John Jacob
Oct 19, 05:09 AM
I'm leaning towards MacPhone for the Blackberry/Treo/PocketPC killer with an embedded/lite version of Mac OS X.
Remember, any Apple product using Mac OS has to have "Mac" in it's name from now on per SJ.
So consumer iPhone and MacPhone, or, MacPhone and MacPhone Pro, if the consumer phone has an even more slimmed down version of Mac OS X on it.
Not very likely that a phone product would use a version of Mac OS X, however slimmed down. Mac OS X does not have the real-time capabilities that are required for a phone to handle call processing. Symbian OS, Windows Smartphone OS (based on WinCE) and Linux do have real-time extensions.
Remember, any Apple product using Mac OS has to have "Mac" in it's name from now on per SJ.
So consumer iPhone and MacPhone, or, MacPhone and MacPhone Pro, if the consumer phone has an even more slimmed down version of Mac OS X on it.
Not very likely that a phone product would use a version of Mac OS X, however slimmed down. Mac OS X does not have the real-time capabilities that are required for a phone to handle call processing. Symbian OS, Windows Smartphone OS (based on WinCE) and Linux do have real-time extensions.
mwayne85
Apr 25, 12:10 PM
I think dual core i7 or i5 is more likely for the base 21.5". It's great there will be newer machines. I won't be upgrading my 4-month-old base. Instead, I'd get a SSD, 128GB or 160GB would do fine for me. Waiting for the prices to fall down.
There aren't any desktop Sandy Bridge dual-core i7s. The low-end will most likely be either dual-core i3 or i5, however there's only one dual-core i5, the rest of the i5s and i7s are all quads.
There aren't any desktop Sandy Bridge dual-core i7s. The low-end will most likely be either dual-core i3 or i5, however there's only one dual-core i5, the rest of the i5s and i7s are all quads.
systole
May 3, 08:13 AM
Anyone find it odd that the only 3.1Ghz Quad-Core i5 listed on intel's website is a Embedded Intel� Core™ i5-2400 Processor (6M Cache, 3.10 GHz) Unless they released the 27" with a brand new i5?
goobot
Apr 22, 04:36 PM
ya no,
any rumors on hspa+?
any rumors on hspa+?
more...
rdowns
Oct 19, 05:46 PM
Thanks for the chart...I always like to see stuff like this. But your 3Q and 4Q numbers for 2003 and 2004 looked a bit fishy, so I looked into it and made the corrections below for 2004. Don't know if there are any other errors.
Thanks. I'll have to go back through all the reports I have one day when I'm bored.
Thanks. I'll have to go back through all the reports I have one day when I'm bored.
Brien
Mar 11, 07:40 PM
Brea Mall is out of all 16 wifi models as of 10 mins ago.
more...
carltabet
Apr 13, 08:25 PM
I think the lack of a March/April iOS 5 preview pretty much confirmed that. No new OS, no new iPhone. If we get the preview in June at WWDC, that means we get new hardware in September, which is likely to be the launch date of iOS 5.
This again is based off of Apple always shipping a new OS with a new iPhone.
Totally agree with you, last April iOS 4 was previewed then released 2 months later with the iPhone 4.
If Apple was planning to release iOS 5 in June it would have previewed it by now so developers have the time they need to work on it.
In other words, iOS 5 preview at WWDC followed by a release late September/early October and its tied iPhone 5 launch.
Uh... I think I just rephrased your post :D
This again is based off of Apple always shipping a new OS with a new iPhone.
Totally agree with you, last April iOS 4 was previewed then released 2 months later with the iPhone 4.
If Apple was planning to release iOS 5 in June it would have previewed it by now so developers have the time they need to work on it.
In other words, iOS 5 preview at WWDC followed by a release late September/early October and its tied iPhone 5 launch.
Uh... I think I just rephrased your post :D
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
more...
FireStar
Nov 29, 04:33 PM
Precisely! Do you read the books too? I would assume so, hehe
You would assume correctly. :)
It is a very good series. However, I do not have covers for them. :D
You would assume correctly. :)
It is a very good series. However, I do not have covers for them. :D
bassfingers
Apr 23, 11:06 PM
I don't believe ithttp://us.cdn4.123rf.com/168nwm/denisnata/denisnata0904/denisnata090400015.jpg
more...
djkny
Oct 24, 07:56 AM
And they delayed this update by 6-8 weeks for ... ?
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
Would/Should we have waited if we knew then what we know now and will know in the future ?
:(
LarryC
Apr 25, 02:04 PM
The shipping time still says within 24 hours on the U.S. Apple Store?
more...
mrial
Apr 14, 09:34 AM
So guys, I'm already queuing up for my ix.Mac.MarketingName. I think I'm the first! Tent and camping gear ready.
Heard Best Buy were holding some back because quota already met.
Heard Best Buy were holding some back because quota already met.
mjuarez
Apr 12, 09:27 AM
Agreed, put it on the second page. This "might/might not" constant chatter is not helpful.
more...
mozmac
Oct 23, 09:15 AM
I've got a question for you guys. Any of you Mac users that also run Windows on a box somewhere:
Are any of you really going to upgrade to Vista when it comes out? or are you going to wait at least a year?
Are any of you really going to upgrade to Vista when it comes out? or are you going to wait at least a year?
cmaier
Apr 23, 10:47 PM
What's so great about the rating arrows is you can tell who's got the balls to share honestly, versus the suck ups with high positive ratings for being perfect yes men.
Nothing ever improves without candid feedback. Yes men breed dysfunction and stagnation. Rock on boys..:)
Not sure which bucket you're putting me in :-)
Nothing ever improves without candid feedback. Yes men breed dysfunction and stagnation. Rock on boys..:)
Not sure which bucket you're putting me in :-)
more...
chasemac
Apr 24, 03:34 AM
What are you people? On dope?:D
baryon
Apr 24, 02:37 AM
I can see they learned from the Gizmodo incident and now it has the "If found, please contact ..." text on it. There's no way someone can say "I found it, it's mine, I didn't know it was Apple's" :D
whooleytoo
Jul 25, 05:56 AM
This would be a nice UI for ebooks - just swipe your finger/hand across the display to turn the page.
The None-Touch (presumably so named as it sounds more pleasing than "Non-Touch", and is a play on "One-Touch") name would imply that at least some control can be achieved without touching the screen.
The None-Touch (presumably so named as it sounds more pleasing than "Non-Touch", and is a play on "One-Touch") name would imply that at least some control can be achieved without touching the screen.
Mal67
May 3, 07:57 AM
Mac Mini: Core2Duo
:( :rolleyes:
Maybe out later today :) Yeh right:confused:
:( :rolleyes:
Maybe out later today :) Yeh right:confused:
amarcus
Mar 31, 11:53 AM
Hideous.
Ugh, traffic lights on that faux leather backdrop!
Ugh, traffic lights on that faux leather backdrop!
Biolizard
Apr 12, 09:29 AM
Makes sense. The iPod is pretty much at an endgame; there's not really anything more they can do with it. Even the Nano runs something that looks like iOS now, and could run iOS in the future (hell, the AppleTV runs it, why not the Nano?). Indeed, last September's event was as much about iOS 4.1 and 4.2 as iPods as I recall.
Additionally, Mac-philes have criticised WWDC for being all about the iPhone lately; seems like a reasonable idea to kill two birds with one stone and shift the phone to the Autumn event, which would cover all the mobile hardware, and leave WWDC to software, ensuring enough time in the keynote for both OS X and iOS.
Moving the iPhone release to autumn could also help shift more units since it's not long before the Christmas shopping season. The initial sell-out of units in September would give way to about a month or so of calm before it all goes nuts again in November/December.
Only drawback is the people coming off two year contracts who won't or can't go SIM-only for 3 months, though given the amounts of money people have supposedly spent on the iOS ecosystem, customers jumping ship may be less of an issue for Apple than in previous times when a phone was just a phone.
Additionally, Mac-philes have criticised WWDC for being all about the iPhone lately; seems like a reasonable idea to kill two birds with one stone and shift the phone to the Autumn event, which would cover all the mobile hardware, and leave WWDC to software, ensuring enough time in the keynote for both OS X and iOS.
Moving the iPhone release to autumn could also help shift more units since it's not long before the Christmas shopping season. The initial sell-out of units in September would give way to about a month or so of calm before it all goes nuts again in November/December.
Only drawback is the people coming off two year contracts who won't or can't go SIM-only for 3 months, though given the amounts of money people have supposedly spent on the iOS ecosystem, customers jumping ship may be less of an issue for Apple than in previous times when a phone was just a phone.
lafemmme
Feb 1, 01:20 AM
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg2O8AMdlkw8wZY29HePWNgGtzlSe9J6KHHgcSRgC-9PnFwUSzKPNZz6zfPgFGVmWReknPvYp3cSKjVxbRMWpbvr6kng4Iuyz166bzTW2tkz19D1A62uym6sRKS642I7hVkorVwULtcE9k/s400/24HourFitnessApprovedLogo.jpg
Back to being a gym rat, just signed up with 24.
Back to being a gym rat, just signed up with 24.
BeSweeet
Apr 12, 10:37 AM
Wouldn't matter anyway if you were using a ThunderBolt external hard drive. Very few mechanical hard drives can even reach 1Gbps-2Gbps. You'll need several of the fastest SSDs in RAID to even reach ThunderBolt speeds.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
USB 3.0 FTW. More practical.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий