sammich
Oct 28, 01:06 AM
Well, I'll hop on the bandwagon. My measly old MBP should be able to cope with it. I'll get my PS3 onto the game as well, just to see how much I can get out of it.
(far out you guys are well equipped)
(far out you guys are well equipped)
beany boy
Apr 14, 07:51 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
4.3.2 feels smoother to me. Take that with as many grains of sand as you like.
4.3.2 feels smoother to me. Take that with as many grains of sand as you like.
JoeG4
Jul 21, 03:35 PM
I don't think it will have virtualization, especially with the way they are supporting Parallels solution itself. I think a dual-boot or a fast OS switching type of solution is much more likely. Somebody around here was suggesting "sleeping" one OS and starting another. That's almost good enough. Afterall Apple does not want you to use Windows, it only wants you to believe you could run Windows if you had to, in order to ease switcher anxiety.
I've been planning a project like this (I finally got it on sourceforge, in fact) - The idea is to make the virtualization system able to hibernate any given OS (or freeze state it) in such a way that it can be restored as the host OS (and vice versa), so that you can give any of your OSes running (virtual or host), the host priorities while all the others become virtual.
OTOH, that could be laggy, and may be subject to limitations within EFI, only time will tell.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/fruitsalad/ <- shameless self promotion XD
I've been planning a project like this (I finally got it on sourceforge, in fact) - The idea is to make the virtualization system able to hibernate any given OS (or freeze state it) in such a way that it can be restored as the host OS (and vice versa), so that you can give any of your OSes running (virtual or host), the host priorities while all the others become virtual.
OTOH, that could be laggy, and may be subject to limitations within EFI, only time will tell.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/fruitsalad/ <- shameless self promotion XD
nagromme
Jul 11, 02:32 PM
I still don't get the value of wireless in a music player--not in actual practice (battery life and added bulk, vs. the need to plug in to charge, which naturally takes longer than synching anyway).
But whatever it is, I think its chances will depend a lot on whether it can be as slim and light as an iPod, and the same elegant ease-of-use as iTunes and iPod.
If it has those things, the X-Box name could carry it to some kind of success. But of course there can be more than one successful product in a market--Apple is not in danger.
But whatever it is, I think its chances will depend a lot on whether it can be as slim and light as an iPod, and the same elegant ease-of-use as iTunes and iPod.
If it has those things, the X-Box name could carry it to some kind of success. But of course there can be more than one successful product in a market--Apple is not in danger.
more...
briankeith513
Apr 18, 08:23 PM
i had to activate the multi-touch gestures with "Xcode", the new 4.3.2 update doesn't activate multi-touch....
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
Does Xcode only work on MAC's?
kalsta
Apr 15, 09:57 AM
Dude,,...... you didn't get rid of the chin....
You can't mention iMac around here without someone saying.
I hope they get rid of the chin. :rolleyes::D
True enough. But if there was no chin, I may as well have drawn an iPad on a stick, and no one would be impressed by that. ;)
ps. Yes I think a touch screen mac is coming but it seriously needs to be a new product not an iMac. Also needs to be much much smaller and lighter like the iMac gets the Air Treatment with say 17 or 20inch screen. No Stand.
I'm not really sure what the point would be. If you lay a 17 or 20 inch Mac down on your lap, give it a touch screen, and modify the interface so it's more suited to the less precise input of fingers… haven't you just created a bigger iPad? (Not that a bigger iPad wouldn't have it's uses, but it wouldn't be a Mac, and I'd question whether it would warrant yet another 'marketing name'.
I suppose it's possible, as many presume, that Apple is looking to merge OS X and iOS, but it's never been that convincing of an argument to me. There are some real incompatibilities between the two in my mind. Many OS X apps demand the precision and unrestricted visibility that a keyboard and mouse give you, but once you're using a keyboard and mouse, the display has moved away from your fingers. A vertical display keeps it within reach, but humans just aren't suited to using a vertical touch screen for more than a few minutes, as Steve Jobs has himself remarked.
If the future were some kind of OS X / iOS hybrid, why did Apple invent iOS in the first place? Why not just go straight for this touchable OS X Nirvana if it exists? I suspect it doesn't exist, and Apple understood that a usable touchscreen interface has a unique set of requirements, benefits and limitations.
As for what this 'ix.Mac.MarketingName' is, I actually haven't a clue. It's somewhat intriguing though. It's kind of exciting to think that the inventive minds at Apple might be hatching some new kind of device. A little optimistic maybe, but who knows?
You can't mention iMac around here without someone saying.
I hope they get rid of the chin. :rolleyes::D
True enough. But if there was no chin, I may as well have drawn an iPad on a stick, and no one would be impressed by that. ;)
ps. Yes I think a touch screen mac is coming but it seriously needs to be a new product not an iMac. Also needs to be much much smaller and lighter like the iMac gets the Air Treatment with say 17 or 20inch screen. No Stand.
