bloodycape
Apr 18, 05:10 PM
No it's not. It's not that obvious. Phones sucked so bad before the iphone. Smart phones sucked even worse. Treo's, Q's omg. horrible pieces of equipment.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
I can't say they sucked, they were just more spartan compare to what we have now. Sure the touch screen aspect of it was crap, but the browser was acceptable, battery life was good, and they keyboard, least on the 650, and 700w where good all the years I used them. From time to time I miss my 700w and WM as it had this nerdy charm to it.
This could out like the RIM v Handspring(Palm bought them later) lawsuit were RIM sued Handspring for copying their keyboard, and something related to emailing on a mobile device. They settled out of court in the end.
grue
Apr 22, 12:51 AM
How utterly retarded does one have to be to get to the point where they put workstations on top of the desk instead of on the floor where they belong? Do you really need to put your Apple computer next to your overpriced, glossy Apple display to prove yourself?
Multimedia
Sep 16, 05:14 AM
You may be right about the 160 GB HDD option and the X1800.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.Tiger also has a lot of controls to increase system level font sizes plus ZOOM so I don't think going higher res would be a problem with Tiger.
But please tell us more of what you know about resolution independence with Leopard and what new display technologies coming next year?At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)Agreed.
There is no way the MBP's will recieve resolution upgrades before Leopard. Santa Rosa MBP's will definiantly be bumped to 1680x1050 and 1920x1200. Tiger is resolution dependent, which means that a higher DPI would make it nearly impossible to see anything.Tiger also has a lot of controls to increase system level font sizes plus ZOOM so I don't think going higher res would be a problem with Tiger.
But please tell us more of what you know about resolution independence with Leopard and what new display technologies coming next year?At last, why 26th-30th? Why would Apple have a large event where it would be appropriate to release MBP's, and then instead announce 1-4 days after? I believe it might be a few days prior to Photokina, as the iMac was before the Paris Expo.;)Agreed.
koruki
Mar 29, 03:00 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
ah nothing like starting the day with a bit of ignorance. :cool:
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
ah nothing like starting the day with a bit of ignorance. :cool:
Eidorian
Mar 29, 02:25 PM
Note that MS is dropping the standalone Zune hardware, and moving the Zune interface into Windows Phone 7.
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?I am stuck in a limbo where I want the phone for everything that it does except the phone part...
If your phone can do it all, why make standalone music players?I am stuck in a limbo where I want the phone for everything that it does except the phone part...
Michael Scrip
Apr 26, 04:01 PM
I'll bet you money they include Android tablets in the same chart if an Android tablet ever actually sells significant numbers. And it IS deceptive because they did not point out that the chart is completely different if you included all Apple iOS devices, whereas if you included all other Android devices besides phones the chart wouldn't change.
Yeah... who knows.
But also... who cares? Is marketshare anything more than fanboy fodder?
Apple is in the business of selling products and they are doing just that. Don't be so concerned with charts and graphs... just let Apple do what they do.
Yeah... who knows.
But also... who cares? Is marketshare anything more than fanboy fodder?
Apple is in the business of selling products and they are doing just that. Don't be so concerned with charts and graphs... just let Apple do what they do.
alent1234
Apr 26, 02:42 PM
I really hope that Apple sees trends like this and realizes it's time to change their game plan. No more once a year phones. Time to kick the innovation level up a few notches. Time for over the air OS updates, over the air app installs, wireless syncing and everything else Android has offered for some time now.
most of the new android phones are just last year's hardware with updated modems. the only ARM Core A9 phone i know of it the Atrix. Everything else is A8 like the iphone 4.
I think the droid incredible is supposed to ship in a few days and that's also tegra 2. later this year tegra 3 is going to be seen on smartphones and tablets. nvidia is ramping up their 6-12 month release cycles like they did on PC's and it will probably shake up the market
most of the new android phones are just last year's hardware with updated modems. the only ARM Core A9 phone i know of it the Atrix. Everything else is A8 like the iphone 4.
