roadbloc
Apr 12, 06:23 PM
All the Windows 7 I use are campus installs, so since they're not configurable, I haven't really looked around the settings. Does Windows have virtual desktops yet?
No. Its coming in Windows 8.
No. Its coming in Windows 8.
ero87
Nov 26, 12:06 AM
ahh i miss real rumors! exciting new stuff!
I guess I can't expect apple to ALWAYS have new stuff, but sales just don't excite me very much...
I guess I can't expect apple to ALWAYS have new stuff, but sales just don't excite me very much...
snberk103
Apr 15, 12:29 PM
While this is true, we can't allow that technicality to wipe the slate clean. Our security as a whole is deficient, even if the TSA on its own might not be responsible for these two particular failures. Our tax dollars are still going to the our mutual safety so we should expect more.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
As I said, I understood the point you were trying to make. But.... you can't take two non-TSA incidents and use those to make a case against the TSA specifically. All you can do is say that increased security, similar to what the TSA does, can be shown to not catch everything. I could just as easily argue that because the two incidents (shoe and underwear bombers) did not occur from TSA screenings then that is proof the TSA methods work. I could, but I won't because we don't really know that is true. Too small a sample to judge.
Well when a fanatic is willing to commit suicide because he believes that he'll be rewarded in heaven, 50/50 odds don't seem to be all that much of a deterrent.
Did you not read my post above? Or did you not understand it? Or did I not write clearly? I'll assume the 3rd. Past history is that bombs are not put on planes by lone wolf fanatics. They are placed there by a whole operation involving a number of people... perhaps a dozen, maybe? The person carrying the bomb may be a brainwashed fool (though, surprisingly - often educated) - but the support team likely aren't fools. The team includes dedicated individuals who have specialized training and experience that are needed to mount further operations. The bomb makers, the money people, the people who nurture the bomb carrier and ensure that they are fit (mentally) to go through with a suicide attack. These people, the support crew, are not going to like 50/50 odds. Nor, are the support teams command and control. The security forces have shown themselves to be quite good at eventually following the linkages back up the chain.
What's worse is that we've only achieved that with a lot of our personal dignity, time, and money. I don't think we can tolerate much more. We should be expecting more for the time, money, and humiliation we're putting ourselves (and our 6 year-old children) through.
You are right. There has been a cost to dignity, time and money. Most of life is. People are constantly balancing personal and societal security/safety against personal freedoms. In this case what you think is only part of the balance between society and security. You feel it's too far. I can't argue. I don't fly anymore unless I have to. But, I also think that what the TSA (and CATSA, & the European equivalents) are doing is working. I just don't have to like going through it.
....
Your statistics don't unequivocally prove the efficacy of the TSA though. They only show that the TSA employs a cost-benefit method to determine what measures to take.
Give the man/woman/boy a cigar! There is no way to prove it, other than setting controlled experiments in which make some airports security free, and others with varying levels of security. And in some cases you don't tell the travelling public which airports have what level (if any) of security - but you do tell the bad guys/gals.
In other words, in this world... all you've got is incomplete data to try and make a reasonable decisions based on a cost/benefit analysis.
Since you believe in the efficacy of the TSA so much, the burden is yours to make a clear and convincing case, not mine. I can provide alternative hypotheses, but I am in no way saying that these are provable at the current moment in time.
I did. I cited a sharp drop-off in hijackings at a particular moment in history. Within the limits of a Mac Rumours Forum, that is as far as I'm going to go. If you an alternative hypothesis, you have to at least back it up with something. My something trumps your alternative hypothesis - even if my something is merely a pair of deuces - until you provide something to back up your AH.
I'm only saying that they are rational objections to your theory.
Objections with nothing to support them.
My hypothesis is essentially the same as Lisa's: the protection is coming from our circumstances rather than our deliberative efforts.
Good. Support your hypothesis. Otherwise it's got the exactly the same weight as my hypothesis that in fact Lisa's rock was making the bears scarce.
Terrorism is a complex thing. My bet is that as we waged wars in multiple nations, it became more advantageous for fanatics to strike where our military forces were.
US has been waging wars in multiple nations since.... well, lets not go there.... for a long time. What changed on 9/11? Besides enhanced security at the airports, that is.
Without having to gain entry into the country, get past airport security (no matter what odds were), or hijack a plane, terrorists were able to kill over 4,000 Americans in Iraq and nearly 1,500 in Afghanistan. That's almost twice as many as were killed on 9/11.
Over 10 years, not 10 minutes. It is the single act of terrorism on 9/11 that is engraved on people's (not just American) memories and consciousnesses - not the background and now seemingly routine deaths in the military ranks (I'm speaking about the general population, not about the families and fellow soldiers of those who have been killed.)
Terrorism against military targets is 1) not technically terrorism, and b) not very newsworthy to the public. That's why terrorists target civilians. Deadliest single overseas attack on the US military since the 2nd WW - where and when? Hint... it killed 241 American serviceman. Even if you know that incident, do you think it resonates with the general public in anyway? How about the Oklahoma City bombing? Bet you most people would think more people were killed there than in .... (shall I tell you? Beirut.) That's because civilians were targeted in OK, and the military in Beirut.
If I were the leader of a group intent on killing Americans and Westerners in general, I certainly would go down that route rather than hijack planes.
You'd not make the news very often, nor change much public opinion in the US, then.
It's pretty clear that it was not the rock.
But can you prove it? :)
Ecosystems are constantly finding new equilibriums; killing off an herbivore's primary predator should cause a decline in vegetation.
I'm glad you got that reference. The Salmon works like this. For millennia the bears and eagles have been scooping the salmon out of the streams. Bears, especially, don't actually eat much of the fish. They take a bite or two of the juiciest bits (from a bear's POV) and toss the carcass over their shoulder to scoop another Salmon. All those carcasses put fish fertilizer into the creek and river banks. A lot of fertilizer. So, the you get really big trees there.
That is not surprising, nor is it difficult to prove (you can track all three populations simultaneously). There is also a causal mechanism at work that can explain the effect without the need for new assumptions (Occam's Razor).
The efficacy of the TSA and our security measures, on the other hand, are quite complex and are affected by numerous causes.
But I think your reasoning is flawed. Human behaviour is much less complex than tracking how the ecosystem interacts with itself. One species vs numerous species; A species we can communicate with vs multiples that we can't; A long history of trying to understand human behaviour vs Not so much.
Changes in travel patterns, other nations' actions, and an enemey's changing strategy all play a big role. You can't ignore all of these and pronounce our security gimmicks (and really, that's what patting down a 6 year-old is) to be so masterfully effective.
It's also why they couldn't pay me enough me to run that operation. Too many "known unknowns".
We can't deduce anything from that footage of the 6 year old without knowing more. What if the explosives sniffing machine was going nuts anytime the girl went near it. If you were on that plane, wouldn't you want to know why that machine thought the girl has explosives on her? We don't know that there was a explosives sniffing device, and we don't know that there wasn't. All we know is from that footage that doesn't give us any context.
If I was a privacy or rights group, I would immediately launch an inquiry though. There is a enough information to be concerned, just not enough to form any conclusions what-so-ever. Except the screener appeared to be very professional.
bushido
Apr 30, 08:59 AM
Windows 8 = version 8 :D When it comes out, 2015?
more like late 2012. milestone 2 already leaked
more like late 2012. milestone 2 already leaked
airforce1
May 2, 10:50 AM
Google's approach is completely different. When phones running the Google OS detect any wireless network, they beam its MAC address, signal strength and GPS coordinates to Google servers, along with the unique ID of the handset.
You can check if any androids have reported your home network to google by inputting your router's MAC here:
http://samy.pl/androidmap/
yup
Apple on the other hand decided to go above the law, after all it must feel powerful now that they have starving Chinese sweatshop workers sign suicide agreements after known they will be driven to the point of no return
You can check if any androids have reported your home network to google by inputting your router's MAC here:
http://samy.pl/androidmap/
yup
Apple on the other hand decided to go above the law, after all it must feel powerful now that they have starving Chinese sweatshop workers sign suicide agreements after known they will be driven to the point of no return
bcslay
Sep 12, 02:59 AM
I believe that an airport extreme, or 802.11g is plenty fast to stream High-def Video, and shouldn't apple change the name of itunes at this point, since it is now a multimedia piece of software?
hob
Jan 5, 03:29 PM
Although the data transferred may be the same or more with on-demand streams, when it's live there will be much higher simultaneous usage. With high-end hosting in general, simultaneous usage is the killer and not really total bandwidth usage. With the popularity of Apple these days the number of simultaneous streams could be extremely high (I mean, if MacRumors gets 100,000 visitors simultaneously think what Apple would get themselves).
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
I don't think expense is the issue here.
Apple can either:
1. Offer the stream only to the stores
2. Pay for massive bandwidth. Have you seen the profit from last quarter alone?! The people watching would most probably have bought an apple product of 5 recently!
apolloa
Nov 6, 06:21 PM
I've pre-ordered the Prestige Edition pack on the PS3. It's already been shipped and I will get it on Monday or Tuesday, shame really, cause I cannot open it until Christmas Day!!!!! hahahaha, oh I shall have to be strong..... but I thinks it's a cool pressy. I may play with the toy car more first though :D:D
Music-Man
Sep 12, 08:04 AM
They appear to be movie trailers.
I thought tht too, but there's already a section on the page for trailer. Just about the iTunes Videos
I thought tht too, but there's already a section on the page for trailer. Just about the iTunes Videos
JeffDM
Oct 3, 11:11 AM
When will this hacking nerd do something REALLY positive and productive to the world?
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
Last time I heard, his occupation was to break into companies' IPR without any legal permission to do so...not commendable, to say the least.
It's currently the only way to get non-Disney movies onto an iPod and many other similar devices. It's also a way for users to get the videos they've paid for onto media devices that don't have a DVD drive. For the movie industry to say that they have to buy the movie again is completely ludicrous on their part.
His work allowed people to use the media and devices they paid for in the way that they want to use it. I would call that productive.
I know you probably don't agree with it but frankly, I think the movie industry is being too greedy here.
The DMCA changed that, and until it's tested in court anything where encryption is used or even potentially used is not "safe" to reverse engineer in the US.
DVDJon is in the EU, which I don't think has such a law yet. The DMCA only applies to the US. Counterpart laws are in the works.
There might be some trouble if he decides to come to the US. Adobe had some Russian guy arrested when he came to the US for making a program that applied ROT13 to Adobe's "encrypted" files to make them useable.
He's just another guy trying to make a quick buck...
I think that's a bit of an ignorant comment. It's taken him long enough to get around to doing so, so I don't think "quick" applies. He's been breaking encryption systems for maybe ten years now, I'm not sure if he's made any money on it so far.
My knowledge on these areas is pretty slim but would Apple be able to license FairPlay content only or would that open up the risk of other companies creating MP3 players that could read FairPlay content and, hence, compete with the iPod? ...or is that some sore of seperate licensure?
I doubt that licencing the format would have to mean that it allows competing players. The licensing contracts can be very specific such that it allows only encryptors, not decryptors, and be limited to certain circumstances.
elppa
Jan 27, 06:42 PM
Well, I'll grade myself:
[1] Lot's of puff about how well Apple is doing. Good news gospel on the iPhone. Pie Charts and bar charts, some early mention of sales figures.
Well we got this 1/1
[2] Leopard talk � Apple haven't had an expo since the Leopard launch. Expect some interesting apps (3rd parties, almost certainly some mention of Office '08, possibly Bento) and talk of the capabilities and technologies in the new OS. We may get an update (10.5.2) and in it some surprises (whether it be QT 8, Java 6) or some iPhone technologies (error correction when typing) intergrated). Also look out for news on a how users will be exposed to the resolution independent UI. This may be particually impotant if number 5 on the list is being launch. Apple also said they'd be ready by '08.
Apple talked about Leopard - 2/2
Mention of Office '08 - 3/3
Other 3rd Party Apps - 3/4
Talk through technologies and capabilities of Leopard - 3/5
10.5.2 Update - 3/6
QT 8 - 3/7
Java 6 - 3/8
iPhone technologies in Leopard - 3/9
Res independence - 3/10
[3] Beetles on iTunes (at last!). This will lead into the the Music section of the keynote.
Not a whisper - 3/11
[3] iTunes Movie Rentals and iTunes 8 (UPDATE: Looks more likely to be a 7.6 release now.). Talk of the interplay between hardware-software, leading to the introduction of the:
Movie Rentals - 4/12
New iTunes - 5/13
[2] new TV + Apple Remote (in metal and using a similar clickwheel to the nano (you heard it here first)). Not sure were TV is headed, so I will not make too many predictions on this.
New Tv - 6/14
Same old white, plastic remote - 7/15
[5] MacBook Nano (possibly left to the end). It may have a pixel density considerably higher than current machines.