I'm not really sure what the point would be. If you lay a 17 or 20 inch Mac down on your lap, give it a touch screen, and modify the interface so it's more suited to the less precise input of fingers… haven't you just created a bigger iPad? (Not that a bigger iPad wouldn't have it's uses, but it wouldn't be a Mac, and I'd question whether it would warrant yet another 'marketing name'.
I suppose it's possible, as many presume, that Apple is looking to merge OS X and iOS, but it's never been that convincing of an argument to me. There are some real incompatibilities between the two in my mind. Many OS X apps demand the precision and unrestricted visibility that a keyboard and mouse give you, but once you're using a keyboard and mouse, the display has moved away from your fingers. A vertical display keeps it within reach, but humans just aren't suited to using a vertical touch screen for more than a few minutes, as Steve Jobs has himself remarked.
If the future were some kind of OS X / iOS hybrid, why did Apple invent iOS in the first place? Why not just go straight for this touchable OS X Nirvana if it exists? I suspect it doesn't exist, and Apple understood that a usable touchscreen interface has a unique set of requirements, benefits and limitations.
As for what this 'ix.Mac.MarketingName' is, I actually haven't a clue. It's somewhat intriguing though. It's kind of exciting to think that the inventive minds at Apple might be hatching some new kind of device. A little optimistic maybe, but who knows?
more...
Banyan Bruce
Mar 31, 01:53 PM
The brown leather looks hideous..if I'd wanted a leather calendar, I'd buy one. :confused:
Even worst than the awful wood background that appears in several apps. :mad:
%IMG_DESC_8%
more...
%IMG_DESC_9%
%IMG_DESC_10%
more...
%IMG_DESC_11%
%IMG_DESC_12%
more...
%IMG_DESC_13%
%IMG_DESC_14%
more...
%IMG_DESC_15%
%IMG_DESC_16%
more...
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
Even worst than the awful wood background that appears in several apps. :mad:
appleguy
Aug 18, 07:05 PM
No, that's the opposite of what I was after, that's the bug it has now. Sigh, this is exactly what I predicted, they added a bunch of new features but haven't fixed any of the major usability bugs and flaws it already has. Why does apple show iCal such contempt?
what are you after then?
what are you after then?
more...
gkhaldi
Oct 23, 12:43 PM
That's what makes all the rancor about this so funny. Depending on the reading of this EULA provision, Apple's limits are still as, or more, restrictive than Microsoft's.
But at least they are clear. And, last time I checked OS X wasn't far of the 99$ mark for a 5 instance home license. Compare that with Micro$oft:p :p
But at least they are clear. And, last time I checked OS X wasn't far of the 99$ mark for a 5 instance home license. Compare that with Micro$oft:p :p
chrmjenkins
Apr 22, 02:03 PM
That's typical Apple. Intel chipset does not support USB 3.0? No USB 3.0 for Apple fans!
It's not built into the current Intel platform standards. That doesn't mean it doesn't support it. Most of Intel's reference boards even include it.
NVIDIA GPUs do not work with SandyBridge? Stick with outdated C2D CPUs for years.
Nvidia GPUs work fine with the Sandy Bridge platform. The problem was that they were not licensed to make chipsets for intel processors past the Montevina platform.
What's more important - CPU/chip or case? In case of Apple, the case always wins. Apple is all about image. Once designed, the case should stay unchanged for many years. Apple will wait until somebody designs a "suitable" chip. Is not it kind of backward?
Apple is using the same CPUs as everyone else, for which their enclosures are extremely competitive in terms of dimensions.
Then we hear excuses from Apple fans why Apple could not use separate USB 3.0 controller. This would require redesign of the motherboard - Wow! Think of it - redesigning a motherboard! Some companies redesign tens of motherboards every year but Apple? No way. Now iPhone users will be stuck with outdated technology for a year or two and they will be feeding us all kinds of excuses why LTE can not be used in iPhone. Just ridiculous.
There's no question that two radio chips would have caused the tiny logic board inside the iPhone 4 to grow. That means the battery gets smaller or they make some other sort of sacrifice which potentially changes the housing. Too much work to release the same iPhone on a different network, especially since apple wouldn't want to sacrifice battery life.
Since apple has to design to the greatest common denominator, I doubt they'd increase the size of the phone given the number of outspoken size critics on this forum.
It's not built into the current Intel platform standards. That doesn't mean it doesn't support it. Most of Intel's reference boards even include it.
NVIDIA GPUs do not work with SandyBridge? Stick with outdated C2D CPUs for years.
Nvidia GPUs work fine with the Sandy Bridge platform. The problem was that they were not licensed to make chipsets for intel processors past the Montevina platform.
