Ommid
Apr 25, 12:10 PM
I don't think so... They skipped iPhone 2 and iPhone 3 and went right to "iPhone 4" because it was the 4th generation. Why wouldn't they call it iPhone 6 if it's the 6th generation?
Because its Apple, and that is what they will do. Trust me, Ive seen the future
Because its Apple, and that is what they will do. Trust me, Ive seen the future
ten-oak-druid
Mar 24, 07:11 PM
Even though OS X got better with each version, I immediately noticed better performance with my Pismo G3 400MHz machine when I installed the original OS X. I remember thinking it was great how fast the system booted up. I never looked back except to run a few apps in classic the first few years.
I've always found it strange that the version numbers are so redundant. OS X 10.5.5 for example. I just use the roman numeral and drop the second 10. I would write OS X.5.5 for example.
I've always found it strange that the version numbers are so redundant. OS X 10.5.5 for example. I just use the roman numeral and drop the second 10. I would write OS X.5.5 for example.
tjhilder
May 2, 04:03 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 :(
JAT
May 2, 11:20 PM
Wow, I finally got a reply! Didn't expect that, I appreciate it. ;)
Sure. That was one of few worthwhile posts in this thread. I just hope this update actually helps. I've been trying to analyze it myself. It seems like 4.2.7 is worse than 4.2.6 for battery life, but not positive.
Sure. That was one of few worthwhile posts in this thread. I just hope this update actually helps. I've been trying to analyze it myself. It seems like 4.2.7 is worse than 4.2.6 for battery life, but not positive.
more...
Yochanan07
Apr 9, 05:22 PM
Best Buy is no longer reputable... ( I think they were in the mid 90's)
Any dealings I've had with them have been slimy. They jack up the prices to ridiculous levels on items like Flash Memory, ripping off less than tech saavy folks who don't know any better.
Their online purchase option with in store pickup is almost criminal with it's
false promises and lack of honesty...
Stay away from Best Buy... They deserve to just fade away like Circuit City.
Apple, You taint your reputation by dealing with this Painted Lady.:mad:
Any dealings I've had with them have been slimy. They jack up the prices to ridiculous levels on items like Flash Memory, ripping off less than tech saavy folks who don't know any better.
Their online purchase option with in store pickup is almost criminal with it's
false promises and lack of honesty...
Stay away from Best Buy... They deserve to just fade away like Circuit City.
Apple, You taint your reputation by dealing with this Painted Lady.:mad:
ghostface147
May 2, 09:53 AM
Screenshot fail :) build number in Quicklook titlebar.
Buahahahahaha.....too funny.
Buahahahahaha.....too funny.
more...
Much Ado
Oct 29, 07:45 AM
Just as same, just as ridiculous, as saying that running Apple software on other hardware makes it "more difficult to use."
Perhaps, (but I still maintain that it's 'easier' to run 'non-Apple' software on a Mac than it is to run OS X on 'non Apple' hardware. But it's true to say that calling Apple exclusively a 'hardware' or 'software' company is a little short sighted, so we're in agreement there.)
It is the hardware sales that keep them afloat, and it's the software that makes the hardware more attractive.
Which is what a lot of people have been saying already :)
To clarify:
Apple is not a normal company. It's a one-off, niche company that do things differently from the rest of the industry. If OS X is licenced to other PC makers then part of the Mac eco-system is lost, and that will kill Apple.
Perhaps, (but I still maintain that it's 'easier' to run 'non-Apple' software on a Mac than it is to run OS X on 'non Apple' hardware. But it's true to say that calling Apple exclusively a 'hardware' or 'software' company is a little short sighted, so we're in agreement there.)
It is the hardware sales that keep them afloat, and it's the software that makes the hardware more attractive.
Which is what a lot of people have been saying already :)
To clarify:
Apple is not a normal company. It's a one-off, niche company that do things differently from the rest of the industry. If OS X is licenced to other PC makers then part of the Mac eco-system is lost, and that will kill Apple.
ericschmerick
Sep 28, 12:09 PM
For those of you running Aperture on a Mac Pro, did you notice the new RAM requirement on http://www.apple.com/aperture/specs/? It says "2GB of RAM required for Mac Pro." I've been running Aperture just fine on my new Mac Pro with the standard 1GB of RAM. Like many new Mac Pro owners, I've been holding off on upgrading the RAM until it gets a little cheaper. The 1.5 update installer better not refuse to install on my Mac because of insufficient RAM; I'll be pretty upset if it does. :(
Russell
I have no idea what I'm talking about here, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's because of the quad cores. I suspect that each "set" of cores needs plenty of memory to stay fed and happy.
EE
http://www.essersinchina.com/
Russell
I have no idea what I'm talking about here, but if I had to guess, I'd say it's because of the quad cores. I suspect that each "set" of cores needs plenty of memory to stay fed and happy.
EE
http://www.essersinchina.com/
more...
SevenInchScrew
Mar 11, 04:43 PM
Transition.
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
The industry is undergoing a massive paradigm-shift, thanks to Apple.
I thought they "redefined" computing? How can it be definite if it is still in a "transition" phase?
Bregalad
Apr 16, 04:23 PM
I don't see how they would go back to angles after touting the more curved and comfortable 3G / 3GS back. There was a big focus on how much more comfortable the new iPhone was to hold compared to the first.
The iPod touch is a different beast. The second generation has a nicer feel around the screen, but the smooth rounded back makes it harder to hold. Fortunately there are some really good cases out there to rectify the situation.
The iPod touch is a different beast. The second generation has a nicer feel around the screen, but the smooth rounded back makes it harder to hold. Fortunately there are some really good cases out there to rectify the situation.
more...
iJohnHenry
Apr 26, 10:21 AM
Yes, I do.
Mord, wow. :eek: That's all. :)
Mord, wow. :eek: That's all. :)
Melrose
Mar 6, 01:25 PM
Apple doesn't invent. Apple refines.
...
I think this is the key point for this argument. Apple, true, did not introduce the first touch screen phone. However, they blew the lid off the touchscreen phone market when introducing the iPhone.
They didn't make the first portable music player with the iPod - but they refined what was there, gave it a good interface and changed the way the world transports and listens to music.
They didn't invent tablet computing - but still they made the iPad and spread a once-dead market segment wide open.
It's not that they invent, though they certainly are innovative, so much as they refine concepts that are already there. And as far as people saying, "everybody copies Apple!" there is more truth to that than you might think - building a tablet computer isn't necessarily copying Apple so much as jumping on the bandwagon once Apple invigorates the market. In that sense, they copy Apple. They ignore a market before because they cannot tap it successfully; Apple does, so then they jump in with drastically similar features.
Apple has single-handedly plowed many technological roads; the roads were already there, but Apple more or less opened them up.
...
I think this is the key point for this argument. Apple, true, did not introduce the first touch screen phone. However, they blew the lid off the touchscreen phone market when introducing the iPhone.
They didn't make the first portable music player with the iPod - but they refined what was there, gave it a good interface and changed the way the world transports and listens to music.
They didn't invent tablet computing - but still they made the iPad and spread a once-dead market segment wide open.
It's not that they invent, though they certainly are innovative, so much as they refine concepts that are already there. And as far as people saying, "everybody copies Apple!" there is more truth to that than you might think - building a tablet computer isn't necessarily copying Apple so much as jumping on the bandwagon once Apple invigorates the market. In that sense, they copy Apple. They ignore a market before because they cannot tap it successfully; Apple does, so then they jump in with drastically similar features.
Apple has single-handedly plowed many technological roads; the roads were already there, but Apple more or less opened them up.
more...
emotion
Oct 17, 10:17 AM
As a consumer I'm trying as hard as possible to sit this one out. :mad:
Which isn't that hard though, let's face it.
Which isn't that hard though, let's face it.
Reticent
Mar 24, 05:10 PM
Huzzah! I remember using an Apple IIe. It's come a long way, and I've loved every second that I've been a part of it (except things did get a liiiittttlee sketchy around the "grey box" era).
more...
RalfTheDog
Apr 8, 12:48 PM
Why would you run a promotion on something that sells out the moment they come into inventory? Sales are for Android products that can't be moved any other way.
Perhaps it is something like, "Purchase an Android device and we will let you buy an iPad."
Perhaps it is something like, "Purchase an Android device and we will let you buy an iPad."
!� V �!
Apr 29, 05:37 PM
You didn't have to click-drag. Just click your option, exactly as before. (Same as iOS, you don't have to drag the slider, you can press on your option.)
Although, the design of the buttons made it look like you had to do this, which is probably why they changed it.
Considering the Finder, where a slider had 3+ options to select, the user would eventually get frustrated. They could have kept it and added the same blue colour to the text or option being selected.
Although, the design of the buttons made it look like you had to do this, which is probably why they changed it.
Considering the Finder, where a slider had 3+ options to select, the user would eventually get frustrated. They could have kept it and added the same blue colour to the text or option being selected.
more...
Anonymous Freak
Oct 11, 12:12 PM
I'm not sure where you got those criteria... but those aren't the criteria for which story make the first page.
Readers aren't asked to blindly believe page 1 rumors... Whether Page 1 or Page 2, rumors are presented in their context.... with historical context of the sites involved. Engadget generally has pretty low standards regarding rumors - in that they will post whatever they want on their site if they find it remotely interesting -- that being said, I've not seen them post Apple Rumor items using their own sources with any degree of certainty before. As a result, they get this front page spot. If "joerumorblogIveneverheardof.com" posts a rumor from "reliable" sources, it won't even get a mention on Page 2.
arn
From the very top of "Page 2":
Page 2: Uncertain news and links
I always took that as an implication that page 1 rumors were from more reliable sources, and should be considered more likely to be true. I didn't say that they were guaranteed to be true, just that they are more reliable.
You also (used to, at least, I can't see any current stories that do,) have disclaimers on Page 2 stories stating that the sources were unreliable, so that's why they were on Page 2. Again, implying that page 1 rumors were more reliable.
Ever since Macslash went downhill, and the significantly more frequent postings of Mac "news" on page 1, I had taken page 1 to be a "news and reliable rumors" page, while Page 2 was a good old fashioned "random rumors of questionable accuracy" page.
Readers aren't asked to blindly believe page 1 rumors... Whether Page 1 or Page 2, rumors are presented in their context.... with historical context of the sites involved. Engadget generally has pretty low standards regarding rumors - in that they will post whatever they want on their site if they find it remotely interesting -- that being said, I've not seen them post Apple Rumor items using their own sources with any degree of certainty before. As a result, they get this front page spot. If "joerumorblogIveneverheardof.com" posts a rumor from "reliable" sources, it won't even get a mention on Page 2.
arn
From the very top of "Page 2":
Page 2: Uncertain news and links
I always took that as an implication that page 1 rumors were from more reliable sources, and should be considered more likely to be true. I didn't say that they were guaranteed to be true, just that they are more reliable.
You also (used to, at least, I can't see any current stories that do,) have disclaimers on Page 2 stories stating that the sources were unreliable, so that's why they were on Page 2. Again, implying that page 1 rumors were more reliable.
Ever since Macslash went downhill, and the significantly more frequent postings of Mac "news" on page 1, I had taken page 1 to be a "news and reliable rumors" page, while Page 2 was a good old fashioned "random rumors of questionable accuracy" page.
one1
Apr 30, 08:46 PM
Safari is broken for me. Reopens the last window URL no matter what I set my preferences to. :( Other than that it FIXED AUTOMATOR (Yaaayyyy!!).
MacsAttack
Jan 12, 07:00 PM
Actually, I believe it wasn't released at MacWorld for two reasons...
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
MacWorld
Mac World
But we got no Macs
And both items are pitched at he US market - not the world market (need to get movie downloads onto other iTunes stores for the Apple TV to be a compelling product)
Oh - and I don't own a mobile phone and have no intention of getting one. Just a rat hole for suckers to pour money down :D
Have not watched the keynote. Not going to bother.
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
1) Time. They keynote ran about 2 hours as is (already above the average). Introducing two new software suites would easily add another 45 minutes (making the event much too long).
2) The focus was clearly the iPhone, and Jobs didn't want anything to steal its glory.
It makes much more sense to introduce the iPhone at MacWorld and have a separate event for Leopard, iLife, and iWork.
MacWorld
Mac World
But we got no Macs
And both items are pitched at he US market - not the world market (need to get movie downloads onto other iTunes stores for the Apple TV to be a compelling product)
Oh - and I don't own a mobile phone and have no intention of getting one. Just a rat hole for suckers to pour money down :D
Have not watched the keynote. Not going to bother.
I'd like to see a bit more commitment from Apple (the company previously known as Apple Computers) on the computer side before I consider recomending any kind of Mac to people again.
logandzwon
Mar 25, 06:29 AM
Happy birthday!
JRM PowerPod
Sep 12, 08:30 AM
God I wish I could be.
Yes, Apple are probably going to release full length movies tomorrow morning but there's nothing out there that proves it yet.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls, Children of aaaaalllll aaageeesssss.....
Come the incredible hyperactive inattentive Apple Special Event thread!!!
You are really disenchanted by this thread arent you?
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
Yes, Apple are probably going to release full length movies tomorrow morning but there's nothing out there that proves it yet.
Ladies and Gentlemen, Boys and Girls, Children of aaaaalllll aaageeesssss.....
Come the incredible hyperactive inattentive Apple Special Event thread!!!
You are really disenchanted by this thread arent you?
But at the end of the day its your fault. You are the leader you must take responsibility.
brianus
Oct 17, 01:45 PM
I was always under the impression that if you wanted to save something for that long your best bet would be to use some kind of tape archival system.
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
I've always thought external hard drives would work fine, especially now that you can make SATA connections externally. You work from the external drive, when you're done you take it with you, no need to wait to burn. As far as backing up goes, that's just going to take a long time no matter which way you do it (unless it's like that Time Machine stuff, which is always going on, and uses a hard drive), and for me, I'd rather back up a whole drive at a time, which would require more space than a disc would provide.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
Tape!?! :confused: who on earth uses tape anymore? This is.. 2006. And I was always under the impression that a medium with moving parts would be more prone to failure than one without. Certainly my VHS and cassette library have had their share of tapes being chewed up by the machine or worn out from use.
I've always thought external hard drives would work fine, especially now that you can make SATA connections externally. You work from the external drive, when you're done you take it with you, no need to wait to burn. As far as backing up goes, that's just going to take a long time no matter which way you do it (unless it's like that Time Machine stuff, which is always going on, and uses a hard drive), and for me, I'd rather back up a whole drive at a time, which would require more space than a disc would provide.
External drives are *not* long term archiving solutions. They are useful for storing vast amounts of data that presumably you want to actually access and use (and possibly modify) on a regular basis; also, they are good for the kind of incremental backups you refer to, Time Machine, Retrospect, other 3rd party backup tools can be used for this. But if you have important files you know aren't going to change, while having them on HDD is useful for instant access, that's not where they should be permanently archived -- they should be burned to a permanent medium, preferably more than one copy, and stored in a safe place (or places). If your drive fails and you still need the data to be on that drive, you can then restore from the permanent medium.
oceans777
Apr 8, 07:02 PM
I got my iPad 2 at the magical store. CompUSA. Winner.
JSage
Mar 19, 06:13 PM
How did this thread become an argument between different dialects? Stop trolling and enjoy using the phones that you have.
No comments:
Post a Comment