~Shard~
Jul 10, 10:08 AM
Nice to see the suite maturing like this. Pages 3 along with Charts will definitely make iWork 07 an improvement over the '06 version and a lot more solid of a suite in general.
0815
Apr 14, 07:18 AM
Why on earth would this happen? Why would they edit it to include the ix.Mac.MarketingName? I don't understand. Is there any logical explanation? I don't think it is a typo because I don't think Apple is stupid enough to edit it just in order to put a typo in. Weird.
Its humans at work - probably a human clicked a wrong button that added this thing with some placeholder name ... most likely means nothing or if anything than updated appleTV to run apps.
Universal MacOS/iOS apps just don't make sense (controlling the apps is just too different) and a apple branded TV makes no sense (appleTV does the trick for this and that way you don't have to buy an expensive TV to get the latest hardware - you just add it to the TV of your choice)
Its humans at work - probably a human clicked a wrong button that added this thing with some placeholder name ... most likely means nothing or if anything than updated appleTV to run apps.
Universal MacOS/iOS apps just don't make sense (controlling the apps is just too different) and a apple branded TV makes no sense (appleTV does the trick for this and that way you don't have to buy an expensive TV to get the latest hardware - you just add it to the TV of your choice)
pmz
Apr 28, 05:29 PM
If there is a physical difference, I find it strange that Apple A) wouldn't publish the numbers, and B) wouldn't provide specific sized bumpers for the white.
andiwm2003
Oct 23, 07:56 AM
This is incorrect.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the licensed device.
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform.
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
that sounds more reasonable to me. i'm not a lawyer but i thought in most countries it would be not legal to restrict the software use to certain hardware settings after you bought a full version.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the licensed device.
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform.
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
that sounds more reasonable to me. i'm not a lawyer but i thought in most countries it would be not legal to restrict the software use to certain hardware settings after you bought a full version.
meowtown
Apr 28, 06:19 PM
If you look really closely, you can see there is no difference. White stands out more than black, so really what you're seeing is the front face of the phone adding to the width because of this two dimensional perspective. The front face of black iPhone is visible too, it just isn't noticeable in front of that background. Look closely.
Glideslope
Apr 28, 07:22 PM
Ok.......?
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
It's a Thick Chick Phone. :apple:
Who cares really?
It's white! That's all I care about :)
It's a Thick Chick Phone. :apple:
joboy
Sep 30, 02:00 PM
I get about the same drop rate or worse in the DC Metro area. I also have friends on AT&T that have their text messages go to the wrong person. Thinking seriously of getting a Verizon BB and an iPod Touch to replace my iPhone. :(:(:( Sorry :apple:
Be careful. iPhone's superior web access is the future. I've been using a BlackBerry on Verizon and, although it's superior to many others, the iPhone's web superiority makes it so much more useful, that I'm migrating TO an iPhone. I'm just waiting until my contract breaking fee goes down a notch. I know I have company. RIM's sales are starting to sag somewhat while iPhone's are soaring. ATT is not my favorite network, but they will get better. The problem right now is that the iPhone is more advanced than the rest of the industry. Its users benefit, except when ATT's inadequacies get in the way.
Be careful. iPhone's superior web access is the future. I've been using a BlackBerry on Verizon and, although it's superior to many others, the iPhone's web superiority makes it so much more useful, that I'm migrating TO an iPhone. I'm just waiting until my contract breaking fee goes down a notch. I know I have company. RIM's sales are starting to sag somewhat while iPhone's are soaring. ATT is not my favorite network, but they will get better. The problem right now is that the iPhone is more advanced than the rest of the industry. Its users benefit, except when ATT's inadequacies get in the way.
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.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 28, 06:16 PM
I think getting a white backplate and keeping the black front is the best of both worlds. That white front looks ugly and disoriented with an obvious front cam and that black PS (looks like sharpie has been applied to the mesh grill original design), and when the screens off, looks even worse.
I'll stick with mine :)
I think just the opposite is better. I like the white front but I think the white back is hideous.
http://maxcdn.fooyoh.com/files/attach/images/591/528/247/004/bele_and_lokai_star_trek.jpg
I'll stick with mine :)
I think just the opposite is better. I like the white front but I think the white back is hideous.
http://maxcdn.fooyoh.com/files/attach/images/591/528/247/004/bele_and_lokai_star_trek.jpg
RebootD
Mar 31, 01:18 PM
I am welcome to having a better iCal but please please please:
1. Let me turn off that horrible pleather skin
2. Let me use colors other than 50%, 70% and 90% gray
1. Let me turn off that horrible pleather skin
2. Let me use colors other than 50%, 70% and 90% gray
Lollypop
Jul 25, 01:31 AM
I see some sort of conversion of these rumors, and a clear indication that the big screen virtual interface thing might be feasible, but really... all the rumors are getting a bit much, next thing the ipod will be a all purpose video edeting aplience called the... macbook! :p
rmhop81
Apr 26, 12:16 PM
Amazon is poised to pwn both Apple and Google on that one.
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
and amazon is getting sued :D. aka, will start to charge customers more to recoup the costs.
Also, enjoy playing your amazon cloud on any apple device.
If MobileMe is any indication, Apple just doesn't get cloud - if they plan on charging for it, Amazon is happy to take their business - they'll sell you plain mp3s for the boot!
Android wins (http://www.androidcentral.com/nielsen-android-americas-most-wanted-platform) in any case!
and amazon is getting sued :D. aka, will start to charge customers more to recoup the costs.
Also, enjoy playing your amazon cloud on any apple device.
Ugg
Apr 27, 06:40 PM
I couldn't watch all of it but it's absolutely appalling that nothing more was done. The employees could have kicked the girls out of the store and locked the doors. The fact that they didn't do anything at all to protect the girl bodes ill for McDonald's.
What's even more disgusting are all the hate filled comments by Macrumors members.
What's even more disgusting are all the hate filled comments by Macrumors members.
shawnce
Jul 21, 11:18 AM
Lets hope this is a start of solid trend (I believe it is) but don't be surprised if the market share numbers are a little bumpy (up and down) as they inch their way up... Apple has relatively few products (compared to their main competition in this market) and as a result their product release cycles can contribute a lot of variability into quarterly market share numbers and depending how they line up with seasonal market aspects you can get even more variability.
In other words (as I have said before) look for trends not point to point comparisons.
In other words (as I have said before) look for trends not point to point comparisons.
playaj82
Jul 28, 10:04 AM
In think the main point of view of many people here is that when Microsoft makes long-term plans, it's because they're planning to drive the competition to the ground with the help of a big pile of cash instead of innovation and good products.
The fact that they started this whole new thing by dropping their own PlaysForSure DRM isn't a good indicator (for the users AND commercial partners - they have to switch hardware again).
Apple, on the other hand, has switched three times (68K->PPC, OS 9->OS X, PPC->Intel) and has always tried to keep compatibility with the previous system. A first generation iPod can play iTMS-bought tunes, too (unless I'm mistaken).
I tend to agree with you, but that is just business, and Microsoft is good at it.
If we want to point fingers, point them at the consumers.
The only reason Microsoft still pours money into things is because people will still buy their products.
Competition is just as much about monopoly as it is about necessity. People could say that Apple is using their marketshare to push around accessory makers and by emphasizing their "Made for iPod" label to rake in some extra cash solely because of their position.
Microsoft also uses their position of having a large amount of disposable cash. If their product sucks, people won't buy it, and Microsoft suffers.
The fact that they started this whole new thing by dropping their own PlaysForSure DRM isn't a good indicator (for the users AND commercial partners - they have to switch hardware again).
Apple, on the other hand, has switched three times (68K->PPC, OS 9->OS X, PPC->Intel) and has always tried to keep compatibility with the previous system. A first generation iPod can play iTMS-bought tunes, too (unless I'm mistaken).
I tend to agree with you, but that is just business, and Microsoft is good at it.
If we want to point fingers, point them at the consumers.
The only reason Microsoft still pours money into things is because people will still buy their products.
Competition is just as much about monopoly as it is about necessity. People could say that Apple is using their marketshare to push around accessory makers and by emphasizing their "Made for iPod" label to rake in some extra cash solely because of their position.
Microsoft also uses their position of having a large amount of disposable cash. If their product sucks, people won't buy it, and Microsoft suffers.
antpod
Apr 13, 11:26 PM
FINALLY. I decided to either wait for this or the iP5, whichever came first. eff yeah finally! My 3GS broke in January and i've decided to be phoneless for a couple months as an experiment on myself and im soooooooo ready to have a phone again.
eji
Jul 24, 05:16 PM
My guess is that it'll be upwards of $70. Which is way too much to pay for a mouse. Like someone else posted earlier, I'm still kind of shocked that I paid $50 for my regular Mighty Mouse. Though I do think it's the bees knees.
As for the wireless bit... well, wasn't it only a matter of time?
As for the wireless bit... well, wasn't it only a matter of time?
noservice2001
Jul 25, 02:52 AM
come on.... 120GB!!! or more...
digitalbiker
Jul 12, 07:19 PM
Show me where Apple calls Pages a consumer app (http://www.apple.com/iwork/pages/).
Oh come on at least give the guy something!
It is common knowledge that Apple markets two principle lines.
The consumer line which used to be prefaced by an "i". iWork, iLife, iBook, iPod, etc.
And the Pro line which used to be prefaced by power or Pro . Ex: PowerBook, PowerMac, Final Cut Pro. etc.
I am also sure that if you review the introduction of Pages at MacWorld it was intended to compete as a consumer product and not a replacement for Word by Steve Jobs. He is always very careful about how he phrases things so that he doesn't upset, MS or Adobe, when they come out with these apps.
Oh come on at least give the guy something!
It is common knowledge that Apple markets two principle lines.
The consumer line which used to be prefaced by an "i". iWork, iLife, iBook, iPod, etc.
And the Pro line which used to be prefaced by power or Pro . Ex: PowerBook, PowerMac, Final Cut Pro. etc.
I am also sure that if you review the introduction of Pages at MacWorld it was intended to compete as a consumer product and not a replacement for Word by Steve Jobs. He is always very careful about how he phrases things so that he doesn't upset, MS or Adobe, when they come out with these apps.
profets
Apr 25, 08:35 AM
"The T-Mobile US network uses different frequencies than AT&T's, requiring different hardware to support."
It surprises me that it would need different hardware. I know that it is possible to jailbreak a AT&T phone to work with T-mobile. so apparently it can be done with software.
The current iPhone can work on T-mobile with gsm/edge/2G only. When they mention different frequencies (UMTS Bands) they are talking about the current iPhone not support the 3G band that T-mobile uses.
It surprises me that it would need different hardware. I know that it is possible to jailbreak a AT&T phone to work with T-mobile. so apparently it can be done with software.
The current iPhone can work on T-mobile with gsm/edge/2G only. When they mention different frequencies (UMTS Bands) they are talking about the current iPhone not support the 3G band that T-mobile uses.
Satori
Apr 12, 09:24 AM
If enough people take a guess on the release date of the next iPhone, someone is going to be right!
aristobrat
Oct 24, 08:55 AM
whats funny is that I walked into the Mac Store yesterday, the guy new everything about the product but seemed a little too clueless about the product cycle.
Mac Store employees *don't* know anything specific about product updates.
There's almost 1000 Apple store employees worldwide. If they knew details, don't you find it really, really odd that none of them leaked any?
Mac Store employees *don't* know anything specific about product updates.
There's almost 1000 Apple store employees worldwide. If they knew details, don't you find it really, really odd that none of them leaked any?
mklos
Dec 3, 09:56 AM
Router, firewall I feel OK.
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
I hate to tell you this, but they are really no help when it comes to spyware. I don't know what you were referring to there, but with adware/spyware they won't help you one bit. Adware comes mostly through port 80, which is the port the internet comes through. So if you want, you can set your router/firewall to block port 80, but then you don't have any internet.
That being said, someone could figure out how to get around a firewall. As with any software based firewall, there are vulnerabilities in it, even the OS X one. A router (hardware based), well, thats a little different.
But there are things Apple could do to make OS X more secure. Hopefully Leopard will patch a bunch of holes and make it even harder for adware and anything else to get in. Then release patches for Panther/Tiger. They've done this in the past with Tiger security enhancements and then releasing a patch for Panther.
I believe SecurityWorks (or whatever they're called), works with Apple now instead of against them to aid in finding "holes" in the system. This is the way it should be. They should be hiring people/companies to find holes in the OS and to report them exclusively to Apple ONLY so they can be fixed.
We Mac users are way to secure with ourselves and one day its going to bite us in the butt bigtime. A lot of us throw the talk to the hand up when OS X starts getting bashed about its insecurity. This is a bad thing and some of us need to shape up. These very people will be the first to bitch and complain about their Mac getting spyware and/or viruses when it happens. And of course, its all Apple's fault!
trainguy77
Oct 6, 05:45 PM
wow meeble and trainguy! long time no see guys
welcome back
Thanks. I am back into the top 20 producers. But I thought I was higher up the list when I used to fold. Mind you this Mac Pro isn't getting any faster.... :rolleyes:
I am under macman64 for those of you who were checking. :)
welcome back
Thanks. I am back into the top 20 producers. But I thought I was higher up the list when I used to fold. Mind you this Mac Pro isn't getting any faster.... :rolleyes:
I am under macman64 for those of you who were checking. :)