A bit more on this from here:
Quote:
[1] The drive will be a bus powered FW800 Super Drive. And you will pay for it, it won't be included in the box because:
[i] Some may have existing external burners they would rather use.
[ii] It would make the box bigger. Bigger, heavier boxes means more expensive shipping.
[iii] Apple will get to make even more money on each sale from people buying the matching optical drive.
[2] The ultra portable will retail for < $1600 (�1400/�1800) and be called the MacBook Nano.
[3] The MBP will get a facelift and a new keyboard to match the MacBook/new Apple Keyboard
And back to this one:
They gave it a better name, no nano - 7/16
Same pixel density as regular MacBooks - 7/18
No Firewire, let only FW 800 on the Air - 7/19
Drive not included - 8/20
US price - 8/21
UK price - 9/22
EU price - 10/23
New MacBook Pro - 10/24
That seems like enough. I have a sneaky suspicsion we may see a new app, because Apple likes writing Apps and they haven't done a new Applications in a long time (apart from Numbers). Apps are important to Apple because they drive the adoption of hardware.
New App - 10/25
Here's what we may not see:
[1] iPhone SDK, I think this may get a special event at another time.
[2] Any pro products (Mac Pro, Cinema displays) (UPDATE: Well we've already had the Mac Pro, so this is technically a correct prediction � even before the expo even begins!).
No iPhone SDK - 11/26
No pro products - 12/261
So all in all a fairly decent 46% success. As is normally the case I tend to hope for too much new. Some of my predictions I completely stand behind and I think we will see them another day. This year I believe we will see:
- Res Independence UI being exposed to user via System Preferences.
- Java 6 on OS X.
- New Apple remote
- New keyboard on MacBook Pro
- A new application from Apple.
[1] Lot's of puff about how well Apple is doing. Good news gospel on the iPhone. Pie Charts and bar charts, some early mention of sales figures.
Well we got this 1/1
[2] Leopard talk � Apple haven't had an expo since the Leopard launch. Expect some interesting apps (3rd parties, almost certainly some mention of Office '08, possibly Bento) and talk of the capabilities and technologies in the new OS. We may get an update (10.5.2) and in it some surprises (whether it be QT 8, Java 6) or some iPhone technologies (error correction when typing) intergrated). Also look out for news on a how users will be exposed to the resolution independent UI. This may be particually impotant if number 5 on the list is being launch. Apple also said they'd be ready by '08.
Apple talked about Leopard - 2/2
Mention of Office '08 - 3/3
Other 3rd Party Apps - 3/4
Talk through technologies and capabilities of Leopard - 3/5
10.5.2 Update - 3/6
QT 8 - 3/7
Java 6 - 3/8
iPhone technologies in Leopard - 3/9
Res independence - 3/10
[3] Beetles on iTunes (at last!). This will lead into the the Music section of the keynote.
Not a whisper - 3/11
[3] iTunes Movie Rentals and iTunes 8 (UPDATE: Looks more likely to be a 7.6 release now.). Talk of the interplay between hardware-software, leading to the introduction of the:
Movie Rentals - 4/12
New iTunes - 5/13
[2] new TV + Apple Remote (in metal and using a similar clickwheel to the nano (you heard it here first)). Not sure were TV is headed, so I will not make too many predictions on this.
New Tv - 6/14
Same old white, plastic remote - 7/15
[5] MacBook Nano (possibly left to the end). It may have a pixel density considerably higher than current machines.
A bit more on this from here:
Quote:
[1] The drive will be a bus powered FW800 Super Drive. And you will pay for it, it won't be included in the box because:
[i] Some may have existing external burners they would rather use.
[ii] It would make the box bigger. Bigger, heavier boxes means more expensive shipping.
[iii] Apple will get to make even more money on each sale from people buying the matching optical drive.
[2] The ultra portable will retail for < $1600 (�1400/�1800) and be called the MacBook Nano.
[3] The MBP will get a facelift and a new keyboard to match the MacBook/new Apple Keyboard
And back to this one:
They gave it a better name, no nano - 7/16
Same pixel density as regular MacBooks - 7/18
No Firewire, let only FW 800 on the Air - 7/19
Drive not included - 8/20
US price - 8/21
UK price - 9/22
EU price - 10/23
New MacBook Pro - 10/24
That seems like enough. I have a sneaky suspicsion we may see a new app, because Apple likes writing Apps and they haven't done a new Applications in a long time (apart from Numbers). Apps are important to Apple because they drive the adoption of hardware.
New App - 10/25
Here's what we may not see:
[1] iPhone SDK, I think this may get a special event at another time.
[2] Any pro products (Mac Pro, Cinema displays) (UPDATE: Well we've already had the Mac Pro, so this is technically a correct prediction � even before the expo even begins!).
No iPhone SDK - 11/26
No pro products - 12/261
So all in all a fairly decent 46% success. As is normally the case I tend to hope for too much new. Some of my predictions I completely stand behind and I think we will see them another day. This year I believe we will see:
- Res Independence UI being exposed to user via System Preferences.
- Java 6 on OS X.
- New Apple remote
- New keyboard on MacBook Pro
- A new application from Apple.
aleck
Aug 8, 04:07 AM
The real problem with ACD is that they don't have HDCP in the DVIs. Bying such a large monitor (I'm targeting 23") is 5-year investment. And bying one now, without HDCP is a wasted money because in 2 years HD movies would be mainstream and you could not watch them on that nice big monitor you bought.
I was hoping Apple would present new ones now, but I guess it's not in the immediate plans.
20" is still way too overpriced for the qualities it offers. That LG.Philips S-IPS panel has nice colours, but so is P-MVA in the Viewsonic wide range, with added benefit of being GBP150 cheaper in UK.
I was hoping Apple would present new ones now, but I guess it's not in the immediate plans.
20" is still way too overpriced for the qualities it offers. That LG.Philips S-IPS panel has nice colours, but so is P-MVA in the Viewsonic wide range, with added benefit of being GBP150 cheaper in UK.
juststranded
Oct 17, 04:20 PM
The porn industry did choose blu-ray because of capactiy and because they believe the PS3 will be a huge factor in the winning format.
GO HERE! (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss)
GO HERE! (http://www.macworld.com/news/2006/05/02/pornhd/index.php?lsrc=mwrss)
Platform
Sep 26, 07:36 AM
Great news, now put the update up on the server...I want it :D
Cloudane
Jan 9, 12:03 PM
In terms of new stuff I think just the thin portable, as that's the only thing there's been any leaks/evidence for (the leaks usually have everything covered!)
Other than that, refreshes - in order of likelihood: MBP refresh with the new keyboard (even tho I think it'd look a bit odd if it's white), 16GB iPhone (not 3G yet), Glossy ACD option, Cheap ACD option (watch for the gradients and poor quality!), MacBook refresh, maybe some tweak to the ATV, maybe a non Glossy iMac option (just to wind up those who bought an iMac and dislike it!).
Things I don't expect them to update: the iMac (already done recently), the Mac Mini (ditto and they don't like updating it), or any of the iPods (also too soon) or the Mac Pro or XServe (that would be silly, and the place would get firebombed)
Other than that, refreshes - in order of likelihood: MBP refresh with the new keyboard (even tho I think it'd look a bit odd if it's white), 16GB iPhone (not 3G yet), Glossy ACD option, Cheap ACD option (watch for the gradients and poor quality!), MacBook refresh, maybe some tweak to the ATV, maybe a non Glossy iMac option (just to wind up those who bought an iMac and dislike it!).
Things I don't expect them to update: the iMac (already done recently), the Mac Mini (ditto and they don't like updating it), or any of the iPods (also too soon) or the Mac Pro or XServe (that would be silly, and the place would get firebombed)
devilstrider
Mar 18, 10:10 PM
That happened to me just last week..
I was answering a call beside a guy at a bus stop who had an evo.. Out of no where he was like "Hey, you better hurry up before that call drops.."
So I just stared at him for a few seconds and said "Well atleast it wont be because my batteries dead"
I knew I got him, because he couldnt come up with anything better and just stared at me with depression as if to say "awwww hes right -_-".. :apple:
I have both of those phones but I like my EVO better. The big screen and flash puts it over the top for me. I still like my iPhone 4 but I get more done on my EVO.
I was answering a call beside a guy at a bus stop who had an evo.. Out of no where he was like "Hey, you better hurry up before that call drops.."
So I just stared at him for a few seconds and said "Well atleast it wont be because my batteries dead"
I knew I got him, because he couldnt come up with anything better and just stared at me with depression as if to say "awwww hes right -_-".. :apple:
I have both of those phones but I like my EVO better. The big screen and flash puts it over the top for me. I still like my iPhone 4 but I get more done on my EVO.
CoolAccent
Nov 23, 04:35 PM
According to Apple's Canadian website, the Black Friday sale will be there too, not only in the U.S.
LagunaSol
Apr 29, 04:29 PM
btw- does anyone know why the current version is named Windows 7? Why 7?
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
the Rebel
May 3, 11:49 PM
Weird, I don't know anyone who owns a truck. But that's irrelevant anyway. You can't really think that there are as many trucks as there are automobiles around. :)
Actually, during the past 20-30 years, the #1 selling vehicle in the United States has been a pickup truck. Many of those years the #2 or #3 selling vehicle has also been a pickup truck.
Trucks may not be as popular in the cities, but the majority of the car owners in this country do not live in the cities.
Actually, during the past 20-30 years, the #1 selling vehicle in the United States has been a pickup truck. Many of those years the #2 or #3 selling vehicle has also been a pickup truck.
Trucks may not be as popular in the cities, but the majority of the car owners in this country do not live in the cities.
*LTD*
Apr 23, 12:04 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)
The issue is that there is no issue. Just an opportunity for headlines.
The issue is that there is no issue. Just an opportunity for headlines.
arkmannj
Apr 29, 02:17 PM
Now that OS X Server is bundled with the Client version, does this mean we should see a price drop on the Mac Mini server edition?
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
Or maybe just better hardware specs to compensate for the cost difference?
Or maybe there won't be a server version, you just have one Mac Mini, pick your options, and when you receive it, then you enable the server features you want...
rtdunham
Oct 10, 10:34 PM
i made a quick mockup of what it could be like, i left out some details. I changed the dvd icon to a mail/gtube one(youtube) because it supossdly has wi-fi.....opinions?
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/374/ipodmockzr0.jpg
...and an integrated spell-checker! :D
http://img223.imageshack.us/img223/374/ipodmockzr0.jpg
...and an integrated spell-checker! :D
NDA74
Jan 13, 09:12 AM
So gizmodo is responsible for this how?
Gizmodo is responsible for this because it vouched for the prankster and obtained a credential for him. Media organizations put their reputations at stake each time they obtain a credential for someone, whether it's to a high school basketball game, a trade show or a political event.
Gizmodo is responsible for this because it vouched for the prankster and obtained a credential for him. Media organizations put their reputations at stake each time they obtain a credential for someone, whether it's to a high school basketball game, a trade show or a political event.
Rodimus Prime
Oct 6, 05:47 PM
My original iPhone was not subsidized and I had to buy it at full price. I chose the device with no qualms about what network I was required to use.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete. But as long as it is lock in together it should be choose network first
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
Well the people who choose the iPhone knowing service are spotty put the label on them as not smart.
Smart people look things over and choose what works best for them. For me I know service is the first thing I look at and that is how I got to ATT (Cingular at the time )for my phone and dump Verizon. Verizon service was crap where I was 6 months out of the year. Sprint and Cingular/ATT were king in that area. I used Sprint for a while and it was great. Switch to ATT because most of my friends and family were on it so M2M.
Either way I choose the service first then pick out the phones from there.
While the iPhone is now subsidized, so are many other phones on many other networks. If only certain networks were doing this to add value to choosing their contracts, I could understand your point of choosing the network before the device. Maybe I'm missing something but I don't understand how this changes my argument that the service is just a commodity while the device is the consumer's primary choice.
I think the biggest problem is when Apple had the chance to change the game by not doing subizided cost they instead give in and just make it worse by forcing a much larger than average subsudize on there phone ($400 vs $250).
Unlock phones puts the network and the phone separete. But as long as it is lock in together it should be choose network first
i get what your sayin, but nah, they can still complain all they want... i dont think it says in the contract be expected to have 30% dropped calls.
people complain not only to relieve themselves, but to eventually get whats right. (complaining on macrumors isnt exactly the best way of going about it, ill give you that)
Well the people who choose the iPhone knowing service are spotty put the label on them as not smart.
Smart people look things over and choose what works best for them. For me I know service is the first thing I look at and that is how I got to ATT (Cingular at the time )for my phone and dump Verizon. Verizon service was crap where I was 6 months out of the year. Sprint and Cingular/ATT were king in that area. I used Sprint for a while and it was great. Switch to ATT because most of my friends and family were on it so M2M.
Either way I choose the service first then pick out the phones from there.
No comments:
Post a Comment