What's more important - CPU/chip or case? In case of Apple, the case always wins. Apple is all about image. Once designed, the case should stay unchanged for many years. Apple will wait until somebody designs a "suitable" chip. Is not it kind of backward?
Apple is using the same CPUs as everyone else, for which their enclosures are extremely competitive in terms of dimensions.
Then we hear excuses from Apple fans why Apple could not use separate USB 3.0 controller. This would require redesign of the motherboard - Wow! Think of it - redesigning a motherboard! Some companies redesign tens of motherboards every year but Apple? No way. Now iPhone users will be stuck with outdated technology for a year or two and they will be feeding us all kinds of excuses why LTE can not be used in iPhone. Just ridiculous.
There's no question that two radio chips would have caused the tiny logic board inside the iPhone 4 to grow. That means the battery gets smaller or they make some other sort of sacrifice which potentially changes the housing. Too much work to release the same iPhone on a different network, especially since apple wouldn't want to sacrifice battery life.
Since apple has to design to the greatest common denominator, I doubt they'd increase the size of the phone given the number of outspoken size critics on this forum.
more...
LightSpeed1
Apr 1, 06:40 AM
Please no brown. Stick with gray please.
RBR2
Apr 13, 11:58 AM
Do you trust Wikipedia? :) In fact the line above this one on Wikipedia says:
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
Everything I've read that is sourced to Intel says an add-on card won't be possible. It's my guess that the integration for Thunderbolt needs to be deeper than an PCI Express card, especially with its capability to carry video/data. It may be that Intel does not want people confused by data-only Thunderbolt ports. OTOH, I'm not a Thunderbolt engineer, so I may be completely mistaken. :D
Technical issues aside - odds are that Apple would rather sell you a new Mac Pro with Thunderbolt onboard.
I am not a Thunderbolt engineer either...in fact, it is interesting (and odd) that Intel is only now announcing the availability of a TB developer kit.
Do you trust the Wiki? While a grain of salt is advisable, I merely reference the item. It does seem to me, however, that the line you reference is talking about a non-GPU PCIe card. I had posted an earlier comment referencing the Intel position that there could not be a TB card (because TB must directly access both the graphics processor and the PCIe lanes). This means that there will not be a simple TB add-on card like adding a FW800/USB 2 card in the past.
The line I referenced seems to indicate that it would be possible for a TB controller to be on a graphics card (and thereby gaining direct access to the GPU) and have direct access to the PCIe lane(s) in which the "TB enabled Graphics Card" is mounted with true (video and data) TB port(s) on the outside.
Would Apple prefer to sell you a new machine? Of course they would. Apple have a well established, if nasty, pattern of abandoning the purchasers of earlier hardware to their fate (not co-incidentally, it is one of the arguments against the use of the Mac platform frequently aired by the PC community).
I believe I mentioned third party developers. If not I do so now. It would be an interesting project for a third party manufacturer to integrate a TB controller and associated ports onto a graphics card that is otherwise the same as a supported graphics card so that it would be recognized by the OS.
Whether Apple have tied access to the TB ports in some bizarre manner which would make this impossible only some clever engineers would know after looking at the new OS & hardware implementation. Apple probably could not care less, but it is a market opportunity for somebody nonetheless.
The reason for the earlier reference to the data only possibility is the reality that external storage for Mac Pros is severely hampered by the lack of a fast interface unless one has made the transition to fibre.
A good RAID array could challenge the current TB bandwidth, but I doubt anyone would complain too loudly considering the lack of alternatives and the degree of improvement over the status quo.
Cheers
more...
OdduWon
Jul 22, 12:51 AM
heres a shot of the macrocrap zuno that is flush worthy:D
lofight
Jan 30, 09:32 AM
How does one buy stock anyway? (from the UK)
I have absolutely no idea on the subject, is it just a matter of buying a share at a couple of hundred dollars, watching Apple go through one of its "win" moments then selling it for a little profit ($50 or whatever) just as a starter? What about tax?
You can do this via your bank our internet, but i'm also a noob in this..
I have absolutely no idea on the subject, is it just a matter of buying a share at a couple of hundred dollars, watching Apple go through one of its "win" moments then selling it for a little profit ($50 or whatever) just as a starter? What about tax?
You can do this via your bank our internet, but i'm also a noob in this..
more...
olimits7
Sep 30, 04:46 PM
Thanks for the replies...
Ok, so AT&T definitely drops calls; that's a given it seems...but for current customers is the dropped calls enough of a pain to leave AT&T/iPhone and go to another carrier??
Thank you,
olimits7
Ok, so AT&T definitely drops calls; that's a given it seems...but for current customers is the dropped calls enough of a pain to leave AT&T/iPhone and go to another carrier??
Thank you,
olimits7
graphite13
Nov 3, 07:22 PM
The nicest thing about a Cocoa app is that it looks and behaves like every other Cocoa app. There is a sort of consistency in behavior. Things that look almost like a Cocoa app, but don't quite behave that way annoy me.
But what'll make VMware faster is the better support for multi-core processors and allowing the VM to take advantage of that.
But what'll make VMware faster is the better support for multi-core processors and allowing the VM to take advantage of that.
more...
Jason Beck
Apr 14, 12:08 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5262/5615054082_4466130eb8_z.jpg
Nice! Soft and sharp. Loooove it.
Nice! Soft and sharp. Loooove it.
asdf542
Apr 21, 10:14 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1PBptSDIh8
Thunderhawks
Apr 13, 02:36 PM
SMART TV? Come on. Only a few year ago we were advised to kill our TVs.
LOL!
LOL!
mc68k
Oct 29, 10:59 PM
i was running -8, should i be running -16?
spotlight shouldnt have been an issue-- it had been on for hours and theres no user accounts on it. raid wasnt on yet.
not stressing too much about it. it's nice to replace a bunch of random machines (especially imacs) with one big producer that actually has a big fan and is designed to get rid of heat fast. those imacs get so hot i get scared for the components. we've had several go out recently. the fan hole on the back is so small its almost comical. apple can't have a fan on the back thats bigger than the logo! it can't have a hard drive light or a cd eject! that would ruin the aesthetics! can't replace the harddrive without suction cups!! needless to say i hate imacs.
spotlight shouldnt have been an issue-- it had been on for hours and theres no user accounts on it. raid wasnt on yet.
not stressing too much about it. it's nice to replace a bunch of random machines (especially imacs) with one big producer that actually has a big fan and is designed to get rid of heat fast. those imacs get so hot i get scared for the components. we've had several go out recently. the fan hole on the back is so small its almost comical. apple can't have a fan on the back thats bigger than the logo! it can't have a hard drive light or a cd eject! that would ruin the aesthetics! can't replace the harddrive without suction cups!! needless to say i hate imacs.
wedge antilies
Jul 11, 06:15 PM
why do people buy the video ipod with its tiny screen when there are other, better, video players out there already?
I have one of these (http://www.cowonamerica.com/products/cowon/a2/) and its fantastic.
IMHO, both Apple and Microsoft will have to go some way to beat the COWON A2.
I know,
A) people use the iPod video for Music first, thats why its "iPod video" not the "Video iPod". The video feature is only a bonus.
B) you can use the iTMS with the iPod video
C) Its $120 more than the iPod
D) Who the hell is COWON?!? - It's sounds like one of those "Simpsons brands" like Sorny.
When the REAL Video iPod comes out, this will be a collectable* item like a Beta VCR.
*By "Collectable" I mean - un-resell-able.
-Red 2.
I have one of these (http://www.cowonamerica.com/products/cowon/a2/) and its fantastic.
IMHO, both Apple and Microsoft will have to go some way to beat the COWON A2.
I know,
A) people use the iPod video for Music first, thats why its "iPod video" not the "Video iPod". The video feature is only a bonus.
B) you can use the iTMS with the iPod video
C) Its $120 more than the iPod
D) Who the hell is COWON?!? - It's sounds like one of those "Simpsons brands" like Sorny.
When the REAL Video iPod comes out, this will be a collectable* item like a Beta VCR.
*By "Collectable" I mean - un-resell-able.
-Red 2.
nw_mike
Dec 1, 03:33 PM
Once someone 'proves' that installation into your System folder, NOT your user space, can be done without an Administrative account THAT will be newsworthy. Making Safari launch a certain web page can be done with preference/.plist files. These are in the USER space. I have yet to see or hear about a compromise of Mac OS X 10.4.8 that does Administrative tampering using a non-admin account (without physical access to the machine). Now I, and many others have submitted feedback to Apple that they have to include, in initial setup of a Mac system, the requirement of setting up a non-admin account. This is security 101 and something neither MS or Apple currently requires. Once you are an Admin all bets are off. We have all seen the installers that you double click and don't require a password to install. Scary. Apple needs to REMAIN diligent on security, but they are not totally lax like some suggest.
just my .02
just my .02
synystergates7
Mar 17, 11:26 AM
Was the door already open or did u wait next to the Nordstroms area? I will probably try to go very early tomorrow and show up to work late.
Store rep told us if we werent within the ropes to come try again tomorrow
Store rep told us if we werent within the ropes to come try again tomorrow
jpjandrade
May 3, 08:14 AM
The 21.5'' has a 512MB GPU while the 15'' MBP has a 1GB GPU, same chipset. There's no reason why would they do this except to push potential buyers to the 27''. This is ridiculous. If it were to keep the iMac price down, they would've added as a BTO.
Ridiculous.
Ridiculous.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario