appleguy123
Apr 28, 08:04 PM
I'm not a she
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLsgwlHyhE
Maybe it's a reference to this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLsgwlHyhE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLsgwlHyhE
Maybe it's a reference to this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOLsgwlHyhE
DagazaGZ
May 2, 01:20 PM
My friend is working an overnight with the visual team tonight at a UK apple store. that only means one thing. cannot wait for tomorrow.
*Crossing fingers*
*Crossing fingers*
Benjamins
Apr 26, 01:06 PM
if it's just mp3 in the cloud, then I am not interested.
Amazon's cloud player's free, and I am not even using it.
Amazon's cloud player's free, and I am not even using it.
kevin.rivers
Jul 24, 04:19 PM
It is about time. I am glad I didn't buy the original one.
gibbz
Apr 26, 12:00 PM
No real surprise here. Apple has been charging for MobileMe. Why not this service.
neko girl
May 1, 11:14 PM
If anything this will have just made our foreign policy situation worse. Get ready for the blowback, because this event definitely pissed off some extremists.
Why does it sound like you are hoping something like this will happen? Bitter much?
Why does it sound like you are hoping something like this will happen? Bitter much?
nishioka
Apr 24, 12:22 AM
Why?
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
When one company acquires another like that, they don't just tear down all the old company's equipment and replace it with their own. If that were the case AT&T would simply skip over the whole mess with getting the deal approved by the US Department of Justice and the FCC and just buy a crapload of equipment to put up themselves with that $39 billion.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
I thought AT&T's buyout means T-Mobile is going bye-bye?
When one company acquires another like that, they don't just tear down all the old company's equipment and replace it with their own. If that were the case AT&T would simply skip over the whole mess with getting the deal approved by the US Department of Justice and the FCC and just buy a crapload of equipment to put up themselves with that $39 billion.
If the deal is approved T-Mobile's assets will be integrated into AT&T's network and AT&T is probably having all their handset manufacturers run similar testing on T-Mobile equipment to ensure compatibility.
Apple is not "wasting money" on a cell phone provider that is going away, and T-Mobile is not "getting" the iPhone.
dethmaShine
Apr 16, 06:58 AM
First, OS X is very much like the last versions of NeXTSTEP was, aside from Quartz/Appkit frameworks and GUI layer. Foundation is basically what was shipping in the 90s, the kernel/BSD userland, etc...
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway.
Yeah, OS X is pretty much the same. There's nothing that apple has put in it. Most of the frameworks are derived from NeXTSTEP. Happy now?
Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
No one is pissing over google's work. It was a response to one of your s*****[censored] comments, here:
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top.
You replied to a person who was talking about ChromeOS being just a giant browser which is absolutely true.
You sound like one of those people on engadget who are always claiming that Apple has just been copying/modifying stuff and selling it as their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
That's not what I meant. I meant that Google buys a lot of companies and makes a lot of acquisitions and sell their product as Google's. There's nothing bad in that. But there's nothing false about it as well. Developing/Not developing Android was never my point.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
OK, which company doesn't? Apple does it too. But they are not buying other people's products and just selling them outright. You know you're dreaming when you claim that Mac OS X has very less to do with apple and much to do with every other thing they 'copied'.
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
[/quote]
Are you the one who's talking about lack of respect? Just look at your post history. You call people fools; you tell them they don't know anything.
Nevermind, please report. Thanks.
Very well said, just like you insert pro-google comments in every other thread.
Apple has done a lot of work on it, and I've said so in my posts several times. I'm not diminishing their work in anyway.
Yeah, OS X is pretty much the same. There's nothing that apple has put in it. Most of the frameworks are derived from NeXTSTEP. Happy now?
Again, I'm simply stating that pissing over Google because they "acquired" and used "open source" is quick disingenuous in the face of Apple having done the same for both their flagship OSes.
No one is pissing over google's work. It was a response to one of your s*****[censored] comments, here:
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top.
You replied to a person who was talking about ChromeOS being just a giant browser which is absolutely true.
You sound like one of those people on engadget who are always claiming that Apple has just been copying/modifying stuff and selling it as their own.
How do you know ? You saw Android in 2005 ? You can seriously compare what Andy's company made back then to what is actually shipping now ? The evolution from Android 1.0 to 2.3/3.0 is quite astounding by itself, who knows what went on between 2005 and version 1.0 that shipped in late 2009.
That's not what I meant. I meant that Google buys a lot of companies and makes a lot of acquisitions and sell their product as Google's. There's nothing bad in that. But there's nothing false about it as well. Developing/Not developing Android was never my point.
Why even attempt to diminish the work ? Apple does the same acquisition, they use open source projects to quicken development. The histories are similar, the goals are similar. Why hate Google over it, and why do you think it doesn't also reflect on Apple when you do ?
OK, which company doesn't? Apple does it too. But they are not buying other people's products and just selling them outright. You know you're dreaming when you claim that Mac OS X has very less to do with apple and much to do with every other thing they 'copied'.
I will leave the rest of your post out and just report it to the mods instead. I suggest editing your post to remove your clear lack of respect. If you want to discuss the merits of each at the fine detail, I don't think this is the thread for it. Again, let's drop the Google hate and talk OS X instead.
[/quote]
Are you the one who's talking about lack of respect? Just look at your post history. You call people fools; you tell them they don't know anything.
Nevermind, please report. Thanks.
Very well said, just like you insert pro-google comments in every other thread.
FloatingBones
Nov 26, 11:43 PM
this very thread and the sales thereof indicate a HUGE interest in being able to view Flash on iOS devices and no amount of BS nonsense on your part will change that fact.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
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.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
The popularity of SkyFire is a wake-up call to website owners to update their media inventory from legacy Flash wrappers to HTML5.
Your implication that people would return an iOS device based on just a single feature alone is ludicrous.
Flash is either a mission-critical for people or it is not. Evidently it is not mission-critical to the owners of 120M+ iOS devices.
I've pointed out there is no equivalent of the iPod Touch from Android and therefore no reasonable alternative regardless of one's feelings about the inability to view Flash web sites.
Makes no difference. If Flash were mission-critical, they wouldn't be using an iPad.
Instead of just acknowledging that not everyone likes Steve Jobs decision to not allow Flash
We're all very clear you don't like the decision. There are plenty of Flash fanboys. If they want Flash in browsers, they shouldn't use iPhones, iPads, or iPod Touches.
The owners of 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. There are serious problems with Flash on laptop and desktop computers:
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.
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
You can't competently address those serious concerns with Flash in a browser.
(hardly an unreasonable opinion to have and clearly shared by everyone who bought this app to be able to view those sites)
See above. There are serious fundamental problems with Flash on websites. There's also a fundamental problem with Flash for advertisers: more users are blocking their ads with click-to-flash blockers every day. Putting your content in Flash now decreases the odds that it will be seen by users.
Adobe understands all of this. They are providing tools to update sites from Flash to HTML5 (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html). Sites should do the same and get their videos updated to HTML5. Lose the Flash, and you'll be able to serve up your content to all browser users on all platforms.
I'm sure there's some reason you're unhappy with that solution. That's fine. You're welcome to be a Flash Luddite if you wish.
SchneiderMan
Sep 12, 11:22 PM
I didn't buy it. A friend of mine from Israel bought it online for $13 and just shipped it to MA. So simple, isn't it? ;)
Oh yeah, and there is that possibility :p
Oh yeah, and there is that possibility :p
SeattleMoose
Apr 15, 02:51 PM
Well Apple has used up all the "big cat" names like Tiger and Lion which means that either OS 11 is underway or they will be in the embarassing situation of having to use lesser cat names which imply "less".
Ocelot, Cheetah, Cougar, Fluffy, etc......:cool:
I for one am ready for OS 11.0 "Merlot"
Ocelot, Cheetah, Cougar, Fluffy, etc......:cool:
I for one am ready for OS 11.0 "Merlot"
rxse7en
Jul 28, 07:18 AM
Awesome! I can't wait for Vista! And now Zune! Who needs those silly Macs?
Uh, why is this on page 1? We already have enough iPod news, now we're going to be following an MS product that doesn't exist yet? C'mon! More grainy photos of elevators! Chop, Chop!
:D
B
Uh, why is this on page 1? We already have enough iPod news, now we're going to be following an MS product that doesn't exist yet? C'mon! More grainy photos of elevators! Chop, Chop!
:D
B
BRLawyer
Apr 11, 01:49 PM
Good sign, maybe I'll be able to buy a consumer external hard drive with Thunderbolt by fall.
This is more than evident, since TB devices will just start to trickle with the millions and millions of MBP and future iMac users out there. TB is THE future of I/O, especially given Intel's explicit endorsement - USB 3.0 is dead meat in comparison.
I am gonna buy the new iMac with TB, and hope to get an external TB HD by May at the latest.
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway? In a typical USB 2.0 external hard drive, what is the bottleneck in speed: The speed at which the hard drive spins, or the USB 2.0 connection? If it's the USB, then why do people even care about the RPM of a drive? If it's the RPM, then isn't USB 2.0 fast enough to run a hard drive at its native speed?
No, not with SandForce SSDs getting in the mainstream market now - with their 6Gb/s speeds (and more to come in the near future), they will easily justify the use of TB...
This is more than evident, since TB devices will just start to trickle with the millions and millions of MBP and future iMac users out there. TB is THE future of I/O, especially given Intel's explicit endorsement - USB 3.0 is dead meat in comparison.
I am gonna buy the new iMac with TB, and hope to get an external TB HD by May at the latest.
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway? In a typical USB 2.0 external hard drive, what is the bottleneck in speed: The speed at which the hard drive spins, or the USB 2.0 connection? If it's the USB, then why do people even care about the RPM of a drive? If it's the RPM, then isn't USB 2.0 fast enough to run a hard drive at its native speed?
No, not with SandForce SSDs getting in the mainstream market now - with their 6Gb/s speeds (and more to come in the near future), they will easily justify the use of TB...
Consultant
Nov 10, 05:41 PM
I wonder what battery life will be like.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Many Porn sites are smart enough to provide HTML5 alternative.
Also, how many people downloaded it just so they could watch porn?
Many Porn sites are smart enough to provide HTML5 alternative.
oingoboingo
Oct 18, 10:36 PM
Allready have a Mini but Im going to stick with this chant ,Apple will build a consumer tower, Apple will Build a Consumer Tower,APPLE WILL BUILD A CONSUMER TOWER!:)
Heh heh...yeah me too. Maybe that's what The Steve (tm) was referring to when he said that '07 was going to be one of the most exciting years for Apple yet.
Or it could just be a new colour range for the iPod nanos.
Heh heh...yeah me too. Maybe that's what The Steve (tm) was referring to when he said that '07 was going to be one of the most exciting years for Apple yet.
Or it could just be a new colour range for the iPod nanos.
nonameowns
Apr 13, 02:02 PM
any chance for apple shaped tv? ;)
Umbongo
May 3, 08:02 AM
How can it be TFT and IPS?!! That makes no sense quite honestly... Pish Posh...
It doesn't make sense to you because you don't understand the technology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD
It doesn't make sense to you because you don't understand the technology.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TFT_LCD
wedge antilies
Jul 28, 10:21 AM
I agree. I like MS strategy. They want to get their foot in the door and compete, then sell you all kinds of other ish. Look at the XBOX/XBOX 360, they may sell them at a loss, but with the Software, XBOX Live, and the Marketplace, they are making their money.
No they are still not making money....From a Forbes article 2005/09/12..
linkypoo (http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/microsoft-management-software_cz_vm_0913microsoft.html)
"The Xbox game console is hot, but its division has lost $4 billion in four years and isn't yet in the black."
And as for the success of the XBox 360 from bink.nu (july 23)
bink link (http://bink.nu/Article7827.bink)
"Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division, home to the Xbox, posted a hefty fiscal year loss of $1.26 billion, thanks largely to losses involved with the Xbox 360. For Microsoft's fourth quarter, losses in the Home and Entertainment division were $414 million. Microsoft says they have shipped 5 million Xbox 360 units worldwide as of the end of June, roughly seven and a half months after launch."
Having said that I do own a Xbox, and will probably buy an Xbox 360 when Halo 3 comes out. And a PS3. And a Wii.
The fact is the Xbox 360 really isn't sellilng that well outside the US, where it has sold 3.3 mil units, in Europe it has sold only 1.3 mil, and more embarrasingly only 0.4 mil in the rest of the world INCLUDING Japan. In fact for the week ending 16th July only 1105 Xbox 360s were sold in Japan, compared to 140,858 DS LItes, and less than one tenth of the sales of the DS phat and less than one twentieth of the PS2, during the same time.
Microsofts home and entertainment division just lost $414million in the last quarter!
I just don't think you should say that the Xbox has been a success, it is possible, however success is a long way off.
-Red 2.
No they are still not making money....From a Forbes article 2005/09/12..
linkypoo (http://www.forbes.com/home/technology/2005/09/12/microsoft-management-software_cz_vm_0913microsoft.html)
"The Xbox game console is hot, but its division has lost $4 billion in four years and isn't yet in the black."
And as for the success of the XBox 360 from bink.nu (july 23)
bink link (http://bink.nu/Article7827.bink)
"Microsoft's Home and Entertainment division, home to the Xbox, posted a hefty fiscal year loss of $1.26 billion, thanks largely to losses involved with the Xbox 360. For Microsoft's fourth quarter, losses in the Home and Entertainment division were $414 million. Microsoft says they have shipped 5 million Xbox 360 units worldwide as of the end of June, roughly seven and a half months after launch."
Having said that I do own a Xbox, and will probably buy an Xbox 360 when Halo 3 comes out. And a PS3. And a Wii.
The fact is the Xbox 360 really isn't sellilng that well outside the US, where it has sold 3.3 mil units, in Europe it has sold only 1.3 mil, and more embarrasingly only 0.4 mil in the rest of the world INCLUDING Japan. In fact for the week ending 16th July only 1105 Xbox 360s were sold in Japan, compared to 140,858 DS LItes, and less than one tenth of the sales of the DS phat and less than one twentieth of the PS2, during the same time.
Microsofts home and entertainment division just lost $414million in the last quarter!
I just don't think you should say that the Xbox has been a success, it is possible, however success is a long way off.
-Red 2.
Don't panic
Apr 28, 12:36 PM
And Annie Oakley is so much cooler than being a stupid sandwich maker...
this is hard to dispute... :)
although in fairness, a sandwich maker was/will be an important character of this adventure
edit: at this point you should consider a temporary change of avatar
this is hard to dispute... :)
although in fairness, a sandwich maker was/will be an important character of this adventure
edit: at this point you should consider a temporary change of avatar
jrichie
Mar 31, 01:01 PM
This use of 'real' materials in digitial software is something I really detest. It made me not like the ipad and nearly put me off the iphone.
Off the top of my head :
Ibooks - wood??????? looks turd
ical - as we have seen
Game center - fake felt table
All these interfaces are the worst thing about iosx .
It seems they are going to get worse !!!!!!! i bet it will be paper for mail next.
Thanks Apple. I am actually starting to like windows 7 and winphone7 as a more beautiful alternative, and I never thought I would say that.
Off the top of my head :
Ibooks - wood??????? looks turd
ical - as we have seen
Game center - fake felt table
All these interfaces are the worst thing about iosx .
It seems they are going to get worse !!!!!!! i bet it will be paper for mail next.
Thanks Apple. I am actually starting to like windows 7 and winphone7 as a more beautiful alternative, and I never thought I would say that.
Plutonius
Apr 17, 08:31 PM
Maybe you could reach out to Nies And ucfgrad93 to see if they would like to play in this game. hopefully that simple game I ran got us some lifelong new players. :D
Read post #3 in this thread :)
Read post #3 in this thread :)
mrsir2009
Mar 31, 01:33 PM
Apple, we all know the mouse is dead... stop wasting time coding mac apps to look like iPad apps and coding mac os to operate like iOS, just do the obvious: ditch the mac platform all together! Make larger iOS devices that allow for the manipulation of iOS apps in windowed form and there you go, desktop operating environment with iOS.
touch input > mouse input
What the hell are you smoking?:eek:
touch input > mouse input
What the hell are you smoking?:eek:
Benjy91
Sep 15, 07:26 AM
http://img.game.co.uk/images/content/SpecialEditions/HaloReachConsole3.jpg
Im such a geek haha.
Im such a geek haha.
rayz
Aug 1, 10:54 AM
I only clarified because it didn't seem like you got it. If you did, then my apologies.
No problem
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Well, I actually didn't have a problem with any version of XP, even before I had installed XP2. The first releases of OSX were pretty hellish for me. Panther was fine; then I installed Tiger and I was back in beta land, which is when I decided to move the business-related stuff back to XP and just do the fun stuff on OSX. Fortunately Apple released a fix a few weeks after they released Tiger.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Well, I don't think they've really done that much. They've mashed a few extra look and feels into the UI, added dashboard (and I'm not even sure they invented that), Automator (wich I really should try out). Apart from that, the OS is pretty much the same as it was when it was released (though a lot more stable obviously).
It's an excellent piece of work, but it certainly should be cheaper because when you get right down to it, they didn't actually have to write it from scratch.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
Er ... OSX does have one, but it appear to be black (http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/ask-apple-matters-os-x-crashes-afterall/) ....
No problem
As for the time it took Apple to create a stable version I disagree...the first desktop version that was available came out in March 2001. I would say that Jaguar was the first completely stable version, which came out in August 2002. Even if you disagree my PowerBook has been completely stable since I got it (it shipped with 10.2.7) in September 2003. Just over two years. My XP boxes have been far less stable.
Well, I actually didn't have a problem with any version of XP, even before I had installed XP2. The first releases of OSX were pretty hellish for me. Panther was fine; then I installed Tiger and I was back in beta land, which is when I decided to move the business-related stuff back to XP and just do the fun stuff on OSX. Fortunately Apple released a fix a few weeks after they released Tiger.
Also, Apple charges because they offer new things to the operating system, not just stability fixes. OS X updates are also cheaper.
Well, I don't think they've really done that much. They've mashed a few extra look and feels into the UI, added dashboard (and I'm not even sure they invented that), Automator (wich I really should try out). Apart from that, the OS is pretty much the same as it was when it was released (though a lot more stable obviously).
It's an excellent piece of work, but it certainly should be cheaper because when you get right down to it, they didn't actually have to write it from scratch.
Timepass,
It's still called the Blue Screen of Death. If OS X had one, it'd be called the same thing. The point is that it's Blue, not that it's caused by .dll errors or incorrect memory addressing.
Er ... OSX does have one, but it appear to be black (http://www.applematters.com/index.php/section/comments/ask-apple-matters-os-x-crashes-afterall/) ....