think it looks *better* (in comparison the 4's sides and top and bottom look too thick). Of course it probably doesn't help that's a white iphone (I don't like the white iphone in general).
I think in black I'd probably be neutral between the two (black doesn't look as bad with that thickness I think).
And if they don't change the resolution, I still don't see much point. You're not really getting more screen real estate. I suppose it will be a little easier on the eyes to have bigger text/icons. But would that really make that much of a difference on that front either?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario