MacbookSwitcher
Mar 29, 03:33 PM
Yeah buddy I am. Are you aware that on every Apple Device it says "DESIGNED IN CALIFORNIA, ASSEMBLED IN CHINA."
There is a reason we do not build these products and it has been well covered through this thread. Can you name any good products made by those companies that you mentioned, that are actually built in the US. You know America SUCKS at making products when we need the media to convince us of this fact. Just watch TV, you do not see Apple advertising that they make there products in China, but you do see a bunch of other companies that slap a "Made in the USA" label gain Patriot approval. I avoid those products and save my money for products that have better quality; I dont innately hate american products, but experience has proved that they are inferior to build qualities of other nations. :apple::D
The reason that simple, brainless product assembly is not done in the US has nothing to due with low quality. It is due to lower manufacturing costs in China, which has no regulations.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
There is a reason we do not build these products and it has been well covered through this thread. Can you name any good products made by those companies that you mentioned, that are actually built in the US. You know America SUCKS at making products when we need the media to convince us of this fact. Just watch TV, you do not see Apple advertising that they make there products in China, but you do see a bunch of other companies that slap a "Made in the USA" label gain Patriot approval. I avoid those products and save my money for products that have better quality; I dont innately hate american products, but experience has proved that they are inferior to build qualities of other nations. :apple::D
The reason that simple, brainless product assembly is not done in the US has nothing to due with low quality. It is due to lower manufacturing costs in China, which has no regulations.
There is no evidence at all that American-made products are of lower quality than any other country's products. (Is there any fighter jet better than the American-made F-16 or F-22?)
Core Trio
Jul 21, 02:04 PM
Noooo....must...resist urges to buy...new MBP's
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
Just have to keep reminding myself I cant afford these things right now..
CalBoy
May 3, 10:23 PM
The advantage you're talking about here is one of degrees. One may be slightly faster than the other, but it's not a revolutionary shift to a better system. I would compare this sort of change to a small upgrade in processing power. The advantages of the metric system over imperial run much deeper than that, so it's a poor analogy.
Can you cite reliable figures for the cost advantage versus the cost to switch?
Can you cite reliable figures for the cost advantage versus the cost to switch?
thankins
Mar 30, 06:47 PM
Can this build be installed/updated over the previous Developer Preview 1 install? Or do I have to do a clean install after each new build?
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
You need to install an update from Software Update first. Then Restart. Then go to the Dev Center and get a redeem code. Then go to the Mac App Store, redeem a and download.
So no you dont have to do a new install
ivan2002
Mar 28, 09:48 AM
I still have 3G. Wanted to get the white 4, kept waiting for it, then finally decided I might as well wait for 5. Now even that is going to get delayed.
Turns out, trusting Apple's promises and release cycles made me a fool. The only behavior that seems to be awarded is: give Apple money is soon as you can and don't ask any questions. :mad:
Turns out, trusting Apple's promises and release cycles made me a fool. The only behavior that seems to be awarded is: give Apple money is soon as you can and don't ask any questions. :mad:
Medanthro
May 7, 10:35 AM
While I agree, MobileMe is still in my eyes the best of the bunch. That's how they get away with charging $99/year. However, if it became free, they could really talk up how great owning a Mac is because of MobileMe.
Some of you may remember way back in the day, before Mobileme was .mac, it was known as itools and it was free. It was a perk that came with buying a Mac.
Some of you may remember way back in the day, before Mobileme was .mac, it was known as itools and it was free. It was a perk that came with buying a Mac.
bananaboi
May 6, 12:15 AM
it's unnecessary rumors like these that make the market overreact and force intel stock prices to fall..
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
kskill
Jul 29, 11:07 PM
they guy says it's the sleekest phone he's ever seen? i wonder if it incorporates this "none-touch" interface that was posted earlier in the week for the iPod. that'd be pretty awesome.
CalBoy
May 3, 03:39 PM
I see no reason why 99, 99.5, and 100 are easier to track than 37.2, 37.5, and 37.7. As you said, we accept body temp to be 98.6 and 37.0 in Celsius. If decimals are difficult to remember, then clearly we should pick the scale that represents normal body temp as an integer, right? ;)
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
It doesn't matter what normal body temperature is because that's not what people are looking for when they take a temperature; they're looking for what's not normal. If it can be helped, the number one is seeking should be as flat as possible.
There is a distinctive quality about 100 that is special. It represents an additional place value and is a line of demarcation for most people. For a scientist or professional, the numbers seem the same (each with 3 digits ending in the tenths place), but to the lay user they are very different. The average person doesn't know what significant digits are or when rounding is appropriate. It's far more likely that someone will falsely remember "37.2" as "37" than they will "99" as "98.6." Even if they do make an error and think of 98.6 as 99, it is an error on the side of caution (because presumably they will take their child to the doctor or at least call in).
I realize this makes me seem like I put people in low regard, but the fact is that most things designed for common use are meant to be idiot-proof. Redundancies and warnings are hard to miss in such designs, and on a temperature scale, one that makes 100 "dangerous" is very practical and effective. You have to keep in mind that this scale is going to be used by the illiterate, functionally illiterate, the negligent, the careless, the sloppy, and the hurried.
The importance of additional digits finds its way into many facets of life, including advertising and pricing. It essentially the only reason why everything is sold at intervals of "xx.99" instead of a flat price point. Marketers have long determined that if they were to round up to the nearest whole number, it would make the price seem disproportionately larger. The same "trick" is being used by the Fahrenheit scale; the presence of the additional digit makes people more alarmed at the appropriate time.
Perhaps your set of measuring cups is the additional piece of equipment. Indeed you wouldn't need them. For a recipe in SI, the only items you would need are an electronic balance, graduating measuring "cup," and a graduated cylinder. No series of cups or spoons required (although, they do of course come in metric for those so inclined).
Of course any amateur baker has at least a few cups of both wet and dry so they can keep ingredients separated but measured when they need to be added in a precise order. It just isn't practical to bake with 3 measuring devices and a scale (which, let's be real here, would cost 5 times as much as a set of measuring cups).
This also relies on having recipes with written weights as opposed to volumes. It would also be problematic because you'd make people relearn common measurements for the metric beaker because they couldn't have their cups (ie I know 1 egg is half a cup, so it's easy to put half an egg in a recipe-I would have to do milimeter devision to figure this out for a metric recipe even though there's a perfectly good standard device for it).
It might seem that way to you, but the majority of the world uses weight to measure dry ingredients. For them it's just as easy.
Sure when you have a commercial quantity (which is also how companies bake in bulk-by weight), but not when you're making a dozen muffins or cupcakes. The smaller the quantity, the worse off you are with weighing each ingredient in terms of efficiency.
Why would you need alternative names? A recipe would call for "30ml" of any given liquid. There's no need to call it anything else.
So what would you call 500ml of beer at a bar? Would everyone refer to the spoon at the dinner table as "the 30?" The naming convention isn't going to disappear just because measurements are given in metric. Or are you saying that the naming convention should disappear and numbers used exclusively in their stead?
Well, no one would ask for a 237ml vessel because that's an arbitrary number based on a different system of units. But if you wanted, yes, you could measure that amount in a graduated measuring cup (or weigh it on your balance).
In that case, what would I call 1 cup of a drink? Even if it is made flat at 200, 250, or 300ml, what would be the name? I think by and large it would still be called a cup. In that case you aren't really accomplishing much because people are going to refer to it as they will and the metric quantity wouldn't really do anything because it's not something that people usually divide or multiply by 10 very often in daily life.
I suspect people would call it a "quarter liter," much like I would say "quarter gallon."
No, that would be 1/4 of a liter, not 4 liters. I'm assuming that without gallons, the most closely analogous metric quantity would be 4 liters. What would be the marketing term for this? The shorthand name that would allow people to express a quantity without referring to another number?
And no, you wouldn't call 500ml a "pint" because, well, why would you? :confused:
Well I'm assuming that beer would have to be served in metric quantities, and a pint is known the world over as a beer. You can't really expect the name to go out of use just because the quantity has changed by a factor of about 25ml.
...But countries using SI do call 500ml a demi-liter ("demi" meaning "half").
Somehow I don't see that becoming popular pub lingo...
This is the case with Si units as well. 500, 250, 125, 75, etc. Though SI units can also be divided by any number you wish. Want to make 1/5 of the recipe? ...Just divide all the numbers by five.
Except you can't divide the servings people usually take for themselves very easily by 2, 4, 8, or 16. An eighth of 300ml (a hypothetical metric cup), for example, is a decimal. It's not very probable that if someone was to describe how much cream they added to their coffee they'd describe it as "37.5ml." It's more likely that they'll say "1/4 of x" or "2 of y." This is how the standard system was born; people took everyday quantities (often times as random as fists, feet, and gulps) and over time standardized them.
Every standard unit conforms to a value we are likely to see to this day (a man's foot is still about 12 inches, a tablespoon is about one bite, etc). Granted it's not scientific, but it's not meant to be. It's meant to be practical to describe everyday units, much like "lion" is not the full scientific name for panthera leo. One naming scheme makes sense for one application and another makes sense for a very different application. I whole heartedly agree that for scientific, industrial, and official uses metric is the way to go, but it is not the way to go for lay people. People are not scientists. They should use the measuring schemes that are practical for the things in their lives.
Not that OS X Panthera Leo doesn't have a nice ring to it, of course. ;)
No, but it is onerous for kids to learn SI units, which is a mandatory skill in this global world. Like I said, why teach kids two units of measure if one will suffice?
It's onerous to learn how to multiply and divide by 10 + 3 root words? :confused: Besides, so many things in our daily lives have both unit scales. My ruler has inches and cm and mm. Bathroom scales have pounds and kg. Even measuring cups have ml written on them.
You could be right for international commerce where values have to be recalculated just for the US, but like I said, I think those things should be converted. I don't really care if I buy a 25 gram candy bar as opposed to a 1 ounce candy bar or a 350ml can of soda.
Perhaps true, but just because you switch to metric, doesn't mean you need to stop using tablespoons and teaspoons for measurements. It's all an approximation anyway, since there are far more than 2 different spoon sizes, and many of them look like they're pretty much equal in size to a tablespoon.
I'm sorry, but which tablespoons do you use that aren't tablespoons? The measuring spoons most people have at home for baking are very precise and have the fractions clearly marked on them.
Other than that, there's a teaspoon, tablespoon, and serving spoon (which you wouldn't use as a measurement). The sizes are very different for each of those and I don't think anyone who saw them side by side could confuse them.
So if you're cooking, do what everyone else does with their spoons; if you need a tablespoon, grab the big-ish one and estimate. If you needed more precision than that, why wouldn't you use ml? :confused:
Because it's a heck of a lot easier to think, "I need one xspoon of secret ingredient" than it is to think, "I need xml of secret ingredient." You think like a scientist (because you are one). Most people aren't. That's who the teaspoons and tablespoons are for.
rorschach
Mar 30, 08:26 PM
Safari
--Tab bar hidden in Full Screen mode
--"Send Do Not Track HTTP Header" option in Debug menu
Preview
--Loupe Tool (like Aperture)
Spotlight
--Options to "Search Web" and "Search Wikipedia" in menu
--Slightly smaller icons in menu
Font Book
--"Find fonts anywhere on this computer" option
--Tab bar hidden in Full Screen mode
--"Send Do Not Track HTTP Header" option in Debug menu
Preview
--Loupe Tool (like Aperture)
Spotlight
--Options to "Search Web" and "Search Wikipedia" in menu
--Slightly smaller icons in menu
Font Book
--"Find fonts anywhere on this computer" option
Cougarcat
May 4, 07:16 PM
I think Apple is doing it this way to cut down on the ability to make hackintoshes.
No, they are doing it to make installations easier. You can already install Lion on Hackintoshes.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
It's not huge...792 MB. Handy for the times your boot drive isn't around. But I could see why you wouldn't want it on your air--every bit of space counts on an SSD.
No, they are doing it to make installations easier. You can already install Lion on Hackintoshes.
Not to mention why would I want to waste space on a recovery partition anyhow ? ;)
It's not huge...792 MB. Handy for the times your boot drive isn't around. But I could see why you wouldn't want it on your air--every bit of space counts on an SSD.
Ori
Apr 18, 04:32 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
The car industry isn't a good one to look at actually. A new top end S Class merc has hundreds of new patents with every modem revamp it does. Car companies constantly pay royalties to each other to use tech. Especially safety tech.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be standardized
(e.g. copied) for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
The car industry isn't a good one to look at actually. A new top end S Class merc has hundreds of new patents with every modem revamp it does. Car companies constantly pay royalties to each other to use tech. Especially safety tech.
Llewellyn
Nov 28, 02:25 PM
Sure, a programmer or tech geek or business person or writer may have little use for a tablet, but artists are another story. Carrying around a separate, cumbersome USB tablet can become a pain. It's much easier to draw with a pen than it is with a mouse.
I once contacted a touch screen manufacturer concerning how a touch screen tablet compared to the wacom cintiq display tablet. I was told that touch screens are very basic in comparison and would not provide anywhere near the level of sensitivity of a art tablet or the Cintiq.
Last I looked the Wacom Cintiq was $2500+ by itself so I would expect you would at least have to add $1500 to the price of a top of the line laptop to have the kind of tablet you describe.
It would be very cool, just not practicle.
I once contacted a touch screen manufacturer concerning how a touch screen tablet compared to the wacom cintiq display tablet. I was told that touch screens are very basic in comparison and would not provide anywhere near the level of sensitivity of a art tablet or the Cintiq.
Last I looked the Wacom Cintiq was $2500+ by itself so I would expect you would at least have to add $1500 to the price of a top of the line laptop to have the kind of tablet you describe.
It would be very cool, just not practicle.
puckhead193
Apr 21, 02:38 PM
FINALLY some Mac Pro updates!
agreed, hopefully an update with the new FCP X :confused:
agreed, hopefully an update with the new FCP X :confused:
kjs862
May 7, 12:10 PM
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
Wow great information. I'm sure Apple will change MM's tech in such a way to give better speeds. I mean, this sever farm has be used for this sort of thing... I hope.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
Wow great information. I'm sure Apple will change MM's tech in such a way to give better speeds. I mean, this sever farm has be used for this sort of thing... I hope.
theosib
Apr 21, 04:19 PM
That comment about two-drive sleds makes me nervous. Apple seems to sometimes sacrifice function for form. Hense the tendency for the smaller notebooks to get REALLY HOT. This is a problem for gamers, because most 3G games just use 100% CPU all of the time, and some Macs (mine for instance) have been known to develop faults as a result of prolongued exposure to heat.
So, here they're going to pack the hard drives in more tightly? Fine for SSDs, but mechanical hard drives are unreliable beasts. Packing them closer is just going to make it harder to cool them properly. And in fact, it appears that most PC makers (Apple is no exception) pay very little attention to hard drive cooling. Why do you think there were so many Time Capsule failures? Apple III all over again. No fans, no airflow, component failure.
So, here they're going to pack the hard drives in more tightly? Fine for SSDs, but mechanical hard drives are unreliable beasts. Packing them closer is just going to make it harder to cool them properly. And in fact, it appears that most PC makers (Apple is no exception) pay very little attention to hard drive cooling. Why do you think there were so many Time Capsule failures? Apple III all over again. No fans, no airflow, component failure.
huntercr
May 7, 06:46 PM
I wouldn't mind if they offered a free "basic" email service with some iWork.com and iDisk stuff thrown in to compete with Google and Microsoft. I just hope they beef up the Pro service to make it worth it. Microsoft currently gives like 25GB away with SkyDrive for free and has like 10GB email storage (at least for students, I don't know if that's standard for Live).
Having to split 20GB between iDisk and email when I'm paying $70/year just sucks, to be honest.
So yeah, they can open a free version (with limited syncing capabilities and storage) that's ad-supported... I'd be fine with that. As long as they make the Pro version ad-free with more features than the free.
Why don't you use gmail for your email and allocate all your storage space to idisk? That's what I do.
Having to split 20GB between iDisk and email when I'm paying $70/year just sucks, to be honest.
So yeah, they can open a free version (with limited syncing capabilities and storage) that's ad-supported... I'd be fine with that. As long as they make the Pro version ad-free with more features than the free.
Why don't you use gmail for your email and allocate all your storage space to idisk? That's what I do.
NAG
Apr 25, 10:07 AM
It's inaccurate because it doesn't track YOUR location, just the location of your nearest Cell Tower.
Your context is incorrect. I was referring to the website that supposedly has a lot of information about you, not the location database.
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
Your context is incorrect. I was referring to the website that supposedly has a lot of information about you, not the location database.
Thank you for the demonstration as to how almost everyone here is acting irrationally, though.
BMcCoy
Mar 27, 01:00 PM
iPad 2 HD
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
coming september 2011
$999 / �799
same specs and design as 64GB iPad 2, but with 2048x1536 screen, at 264ppi.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 01:17 PM
To get 2 requires you to make assumptions about the equation. If you make no assumptions and simply apply the rules then you get 288
No matter what you do you have to make an assumption as to what "/" means. Nobody over the age of 10 should be using that notation for this exact reason.
Therefore, assume that author wanted to use "_" but couldn't as this is a forum not suited to equation writing and work from there. I believe the logical conclusion is 288, but that is not the same as saying the answer is 288.
No matter what you do you have to make an assumption as to what "/" means. Nobody over the age of 10 should be using that notation for this exact reason.
Therefore, assume that author wanted to use "_" but couldn't as this is a forum not suited to equation writing and work from there. I believe the logical conclusion is 288, but that is not the same as saying the answer is 288.
Balli
Sep 11, 03:30 AM
I personally would like a iMovie store from Apple, but only if it offers me something I currently can't get from DVDs.
If Apple offered movies in HD, for a reasonable price, then that would probably persuade me.
But what about the extras that you currently get on DVDs? Will they be included for download as well?
If Apple offered movies in HD, for a reasonable price, then that would probably persuade me.
But what about the extras that you currently get on DVDs? Will they be included for download as well?
Abstract
Apr 10, 08:02 PM
Wow. There are still people who think the answer is 2? I'll check back later, but please remember that not everyone is good at maths. Let it be. :p
needthephone
Jul 31, 06:48 AM
I hope this is true. I have a nokia 6280 which I was given when I extended my 3 contract. At fisrt I thought who needs an ipod but as an MP3 player its an absolute dog. It keeps crashing, it has extremely basic playlist control and is best really as a random shuffle type player really.Not bad sound though.
As for the source of the rumour, just don't believe the photographer leak as everyone involved in product development signs NDA as everyone's pointed out.
If its true, I think Apple probably leaked it or authorised the leak to generate a buzz to counter the Zune buzz-it happens all the time. Record companies always protest when songs or albums are released on the net but I know a lot of these leaks are from the record companies themselves (or engineered by them). The publicity is gold dust.
I doubt we will see this phone in OZ for a while though even if it comes out in August (which I doubt somehow)
As for the source of the rumour, just don't believe the photographer leak as everyone involved in product development signs NDA as everyone's pointed out.
If its true, I think Apple probably leaked it or authorised the leak to generate a buzz to counter the Zune buzz-it happens all the time. Record companies always protest when songs or albums are released on the net but I know a lot of these leaks are from the record companies themselves (or engineered by them). The publicity is gold dust.
I doubt we will see this phone in OZ for a while though even if it comes out in August (which I doubt somehow)
ftaok
Apr 7, 02:32 PM
A lot of the comments on this thread is about competition. How Apple is stiffling the competion by scooping up all of the important parts, thus leaving nothing for the other OEMs.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
I call BS.
If we all want Apple to have competition, then the HPs and Samsungs of the world need to step up and compete. They need to develop something that creates enough demand where they can buy up millions upon millions of parts.
Apple developed a product that has enough demand that warrants the purchase of millions of screens. If someone else developed a product that had such demand, then they should/could corner the market for a particular part. The fact of the matter is that none of the iPad competitors have anything novel enough to differentiate it from the iPad.
Here's what the competitors should do. Don't follow Apple into the tablet/slate market. You won't win. Instead, develop the next big thing. Invest millions of dollars into developing the next device and hope that you had the skills to hit it big. That's what they should be doing, not copying the iPad.
I'd be willing to bet that Apple has about 10 different things they're working on right now that will be replacing the iPad as the next big thing. They'll probably work on these items until they get them right. Then they'll polish it to a blinding sheen. And then they'll release it to great fanfare.
This is what Sammy, HP, LG, Moto, et al need to be competing against. They've already lost to the iPad. The war is over. Don't lose the next war against Apple's next big thing.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق