Benjy91
Apr 22, 07:58 PM
There comes a point, after years of each announcement being "Thinner and Lighter!"
That I have to say, "No thank you"
Too light and it feels cheap, too thin and it'll become weak, Apple have developed an unhealthy obsession with "Thinner & Lighter" everything. There has to be a balance.
Im also guessing they'll expect us to be really impressed that they've spent all this time making it 0.3456mm thinner and 4 grams lighter. With Steve showing a hundred side-by-side comparisons.
Thinner case = smaller battery, as battery technology would have most likely improved since the iPhone 4, why not stick the same sized battery inside, and then boast about the massively improved battery life?
That I have to say, "No thank you"
Too light and it feels cheap, too thin and it'll become weak, Apple have developed an unhealthy obsession with "Thinner & Lighter" everything. There has to be a balance.
Im also guessing they'll expect us to be really impressed that they've spent all this time making it 0.3456mm thinner and 4 grams lighter. With Steve showing a hundred side-by-side comparisons.
Thinner case = smaller battery, as battery technology would have most likely improved since the iPhone 4, why not stick the same sized battery inside, and then boast about the massively improved battery life?
miamialley
Mar 31, 04:12 PM
Yeah that's really ugly.
bloodycape
Jul 12, 03:02 AM
In Japan and Korea iRiver currently has one or two mp3/pmp wi-max players which is doing decent for what it is. But the wi-Max is only for multiplayer games it offers, plus all those odd things the have available there wi-max can use.
milo
Aug 16, 11:18 AM
Is anyone else bothered by the button to buy more batteries?
No. Some people *want* a spare battery, if you don't want it don't buy it. It's not like it's a popup ad or something.
The American market is not like the rest of the world and it really isn't 'all anyone uses'.
Which is why he began the statement AROUND HERE. Since when does "around here" mean "everyone in the world"?
No. Some people *want* a spare battery, if you don't want it don't buy it. It's not like it's a popup ad or something.
The American market is not like the rest of the world and it really isn't 'all anyone uses'.
Which is why he began the statement AROUND HERE. Since when does "around here" mean "everyone in the world"?
MacProCpo
Nov 23, 07:50 AM
I also just joined. Let see what my '08 Octo 2.8 MP can contribute to our score/rankings:D
Paul Graham
Jan 31, 03:52 PM
Why have a Canon and a Nikon? Does that not mean you have to buy lenses for both?
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
Detlev
Jul 26, 09:06 PM
I'm going to assume it doesn't mean that you actually control the thing without touching it, rather it just makes the wheel disappear when you aren't holding it. That seems to be a more useful idea.
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
That is more likely. Even if a user did not have to touch the screen it would be extremely foreign to people to type or control a piece of hardware without actually touching it�air typing. Look at the new ATMs that are controlled on screen. You can see people reactions to the machine when it does not operate as assumed. They press harder on the screen :rolleyes:
I mean, otherwise, it's a useless feature, except to prevent screen scratching.
That is more likely. Even if a user did not have to touch the screen it would be extremely foreign to people to type or control a piece of hardware without actually touching it�air typing. Look at the new ATMs that are controlled on screen. You can see people reactions to the machine when it does not operate as assumed. They press harder on the screen :rolleyes:
iDrinkKoolAid
Jul 10, 12:22 PM
Really? I love the whole Inspector idea and the side toolbar in Word type thing.
Well, I guess these kinds of things are preferential. Perhaps I'm more used to Micro$oft Office toolbars.
Anyhow, I find myself using Pages more often. I'll just tell my boss to buy a Mac Mini if he wants to read my documents. :D
If Apple does come out with a spreadsheet, it better be more usable than what one can get currently on Pages. One major omission is that one cannot create a graph directly from a table (you have to 'cut and paste').
Well, I guess these kinds of things are preferential. Perhaps I'm more used to Micro$oft Office toolbars.
Anyhow, I find myself using Pages more often. I'll just tell my boss to buy a Mac Mini if he wants to read my documents. :D
If Apple does come out with a spreadsheet, it better be more usable than what one can get currently on Pages. One major omission is that one cannot create a graph directly from a table (you have to 'cut and paste').
Nord
May 4, 01:58 AM
Good so.
It's the return of the Mac, Steve Jobs said it so, so let's focus on Macs now and iPhone in second plan for this year at least; it's already a huge success, so...
It's the return of the Mac, Steve Jobs said it so, so let's focus on Macs now and iPhone in second plan for this year at least; it's already a huge success, so...
burningbright
Mar 31, 11:47 AM
I think those torn-off pages will make several people with OCD explode with rage...:eek:
eRondeau
Jan 25, 10:50 PM
The people who own AAPL stock are not like you and me. I'd be shocked if they've even heard of Macworld. They don't use or own Apple computers, they just automatically buy whatever hot stock happens to have gone up this week. When it starts going down, they sell off. Tech stocks are especially prone to this kind of short-sighted selling. It's cold in New York, investors are selling in order to go on vacation. Simiple as that.
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
tny
Oct 6, 04:23 PM
You are assuming that the amount of spectrum available will never change. There's a reason they just shut off analog TV. Yes, spectrum is a finite resource, but they're shifting more to mobile voice/data very soon.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
You are also assuming that all the frequencies available to each tower are already in use on that tower - that the towers are saturated. I think that's an unlikely assumption, outside very dense areas like Manhattan and DC. (And in Manhattan, you probably don't have the whole "can't get towers approved because of community opposition" problem because the towers are just installed on or in existing buildings, albeit at some expense; and you probably need a denser tower population anyway because of all the ground clutter; so a denser tower population probably already exists).
I imagine that the transceivers used on the towers have channel limits - that each transceiver can only handle a certain number of handsets k, within the limits of the number of available frequency sets n (the phone doesn't just use one frequency; I'm pretty sure they are spread-spectrum devices, so you are better off thinking of frequency sets rather than frequencies), and that k <<< n . That would explain AT&T's claims that their ongoing upgrades will mitigate the problem - they may be upgrading the transceivers on the towers so that each tower can use more of the frequencies theoretically available than has been true so far.
The other cell companies also have to segregate their frequencies from one another. If T-Mobile (the other GSM/3G carrier) isn't having this problem, it means either a. their network utilization is a lot lower, or b. they're doing something right and AT&T is doing something wrong. That's also true with the CDMA carriers, of course, but I think they use different parts of the spectrum - and Verizon is a pretty big network.
It's interesting how cell service works. Here's a simplistic summary:
Only a certain number of users can use a tower at any given time. There is only a certain range of frequencies that can be used. All towers use these same frequencies. This means that each tower must not overlap the others in terms of coverage area and frequenceis. To ensure this, companies actually use different frequency ranges on adjacent towers. Further limiting how many users can use each tower.
[cropped out a lot of the quote]
When I was in NYC I noticed by data speeds were much slower. I didn't make enough calls to have any problems with that though.
Intell
Apr 26, 01:09 PM
Just a quick note: The hunter cannot protect against infections. There is no night watch. The night time lasts until I get all the needed PMs or 24 hours. Whichever comes first.
IJ Reilly
Jul 10, 10:54 AM
Hmm, modal software. This used to be a very undesirable characteristic, a violation of the Mac interface guidelines. I don't see the problem with the way Pages handles layouts and word processing now. It sounds like Apple may be caving into the critics who want Pages to be more like Word. I hope not.
ProfessorApple
Apr 28, 12:29 PM
They can always try.
Please can we have some rumors abour iOS5 maybe?
Nice!
Please can we have some rumors abour iOS5 maybe?
Nice!
realitymonkey
Apr 15, 03:29 PM
And dropbox now works without the plist hack
daneoni
Jul 24, 03:44 PM
Frankly i think the Bluetooth version should have been relased August 2005. Bout time though and i hope it comes in white/black/aluminium (silver plastic?) variations.
prady16
Oct 24, 08:05 AM
Told ya! :D
More RAM, faster and newer processor, FW800 port all at the same price!
The wait was worth it! :)
More RAM, faster and newer processor, FW800 port all at the same price!
The wait was worth it! :)
shanmugam
May 3, 09:13 AM
Am I wrong?:confused:
we have to wait until ifixit teardown.
are these low power CPUs are standard CPUs under clocked.
anyway apple is using >$175 CPUs in all the iMac, just a variety in each model ...
we have to wait until ifixit teardown.
are these low power CPUs are standard CPUs under clocked.
anyway apple is using >$175 CPUs in all the iMac, just a variety in each model ...
AndroidfoLife
Apr 24, 01:41 PM
There is a lot of Apple Dick riding going on. Their is nothing wrong with that. But at some point you have to wake up and look at the rest of the world. World wide in smartphone sells Iphone leads by a large margin. World wide Smartphone OSs, iPhone is generally in third or fourth place (Depends on who made it, Some put RIM in front of iOS). But the majority of them place Android or Symbian as the top selling OS.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
If many of your theories that android would disappear if the iPhone was on the same carrier holds no weight. AT&T is still selling millions of Android based phones next to the iPhone (that is was even when AT&T had a piss poor line up android phones.) Right now yes iPhone is selling more then android OS on verizon. But once the honey moon phase is over android based phones will slip back ahead in sells.
And please for the love of all thats good stop going by your personal observations. Watch me do it. In my men of honor meetings on campus I see no iOS devices and half the room has Androids. In my history class there is an equal proportion of Android OS to iOS phones. its based on where and when you look however it does not represent the entire world.
But this does my school did a survey online and we found as March 20 the Ratios look like this- Blackberry 17%, iOS 40, Android 35%, other ties in the rest. Highest selling phone: iPhone 4, iPhone 3gs, Lg Optimus 1 series of phones.
HasanDaddy
Mar 15, 09:06 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Just took a pic with Mystikal and put it on our facebooks
Worst case scenario? Made a new friend
It's a good day :)
Just took a pic with Mystikal and put it on our facebooks
Worst case scenario? Made a new friend
It's a good day :)
jettredmont
Oct 23, 10:42 AM
just to clear up the confusion, is this a legal or technical restriction? Can you still do this with the basic edition technically, but illegally. Or are there technical restrictions being applied?
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
Eldiablojoe
Apr 30, 01:10 PM
Thanks for another great game guys. I apparently choked it from the beginning, not sure how you all saw through me so easily. I tried my best to cast our biopsied friend -aggie- under the bus, to cloud people's opinions and to get them to question their analyses all to no avail. Well played! No hard feelings