I think the droid incredible is supposed to ship in a few days and that's also tegra 2. later this year tegra 3 is going to be seen on smartphones and tablets. nvidia is ramping up their 6-12 month release cycles like they did on PC's and it will probably shake up the market
Jape
Nov 18, 05:41 AM
The apple store is looking better and better, once again it has been pushed bac to dec 2. I wonder when the Magellan car kit is coming out and how much that will cost.
KnightWRX
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Instead of pixel based images that are just bigger, why not simply ship vector based icons/wallpapers ?
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
KDE supported SVG as a format for wallpapers and icons something like 10 years ago... That way, it doesn't matter what the display resolution is, the icon always looks sharp and non-pixelated.
I'd rather Apple work on making SVG the standard graphics format for graphics ressources than just bumping up the pixel count (and the file size!).
Heck, if they don't like SVG (which is just a bunch of XML), they could go with one of the other vector based image formats or come up with one of their own.
trip1ex
May 6, 07:19 AM
Not like they don't already have OSX running on ARM in-house.
itcheroni
Apr 19, 11:36 AM
That's like saying that I need to read the whole Bible instead of you just telling me why you're a believer.
That's all we're asking. Just tell us why you believe something to be true.
If you inspire us enough, maybe we'll crack open that Bible.
A better analogy would be a scientist trying to explain to a Christian scientist why evolution makes more sense than a strict interpretation of the Bible. Or Galileo (was it him?) trying to convince people that the Earth revolved around the Sun.
By the way, speaking of being convinced, I looked back on some of my posts from 2008 and can't believe the crazy things I believed back then. Nobody took my aside and explained things to me. I went and found sources on my own. I don't know how to explain a lot of different concepts that hinges on each other that will be utterly convincing in 100-200 words. It took me a few years to unlearn all the crap I learned in economics classes in college. I can't do the same for you in a few minutes.
That's all we're asking. Just tell us why you believe something to be true.
If you inspire us enough, maybe we'll crack open that Bible.
A better analogy would be a scientist trying to explain to a Christian scientist why evolution makes more sense than a strict interpretation of the Bible. Or Galileo (was it him?) trying to convince people that the Earth revolved around the Sun.
By the way, speaking of being convinced, I looked back on some of my posts from 2008 and can't believe the crazy things I believed back then. Nobody took my aside and explained things to me. I went and found sources on my own. I don't know how to explain a lot of different concepts that hinges on each other that will be utterly convincing in 100-200 words. It took me a few years to unlearn all the crap I learned in economics classes in college. I can't do the same for you in a few minutes.
ftaok
Apr 7, 02:51 PM
I can say CONFIDENTLY that the war is NOT over. It's been what 2 years? No way. Apple may have the upper hand in the battle but has NOT won the war.
What I'm saying is that by the time Android or WebOS or QNX catch up to the iPad, Apple will already be onto the next big thing. Tablets will have peaked, and the weak players will have dropped out.
So instead of following Apple and forever having your products known as iPad killers, why not spend the money that you'd put into designing mediocre tablets into creating the next device? I'm sure that Sammy, Moto, RIM, etc all have some budget to develop the next generation of devices, but I think they need to spend a lot more on the R&D.
For instance, when netbooks were all the rage, everyone was demanding that Apple come up with their own netbook. For whatever reason, Apple wasn't (and still isn't) in the netbook market. Instead, they spent their energies (and money) developing the successor to the netbook. In hindsight, we should have all seen it coming. Jobs even said that Apple couldn't make a decent 'computer' for less than $500. Apple was busy creating the iPad to be that device that folks would shell out $500 for. Genius.
So instead of waging a long, drawn out war against Apple for a small slice of the tablet market, work on making the successor to the tablet.
What I'm saying is that by the time Android or WebOS or QNX catch up to the iPad, Apple will already be onto the next big thing. Tablets will have peaked, and the weak players will have dropped out.
So instead of following Apple and forever having your products known as iPad killers, why not spend the money that you'd put into designing mediocre tablets into creating the next device? I'm sure that Sammy, Moto, RIM, etc all have some budget to develop the next generation of devices, but I think they need to spend a lot more on the R&D.
For instance, when netbooks were all the rage, everyone was demanding that Apple come up with their own netbook. For whatever reason, Apple wasn't (and still isn't) in the netbook market. Instead, they spent their energies (and money) developing the successor to the netbook. In hindsight, we should have all seen it coming. Jobs even said that Apple couldn't make a decent 'computer' for less than $500. Apple was busy creating the iPad to be that device that folks would shell out $500 for. Genius.
So instead of waging a long, drawn out war against Apple for a small slice of the tablet market, work on making the successor to the tablet.
dagomike
Nov 3, 01:04 PM
So, Apple online is now shipping these?
Coincidentally I called today to cancel my order and they wouldn't let me. They said it was prepared to ship, but still telling me it will ship December 4th. What a painful conversation that was, but now I suppose it makes sense.
Coincidentally I called today to cancel my order and they wouldn't let me. They said it was prepared to ship, but still telling me it will ship December 4th. What a painful conversation that was, but now I suppose it makes sense.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 25, 10:40 AM
Steve:
You may not track anyone. But you can. We'd like to know you cannot.
Please address that issue.
Thanks
You may not track anyone. But you can. We'd like to know you cannot.
Please address that issue.
Thanks
dr Dunkel
Apr 20, 01:01 AM
It is not necessary it is not better, although I know some of you think anytime has anything with a bigger number in it you think Apple needs to follow. That is not how they work. They make whole devices, they don't just compile disparate parts with no real rhyme or reason.
But if it would have gotten the 4" screen it would have been just right, right? I love this "if Apple does something, it is great and if they don't, it's not needed anyway" - regardless of what it is... Haters gonna hate, but maniacs are blind.
But if it would have gotten the 4" screen it would have been just right, right? I love this "if Apple does something, it is great and if they don't, it's not needed anyway" - regardless of what it is... Haters gonna hate, but maniacs are blind.
ciTiger
Apr 23, 06:11 PM
Ok, I'll try this question, which is a fair question...............
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
Everyone says again and again, Apple does not aim for the high end.
If we put Mac Pro's to one side as they are the proper PC's of the Apple Mac world.
Let's speak about iMac's
They are Apple mass consumer, man/woman in the street computers.
They type of customers who just want to enjoy their computer and be able to get the jobs they want done in a nice and easy way.
I think that's a fair statement.
Also, as has been said, over and over and OVER again, these customers, that the iMac's are aimed at, are not Nerds, Not Tech Freaks, Not spec junkies.
They are just normal people who probably don't want to be worried about specs and to be honest as long as it looks nice and moves smoothy on screen, don't care what's inside the case.
Given this. If these "typical consumers, who don't care or really know about specs" are today, looking at their current 1920x1080 screens, or 1920x1200 screens, and they cannot see the individual pixels from their normal, let's say two feet away viewing distance, then what on earth would be the point in increasing costs, and slowing down an iMac by lumbering it with a higher resolution screen?
What is the point, for these consumers, to increase the screen resolution when they can't make out the individual pixels currently?
What was the point in bringing retina display to the iPhone? :)
Same thing I guess...
For one I want it, it is very kind on the eyes...
CAWjr
Mar 28, 11:06 AM
I'm still on a 3GS. If I don't get an iPhone 5 this summer, the world won't end. In fact, it will be nice to not hear my wife get in my ear about getting an iPad & an iPhone only months apart from each other.
Plus, if they delay it & get better technology in it, I can wait it out.
Plus, if they delay it & get better technology in it, I can wait it out.
kiljoy616
Mar 26, 11:05 PM
What crack-addled mind seriously thinks it'd be sensible or probable that Apple would come out with a new iPad 5 months after... coming out with a new iPad?
I mean, I suppose, if they just wanted to take the biggest splashiest attention grabber product they have and not bother capitalizing on all the time & money they spent on iPad2, and just completely hamfist the frickin thing up it's own arse for the sheer bloody hell of it, then yea, sure it makes total sense.
Or you could look at it this way, considering that the new ipad 2 is a capable graphic gpu its possible that the big difference to the ipad will be some retina like upgrade only. :)
I was feeling( I know :p ) the ipad 2 and its so thin that it actually felt nice in my hand :) more so than the ipad 1 :o so making the ipad 3 even more thinner to me would not really be a sell considering how thing it is now and rather see an upgrade in resolution with maybe more memory. I can see apple making the ipad 3 more of a finishing touch to the ipad 2 than a whole new revamp. :D
I mean, I suppose, if they just wanted to take the biggest splashiest attention grabber product they have and not bother capitalizing on all the time & money they spent on iPad2, and just completely hamfist the frickin thing up it's own arse for the sheer bloody hell of it, then yea, sure it makes total sense.
Or you could look at it this way, considering that the new ipad 2 is a capable graphic gpu its possible that the big difference to the ipad will be some retina like upgrade only. :)
I was feeling( I know :p ) the ipad 2 and its so thin that it actually felt nice in my hand :) more so than the ipad 1 :o so making the ipad 3 even more thinner to me would not really be a sell considering how thing it is now and rather see an upgrade in resolution with maybe more memory. I can see apple making the ipad 3 more of a finishing touch to the ipad 2 than a whole new revamp. :D
citizenzen
Apr 16, 01:23 PM
It's spending on investment rather than spending on consumption.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
This is a key point to the growing inequity of wealth in America. The rich have surplus funds that they are able to invest, while the poor, and a growing number of people are spending all of the income on consumption.
In 2007 Zhu Xiao Di wrote a report for the Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies title, Growing Wealth, Inequity, and Housing in the United States [PDF] (http://www.jchs.harvard.edu/publications/markets/w07-1.pdf)
Abstract
The rapid growth of household wealth in the United States has been accompanied by drastic growing inequality. This paper discusses both wealth and inequality growth, examines demographic factors behind the growth, and analyzes housing�s role in it, using the Survey of Consumer Finances data collected by the Federal Reserve Bank. While aggregate household net wealth grew from $25.9 trillion in 1995 to $50.1 trillion in 2004 (both in 2004 dollars), nearly 90 percent of the net gains occurred only among the top quartile of households in the wealth distribution. Although housing wealth (both home equity and housing value) was still more evenly distributed than other types of wealth, it largely served to widen the wealth gap rather than to narrow it during the last decade.
In this report, he clearly illustrates the difference between household net wealth and household income.
Wealth Inequality and Household Net Wealth Growth
It is well known that the distribution of household net wealth is even more unbalanced than that of household income. Net wealth is defined as all assets net out all debts. In the top quartile of the household net wealth distribution held the lion�s share�87 percent (or $43.6 trillion) while the bottom quartile of households had nothing. The upper and lower middle quartiles combined held $6.5 trillion, or 13 percent of total household net wealth (see Chart 1).
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/members/citizenzen-albums-album-picture1305-screen-shot-2011-04-16.png
As he says in the report, "In other words, the bottom 28 million of American households in 2004 had nothing once their debt is netted out ..."
The difference between inequalities in wealth and income is quite natural, as one is from a stock perspective and the other is from a flow perspective. Low income households have to spend most or all of their incomes on life necessities with little capability of saving and investment so they can hardly accumulate any household net wealth. Thus they often remain in the bottom distribution of household wealth with nothing; the exception is the group of low income senior households who recently fell into the low-income category due to retirement and the loss of income. In short, while the bottom quartile of income distribution still has income, the bottom quartile of wealth distribution does not have any wealth net of debt.
ravenvii
Jul 29, 11:34 PM
The Apple iPhone would have to be better in functionality than a Blackberry to be considered useful, unless they can work out a better input device method or utilize Microsoft's Vista speech recognition program.
Hurray! Exactly what I'm thinking.
If Apple accomplishes this, I'll sell my Blackberry and buy Apple's phone in a flash.
But please, no speech recnogization... have you seen Microsoft's demo of their technology? Hilarious.
Hurray! Exactly what I'm thinking.
If Apple accomplishes this, I'll sell my Blackberry and buy Apple's phone in a flash.
But please, no speech recnogization... have you seen Microsoft's demo of their technology? Hilarious.
zephonic
Apr 23, 03:19 AM
Apple had/has its prime time with the ipod, iphone, ipad but now the innovation chip has changed it seems.
This has been my feeling as well. Unless Apple pulls some new magic out of the hat. I love OSX, but I'm not sure how much longer I can stay on board.
This has been my feeling as well. Unless Apple pulls some new magic out of the hat. I love OSX, but I'm not sure how much longer I can stay on board.
balamw
Apr 11, 08:28 AM
If someone in my group had sent me a quick email with this equation I would expect to see-
(48/2)(9+3) or 48/[2(9+3)]
This is even more important when the equations I was using were a lot more complex!
Step back a bit. Someone in your group would actually send you an expression that was full of constant numbers rather than reducing that to the answer?
As s a physicist by training I hate it when the meaning is bled out of an expression, by rote plugging in of numbers. Engineers love to do this kind of thing and take a perfectly nice equation, lump a bunch of stuff together and take a few implied logs for good measure and think it still has meaning. :p
I'd expect anyone who knows what they are doing to send something like x/y(a+b) rather than 48/2(9+3). Preferably with an extra pair of parens/brackets to improve clarity. Or send you TeX $\frac{x}{y}(a+b)$ or even code if this was a numerical exercise. This would assist in your sanity checking if, for example, you saw that x was a distance, y was a time and a and b were also times and you knew the expected answer was a distance you'd know that (x/y)*(a+b) was meant. If you were looking for acceleration you might go back to the author and ask, "did you mean (x/[y*(a+b)])?" instead of taking the original expression at its face value.
In the absence of context and any other information the answer is 288.
B
(48/2)(9+3) or 48/[2(9+3)]
This is even more important when the equations I was using were a lot more complex!
Step back a bit. Someone in your group would actually send you an expression that was full of constant numbers rather than reducing that to the answer?
As s a physicist by training I hate it when the meaning is bled out of an expression, by rote plugging in of numbers. Engineers love to do this kind of thing and take a perfectly nice equation, lump a bunch of stuff together and take a few implied logs for good measure and think it still has meaning. :p
I'd expect anyone who knows what they are doing to send something like x/y(a+b) rather than 48/2(9+3). Preferably with an extra pair of parens/brackets to improve clarity. Or send you TeX $\frac{x}{y}(a+b)$ or even code if this was a numerical exercise. This would assist in your sanity checking if, for example, you saw that x was a distance, y was a time and a and b were also times and you knew the expected answer was a distance you'd know that (x/y)*(a+b) was meant. If you were looking for acceleration you might go back to the author and ask, "did you mean (x/[y*(a+b)])?" instead of taking the original expression at its face value.
In the absence of context and any other information the answer is 288.
B
Coolerking
Sep 11, 01:05 PM
...or back to school rush
We'll find out tomorrow
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point.
:cool:
We'll find out tomorrow
BTW...what is the high end Merom processor? Is there a lower end processor? If there is the higher, faster one would go into the MBP while the lower end C2D is in the MB so you still have a discrepancy that warrants a higher price point.
:cool:
Gepat
Jul 30, 05:06 AM
I guess the guy who told you that story can kiss his career (with apple) goodbye ;) There's not that many photographers who take pictures of upcoming Apple products ...
Anyway, I can't wait to see the phone...
Anyway, I can't wait to see the phone...
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar