MacRumors
Apr 14, 12:17 PM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/14/apple-releases-ios-4-3-2-ios-4-2-7-for-verizon-iphone/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/14/131435-ios_4_3_2.jpg
cute after fighting quotes
.jpg "cute quotes for your est")
cute quotes for your est
quotes about est friends and
cute quotes for est friends
short funny quotes about est
cute best friends quotes
friends. cute
cute quotes for est friends
cute quotes for est friends
cute quotes for your est
cute funny quotes about est
Cute+est+friends+quotes+
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/04/14/131435-ios_4_3_2.jpg
jtara
Apr 14, 11:14 AM
Interesting possibility. It would be extremely difficult to emulate a complete iOS device (custom ASICs and all). But Apple could emulate just enough ARM instructions to emulate an app that was compiled by Xcode & LLVM (which would limit the way ARM instructions were generated), and used only legal public iOS APIs (instead of emulating hardware and all the registers), which could be translated in Cocoa APIs to display on a Mac OS X machine.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
There's no need to emulate ARM instructions, though. And they already do emulate all of the complete iOS devices, at least sufficiently to run iOS apps on OSX.
Apple provides developers with a complete emulation package for testing their iOS apps on OSX. Apps are cross-compiled to x86 code. They also provide the complete set of iOS SDKs, cross-compiled to X86 code.
An emulator handles the device hardware - touchscreen, display, sound system, GPS (REALLY simple emulation - it's always sunny in Mountain View...), etc. If an iPhone or iPad are attached via USB cable, the emulator can even use the accelerometer and gyroscope in the device. Obviously, this could be easily changed to use some new peripheral device.
Other than device emulation, the apps suffer no loss of speed, since they are running native x86 code. In fact, they run considerably faster (ignoring, for this discussion, device emulation) than then do on an actual iOS device.
All Apple would need to give consumers the ability to run iOS apps on their Macs would be to provide them with the emulator (or, more likely, integrate it into the OSX desktop. I think end-users would find the picture of an iPhone or iPad that the emulator draws around the "screen" cute for a couple of days, but then quickly tire of it...), and add an additional target for developers.
What we've seen certainly seems to suggest that's what this is. HOWEVER:
1. For a single app to be compatible with both ARM and x86, they would need to introduce a "fat binary" similar to what they did with the transition from PowerPC to x86. This would bloat apps that are compatible with both to double their current download size. Current Universal (iPhone/iPad) apps are NOT fat binaries. They have multiple sets of resources (images, screen layouts, etc.) and the code needs to have multiple behaviors depending on the device. i.e. the code has to check "is this an iPad? If so do this...
Currently, developers have to create separate binaries for use on the emulator or the actual device.
2. Several developers have checked-in here to say that their apps are listed this way. None have offered that they had any advance knowledge of this, or did anything to make it happen. If this is about ARM/x86 fat binaries, the developer would have had to build their app that way. And even if it didn't require a re-build, I think it's highly unlikely that Apple would start selling apps on a new platform without letting the developers know!
3. Apple is *reasonably* fair about giving all developers access to new technology at the same time. They also generally make a public announcement at the same time as making beta SDKs available to developers. (Though the public announcement may be limited in scope and vague.) There are so many developers, that despite confidentiality agreements, most of the details get out to the public pretty quickly, though perhaps in muddled form. While Apple DOES hand-pick developers for early-early access, it's typically not THAT early. A few weeks, max.
I do think that an x86 target for iOS apps is inevitable. Just not imminent.
My best guess is that this was a screw-up by the web-site developers. Perhaps they did a mockup of the app store for the marketing people, selected some apps or app categories that seemed likely candidates, and slipped-up and it went live on the real app store.
63dot
Mar 1, 08:40 AM
Over the years, Sheen has shown himself to be pretty volatile. But that being said, Chuck Lorre is also a piece of work. What's funny, but not surprising, is how in many ways the two guys are similar.
Sure, Charlie has had great success with this show and was in some high profile movies, and sure Chuck Lorre has been at the helm of some high profile projects, but somewhere along the way, nobody told either of these men they were not God.
Anyway, it will be interesting, yet predictable, to see this war of words back and forth. I don't think the world would miss Sheen or Lorre leaving Hollywood.
Sure, Charlie has had great success with this show and was in some high profile movies, and sure Chuck Lorre has been at the helm of some high profile projects, but somewhere along the way, nobody told either of these men they were not God.
Anyway, it will be interesting, yet predictable, to see this war of words back and forth. I don't think the world would miss Sheen or Lorre leaving Hollywood.
ssk2
May 2, 03:23 PM
You have implied your own proof. The fact that they are in Court at all should tell you money is not going from the site to the record labels / artists etc.
The only reason the cases have failed is that its not illegal under Russian law. Russian sites are violating international law in making this content available, but international law is very, very difficult to enforce. Especially where the action is legal in the violating nation.
So by your logic, if you end up in court on flagrantly made up charges, you're guilty by implication? Jesus...
The only reason the cases have failed is that its not illegal under Russian law. Russian sites are violating international law in making this content available, but international law is very, very difficult to enforce. Especially where the action is legal in the violating nation.
So by your logic, if you end up in court on flagrantly made up charges, you're guilty by implication? Jesus...
RRmalvado
Mar 31, 11:42 AM
Apple should integrate iCal, Mail and Address Book already.
JGowan
Apr 12, 09:39 AM
I don't know what else Apple can add to its existing iPod line besides small improvements... a few of their recent "revolutions" (buttonless Shuffle, touch-screen nano) have actually been steps backward, imo.Absolutely, man I hated the Dentyne Shuffle. Of course, this happens from time to time � iPod 3 was a loser with the 4 touch buttons at the top. The nice thing about Apple, when they make true mistakes, it shows in the next revision when they come back to what works.
I think the current iPod line is just about perfect. I just wish the Shiny Back would go away for the Classic and the Touch. Looks pretty for the first day... then even one scratch blows that.
I think the current iPod line is just about perfect. I just wish the Shiny Back would go away for the Classic and the Touch. Looks pretty for the first day... then even one scratch blows that.
simX
Oct 18, 06:22 PM
Yes, thank you. At least someone else out there is emotionally distanced enough from the iPod and the Apple entertainment sector to be a bit objective.
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
Innovation: just what happened to Apple's innovative spirit when it comes to computers? The latest Mac Pro was fitted into the existing (and way oversized) G5 case. The MacBook was disappointing in that - proportionally - Apple did not shrink it at all or make it lighter than its predecessor (a design which had been in existence for about four years). There are more things, but I really don't want to sound like a troll here...
Apple needs to come out with new computer models that are unlike anything else out there. What about a tiny, thin ultraportable? What about a smaller tower, so those of us that want a pro computer don't have to invest in an oversized monster (which is larger than any PCs in the market that I am aware of). Aren't computers supposed to get SMALLER as the technology advances? Why is Apple obsessed with making the iPod smaller and smaller, but does not care as much about its laptops and desktops?
The answer: profit, or course. The iPod is Apple's cash cow. And this, my friends, is what I mean when I say that Apple needs to be partitioning off a little of its innovative energy that it is putting into its entertainment sector and bring it back to the computer line.
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :)
*sigh* How many times do we have to refute your assertions with facts before you stop repeating them?
To wit, the iPod is not Apple's "cash cow". By definition, if there is something that gains more revenue/profit than the iPod, then the iPod cannot be the cash cow. 58% of Apple's revenue still came from sales of Macs. Gross margins for both Macs and iPods has always been similar (hovering a bit below 30%), so the Mac also generates the majority of the profit for Apple.
As for Apple's innovative spirit lacking when it comes to the Macs, let's just point out that it Apple updated the iPod in October 2005 to the 5th generation, and we JUST got the 5.5th generation last month. Apple took a year to add slightly brighter screens, better battery life (only for video), and games. The nano just gained the anodized aluminum exterior -- wow, Apple's reaching back to the past for it's innovation now! And the shuffle got slimmed down and consolidated into one product. All this doesn't sound exactly like innovation to me. (Of course, Apple doesn't really need to innovate, since they're already selling iPods by the boatload.)
In contrast, Apple brought all of its Macs over to the Intel processor. The Mac Pro was dramatically higher value, what with double-wide graphics card slot, dual optical drives, 4 internal hard drive bays, etc., etc. All Macs (except for the Mac Pro) now have Front Row and a remote, which is a great feature. Built-in iSights have also migrated across the entire product line. The MacBook and MacBook Pro now have MagSafe -- a great innovation. Boot Camp is now supported on all new Macs. The Xserve has new features like lights-out management, redundant power supplies, etc. And we've seen some great things coming for Leopard, what with Time Machine and Spaces and iChat Theater and Core Animation and iCal Server, etc., etc., etc.
It seems to me that Apple is innovating more on the Macintosh side of things than they are with the iPod. What are they going to add next on the iPod -- wireless? *gasp*, so innovative!
Seriously, can we stop with this myth already? It's the same thing with all of Apple's "woes" with quality control (which was busted by the recent consumer reports articles where Apple has actually brought DOWN the number of new computers needing repair in their first year). It's something that's repeated ad nauseum by a few vocal people, when it's really not a problem at all. Same here: everybody gawks and writes about the iPod precisely because more people can afford it and more people can use it with whatever computer they have. So, obviously, you will hear more about the iPod.
Let's see if repeating myself again has any effect: the iPod is not Apple's cash cow!
Understood now?
OK, now fire away :rolleyes:
alent1234
Apr 29, 02:44 PM
can anyone tell me why this market is so important? even at .99 cents a song the margins for the retailer can't be that much.
AndroidfoLife
Apr 12, 03:33 PM
iPhone is a great phone and their are some android phones that are just as good. (I can say so much more but not trying to start an argument). But we have entered a time when smart phones have gotten super competitive with one another. Fact is the best new smart phone is being released every other week. When you pick this phone up you see the add on the way home alerting you a phone better is going to be released in a week.
Facts are now we live at a point where you can never have the best smart phone because the companies are doing such a great job to top the last one that no phone is great for more then a week now. You get what you want right now. Do go out attempting to buy the best one because you will be disappointed its not the best one. Get what you want. Wp7, iOS and Android all have there pros and cons.
Facts are now we live at a point where you can never have the best smart phone because the companies are doing such a great job to top the last one that no phone is great for more then a week now. You get what you want right now. Do go out attempting to buy the best one because you will be disappointed its not the best one. Get what you want. Wp7, iOS and Android all have there pros and cons.
Otaillon
Sep 16, 10:52 PM
http://www.4thringroad.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/angry-bird.jpg
For 99cents this game is incredible!:D
For 99cents this game is incredible!:D
iMeowbot
Dec 1, 03:00 PM
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Sure you can. What you can't do is grab stuff and assume that it does the right thing without checking it for yourself. That's equally true for software developed in house, or developed by subcontractors or commercial partners. It has little at all to do with public vs. private source code.
Sure you can. What you can't do is grab stuff and assume that it does the right thing without checking it for yourself. That's equally true for software developed in house, or developed by subcontractors or commercial partners. It has little at all to do with public vs. private source code.
Lord Blackadder
Jan 31, 12:47 PM
And people were offended when Ricky Gervais made a crack about him...turns out he was being nice. :rolleyes: :D
OdduWon
Jul 22, 12:42 AM
No, that's this guy (http://www.lebonze.co.uk/playground/bunnylove.htm).
Quotes from the cute quotes #1
cute quotes for your est
friends. cute
friends. cute
quotes about est friends,
cute happy birthday quotes for
mrblah
Jul 24, 11:27 PM
No freakin thanks. Its already hard enough to control the touch sensitive orange ipod because its so "touchy." It would literally be impossible to use the ipod without looking with an interface like that, driving with an ipod would go from dangerous to suicidal. Its not the least bit practical and would just be a gimmick.
Its just an all around NO for me. One hand control would be a pain, no-look control would be impossible, the learning curve would take awhile to get used to because it would be the first thing with controls like that, no cases, pretty much no everything. Bad idea.
Its just an all around NO for me. One hand control would be a pain, no-look control would be impossible, the learning curve would take awhile to get used to because it would be the first thing with controls like that, no cases, pretty much no everything. Bad idea.
Some_Big_Spoon
Dec 3, 11:34 AM
No one has it seems. There's reports of a few people running the beta, but it seems isolated. I think it was a release in name only. Hopefully we'll see something around MW in Jan? Who knows.
Has anyone been getting updates at all from VMware? I sent in my request for Discussion Forums (a while back), but haven't gotten access.
Has anyone been getting updates at all from VMware? I sent in my request for Discussion Forums (a while back), but haven't gotten access.
lordonuthin
Oct 28, 01:42 AM
Well, I'll hop on the bandwagon. My measly old MBP should be able to cope with it. I'll get my PS3 onto the game as well, just to see how much I can get out of it.
(far out you guys are well equipped)
Great to have you aboard! Every machine we can get helps. PS3's are great folding machines.
(far out you guys are well equipped)
Great to have you aboard! Every machine we can get helps. PS3's are great folding machines.
adcx64
Apr 14, 02:37 PM
UPDATE there has been news that Apple will release a "smart TV" in the near future, this could be their 9th product (ix):apple:
dr_lha
Oct 18, 05:04 PM
Wow, amazing how emotional people always get whenever I make a statement that could sound slightly anti-iPod... I know you love your iPod and all (I am very fond of mine myself), but over the last few years Apple has been focusing a dispropotional amount of energy into their cute little gadget which has massively boosted their profits. For those of us that don't salivate over all things iPod, I think this is too bad.
That is all.
Apple revamped their entire line of computers this year, a massive change over to a new CPU architecture and sales have increased accordingly. What more do you want from them exactly?
Personally I think your vision is very skewed. The iPod line up has languished this year in comparison to the computer line up.
That is all.
Apple revamped their entire line of computers this year, a massive change over to a new CPU architecture and sales have increased accordingly. What more do you want from them exactly?
Personally I think your vision is very skewed. The iPod line up has languished this year in comparison to the computer line up.
ChrisGonzales90
Jun 27, 12:53 AM
Should be for all limits
Popeye206
Apr 13, 02:15 PM
If Apple comes out with a TV are we all going to start fighting over which cable or satellite provider is better? :p
LondonCentral
Apr 22, 04:57 PM
What is funny is remembering the outcry on the early leaked pictures on the iPhone 4 and how ugly it was... Yet it is the best looking phone in the world now.
Damn right it is. I sold mine a few weeks back but now might buy a white one which I'll keep until I can get my hands on an iP5. I've never considered buying back tech I'd sold before but I genuinely miss holding and using it. Never has metal and glass looked so sexy as a phone.
Damn right it is. I sold mine a few weeks back but now might buy a white one which I'll keep until I can get my hands on an iP5. I've never considered buying back tech I'd sold before but I genuinely miss holding and using it. Never has metal and glass looked so sexy as a phone.
Legion93
May 1, 11:05 PM
my fear is the democrats will try to use this a political gain and that is so very wrong both to the military and for this good event.
1. Democrats buy most of the books that have been banned somewhere. Republicans form censorship committees and read them as a group.
2. Republicans consume three-fourths of all the rutabaga produced in this country. The remainder is thrown out.
3. Republicans usually wear hats and always clean their paint brushes.
4. Democrats give their worn-out clothes to those less fortunate. Republicans wear theirs.
5. Republicans employ exterminators. Democrats step on the bugs.
6. Democrats name their children after currently-popular sports figures, politicians, and entertainers. Republican children are named after their parents or grandparents, according to where the money is.
7. Democrats keep trying to cut down on smoking but are not successful. Neither are Republicans.
8. Republicans tend to keep their shades drawn, although there is seldom any reason why they should. Democrats ought to, but don't.
9. Republicans study the financial pages of the newspaper. Democrats put them in the bottom of the bird cage.
10. Most of the stuff alongside the road has been thrown out of car windows by Democrats.
11. Republicans raise dahlias, Dalmatians, and eyebrows. Democrats raise Airedales, kids, and taxes.
12. Democrats eat the fish they catch. Republicans hang them on the wall.
13. Republican boys date Democratic girls. They plan to marry Republican girls, but feel that they're entitled to a little fun first.
14. Democrats make plans and then do something else. Republicans follow the plans their grandfathers made.
15. Republicans sleep in twin beds--some even in separate rooms. That is why there are more Democrats.
1. Democrats buy most of the books that have been banned somewhere. Republicans form censorship committees and read them as a group.
2. Republicans consume three-fourths of all the rutabaga produced in this country. The remainder is thrown out.
3. Republicans usually wear hats and always clean their paint brushes.
4. Democrats give their worn-out clothes to those less fortunate. Republicans wear theirs.
5. Republicans employ exterminators. Democrats step on the bugs.
6. Democrats name their children after currently-popular sports figures, politicians, and entertainers. Republican children are named after their parents or grandparents, according to where the money is.
7. Democrats keep trying to cut down on smoking but are not successful. Neither are Republicans.
8. Republicans tend to keep their shades drawn, although there is seldom any reason why they should. Democrats ought to, but don't.
9. Republicans study the financial pages of the newspaper. Democrats put them in the bottom of the bird cage.
10. Most of the stuff alongside the road has been thrown out of car windows by Democrats.
11. Republicans raise dahlias, Dalmatians, and eyebrows. Democrats raise Airedales, kids, and taxes.
12. Democrats eat the fish they catch. Republicans hang them on the wall.
13. Republican boys date Democratic girls. They plan to marry Republican girls, but feel that they're entitled to a little fun first.
14. Democrats make plans and then do something else. Republicans follow the plans their grandfathers made.
15. Republicans sleep in twin beds--some even in separate rooms. That is why there are more Democrats.
decafjava
Apr 14, 12:52 PM
Happy with my black iPhone4 I got in January and can wait til iPhone6. :D
csjo00
Oct 25, 02:01 AM
Minor aesthetics on my car fixed. (Headliner falling out, door handle, cup holders)
An expresso machine.
An electric razor.
An expresso machine.
An electric razor.