KingYaba
Jul 26, 10:15 PM
Burn High Def movies to Blu-Ray disk. Stick in PS3, watch on DLP tv :cool: life will be sweet.
spazzcat
Mar 31, 11:52 AM
I'm guessing this is sarcasm.
Wallpaper Quote of the Week
bil-keane-insperational-quotes
more...
Make Your Future
quotes.php?qFuture+Quotes
more...
It#39;s good to know that quotes
for future quotes on this
more...
Abraham Lincoln quotes
you consider the future as
more...
the future, from The Quote
Future, Quote by
more...
inspirational quotes
Great Quotes - Future Belongs
more...
quotes.php?qFuture+Quotes
Inspirational Quotes and
more...
future quote quotes poem poems
tomorrow#39;s the future,
the future
jrko
Apr 16, 04:56 AM
IMO yes, esp. copper ones.
I'll look into copper ones. Most seem to be aluminium
I borrowed a faster Mac, and used that to install to its HDD, I think it mayve had more RAM, then dumped the HD in my trusty eMac and let it boot. It wouldnt boot on 64MB though... I tried that xD
Ah - I was wondering how you did it. Lateral thinking.....
I'll look into copper ones. Most seem to be aluminium
I borrowed a faster Mac, and used that to install to its HDD, I think it mayve had more RAM, then dumped the HD in my trusty eMac and let it boot. It wouldnt boot on 64MB though... I tried that xD
Ah - I was wondering how you did it. Lateral thinking.....
musio
Nov 11, 01:39 PM
What about an update for Logic!?? Someone mail the man, he doesn't reply to me!
more...
PBz
Oct 31, 01:19 PM
Good point... I hadn't considered the battery time. By this time next year, the memory chips will definitely be a lot cheaper so 2G (or more) will be easily do-able in something as small as the Shuffle for a decent price. Hopefully the battery life can be improved as well. Not much use being able to store 36 hours of music and not being able to listen to it.
Then definitely steer cleer of the 60GB iPod.
Seriously, wanting a correlation between total song time and single-session battery life is a bit off IMO.
Everybody WANTS it....but reality says otherwise.
Then definitely steer cleer of the 60GB iPod.
Seriously, wanting a correlation between total song time and single-session battery life is a bit off IMO.
Everybody WANTS it....but reality says otherwise.
benhollberg
Apr 28, 01:11 AM
I'm hoping for the new iMacs but I don't think so.
more...
mizzytheboy
May 5, 05:36 AM
U can use mobile mouse, but it only works with wifi.
bertdevriese
Oct 21, 08:09 AM
I'm from Bruges but I already pre-ordered via the web. Sorry!
more...
aegisdesign
Oct 6, 09:51 AM
What I've been waiting for is true javascript support for wysiwyg textarea editors. I run a Mac blog site and I have to ask users to use Firefox. It seems a little sucky to do that for a Mac specific blogger site. Since Safari 1.3 Apple said they included the nessesary "hooks" for these editors, but no one has been successful in getting any of them to work in Safari.
I downloaded the latest nightly build of Webkit and it still doen't work :(
Actually, there are a few that do work, mostly commercial like Asbru's editor - http://editor.asbrusoft.com/
The problem is, the support in Safari still isn't brilliant and the other guys like FCK, TinyMCE etc so far aren't willing to work around the bugs knowing that Apple is fixing them in a forthcoming release anyway.
I downloaded the latest nightly build of Webkit and it still doen't work :(
Actually, there are a few that do work, mostly commercial like Asbru's editor - http://editor.asbrusoft.com/
The problem is, the support in Safari still isn't brilliant and the other guys like FCK, TinyMCE etc so far aren't willing to work around the bugs knowing that Apple is fixing them in a forthcoming release anyway.
NebulaClash
Apr 27, 01:10 PM
I am not defending Full of Win. I sincerely am not.
But some people should keep in mind that it's entirely possible to love a company's products while not liking part or all of the actual company or how they operate on given occasions.
It's very easy for some here to just throw out the term troll and hater just because someone isn't accepting of Apple's PR, etc.
Now go ahead an tag this with your "-1" too :)
Your point is quite valid, but this is specifically directed at Full of Win who has a long history of making anti-Apple comments here. It's certainly true that he might like their products and hate the company that makes it. His comments are so over the top, so factually slanted, that he gets criticized for it.
Either he is sincere, in which he might take the advice to heart. Or he is trolling, in which case he is already doing precisely what he set out to do, in which case nothing will change.
But some people should keep in mind that it's entirely possible to love a company's products while not liking part or all of the actual company or how they operate on given occasions.
It's very easy for some here to just throw out the term troll and hater just because someone isn't accepting of Apple's PR, etc.
Now go ahead an tag this with your "-1" too :)
Your point is quite valid, but this is specifically directed at Full of Win who has a long history of making anti-Apple comments here. It's certainly true that he might like their products and hate the company that makes it. His comments are so over the top, so factually slanted, that he gets criticized for it.
Either he is sincere, in which he might take the advice to heart. Or he is trolling, in which case he is already doing precisely what he set out to do, in which case nothing will change.
more...
Snowy_River
Oct 31, 12:28 PM
Actually, LASER = Light Ampilfication by Stimulated Emission of Radiation. ;)
Touche (http://www.goldennaga.com/Touche.aif) ;)
Touche (http://www.goldennaga.com/Touche.aif) ;)
dernhelm
Sep 30, 10:14 PM
My last exposure to Notes was 12 yrs ago. We hated it. After 5 yrs, my then company decided to move to Exchange to much hype that it would be a lot better.
It wasn't. I still miss the days of Notes. I've since moved on to two different companies, each of whom have used Exchange. Not once has the Exchange implementation been any better than I remember Notes being more than 7 years previous.
But I will face facts. Notes lost the battle - it is a dead platform for all intents and purposes. As went 1-2-3, so went Notes. It's a shame really because Exchange/Outlook is so terrible, that you'd think anyone with a modicrum of experience could trump it without even trying really hard.
I mean, really, do you need 80% of one of my CPU cores to look up a name in an address book? And how large does the memory footprint of an e-mail app need to be? I often have to shut down Outlook just so compiles will complete in less time. But that will never get better now, because there is no one to push them.
It wasn't. I still miss the days of Notes. I've since moved on to two different companies, each of whom have used Exchange. Not once has the Exchange implementation been any better than I remember Notes being more than 7 years previous.
But I will face facts. Notes lost the battle - it is a dead platform for all intents and purposes. As went 1-2-3, so went Notes. It's a shame really because Exchange/Outlook is so terrible, that you'd think anyone with a modicrum of experience could trump it without even trying really hard.
I mean, really, do you need 80% of one of my CPU cores to look up a name in an address book? And how large does the memory footprint of an e-mail app need to be? I often have to shut down Outlook just so compiles will complete in less time. But that will never get better now, because there is no one to push them.
more...
ThaDoggg
Apr 7, 09:27 AM
Geez kind of happy that I held off on updating to 4.3.1. I usually update as soon as a JB is out but I was kind of lazy this time. Seems there are alot of bugs.
bkushner
May 6, 09:49 AM
Nobody wants to try gps on their wifi iPad?
more...
DiamondMac
Apr 6, 12:31 PM
I cut it off b/c it was irrelevant. Not because I was avoiding it...and come to think of it, what exactly was avoided? If some want to go to Verizon, so be it. It may cost them more money but some leave for the principal of it. If my unlimited got cut off, I would move to Verizon in a heartbeat even though it would cost me a bit more. I would not want AT&T getting my business anymore.
You mentioned people hissy fitting (for whatever reason) and I mentioned that many do throw but many others are throwing them for legitimate reasons
Oh, AT&T isn't doing this for money? What exactly went up cost wise with AT&T and the iPhone 5?
You mentioned people hissy fitting (for whatever reason) and I mentioned that many do throw but many others are throwing them for legitimate reasons
Oh, AT&T isn't doing this for money? What exactly went up cost wise with AT&T and the iPhone 5?
rdowns
Oct 19, 06:41 PM
iPod- lower case i, upper case P.
more...
anytime2u
Jun 25, 11:02 AM
Very happy for the owner :apple:
Slip
Jan 13, 12:29 PM
Wow, that 'packuaging' is nice ;)
(And yes, it's an intentional typo, watch the vid)
(And yes, it's an intentional typo, watch the vid)
starflyer
Apr 4, 03:46 PM
On a side note, I wonder whether Apple violates competition rules. When I remember correctly, the iPad had a considerable market share on the tablet market. One could argue that Apple abuses its market position to impose their own (unfair) conditions on publishers.
No, they don't.
No, they don't.
olicool1234
Nov 13, 06:30 PM
it should be ok if you dont play with it and streacth it or watever you might think of doing with it, just use your ipod like a normal person and it should be ok.
Corpus_Callosum
Nov 22, 08:50 PM
just to clear something up. This right now appears to be a text-based phone. I don't think Wu is talking about iChat AV functionality. Some other sites (of much, much less accuracy) have been claiming that the iPhone would be able to do videoconferencing and whatnot, but currently there isn't any good evidence to support this, and in my opinion it doesn't look like current 3G GSM cellular networks simply don't have the duplex bandwidth to deliver that kind of content. (and 4G is still a ways off)
Apple would not try to deliver iChatAV video conferencing services over 3G (or any other cellular network). It's a ridiculous idea. However, having iChatAV capability over WiFi is totally doable and completely within the realm of possibility. Apple would be retarded not to have a camera and WiFi on their new phone, mostly because it would represent a step backwards from current state of the art cellular phones.
So, what is the real issue? If they have WiFi capability and have a camera, all they need is the horsepower to encode and decode H.264 and iChatAV on the iPhone becomes a reality. While H.264 is a demanding codec, there already exists hardware encoders/decoders in the wild. This is the stopping point. If Apple includes silicon that can handle H.264, iPhone will do AV conferencing ala iChatAV. My own personal belief is that this one feature is the primary differentiator that Apple is going to leverage to gain traction in the mobile market. While everyone else is yakking and texting, iPhone users are holding their phones up to show their friends what they are seeing, watching iTunes movies and listening to iTunes music. A true lifestyle change as is the Apple way.
You can speculate all you want, but until you realize that Steve Jobs isn't going to enter a market that he can't shatter preconceived notions in, you aren't going to understand Apple's modus opperandi.
I also believe that this will be sold in Apple stores and not through carriers. There are two reasons for this:
(1) Apple will be selling a WiFi digital lifestyle device as the iPhone's primary role (e.g. if you are within range of usable WiFi, it will perform all functions through WiFi, including VOIP) and only use cellular networks as a fallback condition when WiFi is not available, crippling many features of the iPhone. Carriers are not going to be happy about this and would have no incentive to carry such a device as it represents a competitive threat. But don't let that alarm you, you should be able to slip any normal SIM card into the iPhone and make use of your existing carrier. Just don't expect to be subsidized - Apple doesn't tend to market to cheap consumers anyhow, they won't be worried about starting out with a non-subsidized and reasonably expensive phone. People will pay for this advancement and prices will go down over time.
(2) Apple will promote direct purchasing of video and audio content from iTunes using the device when on a WiFi network. This direct sales approach is also a threat to the carriers who want a piece of the action and demand much higher price/margins on digital content ($2 for a ringtone anyone?)
This all seems pretty obvious to me.
Apple would not try to deliver iChatAV video conferencing services over 3G (or any other cellular network). It's a ridiculous idea. However, having iChatAV capability over WiFi is totally doable and completely within the realm of possibility. Apple would be retarded not to have a camera and WiFi on their new phone, mostly because it would represent a step backwards from current state of the art cellular phones.
So, what is the real issue? If they have WiFi capability and have a camera, all they need is the horsepower to encode and decode H.264 and iChatAV on the iPhone becomes a reality. While H.264 is a demanding codec, there already exists hardware encoders/decoders in the wild. This is the stopping point. If Apple includes silicon that can handle H.264, iPhone will do AV conferencing ala iChatAV. My own personal belief is that this one feature is the primary differentiator that Apple is going to leverage to gain traction in the mobile market. While everyone else is yakking and texting, iPhone users are holding their phones up to show their friends what they are seeing, watching iTunes movies and listening to iTunes music. A true lifestyle change as is the Apple way.
You can speculate all you want, but until you realize that Steve Jobs isn't going to enter a market that he can't shatter preconceived notions in, you aren't going to understand Apple's modus opperandi.
I also believe that this will be sold in Apple stores and not through carriers. There are two reasons for this:
(1) Apple will be selling a WiFi digital lifestyle device as the iPhone's primary role (e.g. if you are within range of usable WiFi, it will perform all functions through WiFi, including VOIP) and only use cellular networks as a fallback condition when WiFi is not available, crippling many features of the iPhone. Carriers are not going to be happy about this and would have no incentive to carry such a device as it represents a competitive threat. But don't let that alarm you, you should be able to slip any normal SIM card into the iPhone and make use of your existing carrier. Just don't expect to be subsidized - Apple doesn't tend to market to cheap consumers anyhow, they won't be worried about starting out with a non-subsidized and reasonably expensive phone. People will pay for this advancement and prices will go down over time.
(2) Apple will promote direct purchasing of video and audio content from iTunes using the device when on a WiFi network. This direct sales approach is also a threat to the carriers who want a piece of the action and demand much higher price/margins on digital content ($2 for a ringtone anyone?)
This all seems pretty obvious to me.
wesrk
Feb 15, 02:38 AM
What's with the hosting sites that try to get porn pop ups?
FYI for those at work or in sensible areas
FYI for those at work or in sensible areas
ConceptVBS
Apr 29, 10:12 PM
Don't be daft, Samsung are the suppliers because they gave the best price.
Samsung will also be locked into supply contracts anyway, and they interfered with them, Samsung would be in a world of hurt, not just from Apple and litigation, but every other company they supply.
And don't you believe there aren't alternatives for Apples component supplies either - every company that can build something that Samsung already does has been on the phone this week to Apple.
The end result in all of this is that Samsung are putting at risk an $8bn turnover for copying a customers phone design.
Even if Samsung win any of these suits, Samsung will lose the $8bn turnover, and will hand their component rivals the same amount.
The question at the end of the day is whether the Galaxy/Tab/S/S2 are really worth $8bn a year - which they aren't.
So who loses? Samsung every time.
Heres the clue - never sue your customer.
You dont seem to know how much pull Samsung has in the components arena do you?
They are
#1 in RAM Memory
#2 in semiconductor LSI
#1 in flat panel display
#1 in rechargeable battery
#2 in mobile phones over all
#1 in NAND flash memory
$8 billion to a company with revenue generation in excess of $140 billion is chunp change. That is around 4% of total revenue.
Never sue your supplier when your supplier can turn around and gobble up other suppliers and increase the price for all OEM makers, but giving itself the cost effective goods, because it also itself is an OEM maker.
Unlike Apple, who is just a customer, Samsung is BOTH a customer AND a supplier at the same time. Either way, they win.
Quite recently, Samsung attempted to take over Sandisk, the NAND flash memory company. It wasnt successful due to some differences in price offers. That alone tells you that Samsung is willing to strangle hold the market even more than it already has. NAND flash market alone, Samsung has over 30 % of the market all to itself. For RAM memory, it close to 40%.
Apple is barking up the wrong tree.
Samsung will also be locked into supply contracts anyway, and they interfered with them, Samsung would be in a world of hurt, not just from Apple and litigation, but every other company they supply.
And don't you believe there aren't alternatives for Apples component supplies either - every company that can build something that Samsung already does has been on the phone this week to Apple.
The end result in all of this is that Samsung are putting at risk an $8bn turnover for copying a customers phone design.
Even if Samsung win any of these suits, Samsung will lose the $8bn turnover, and will hand their component rivals the same amount.
The question at the end of the day is whether the Galaxy/Tab/S/S2 are really worth $8bn a year - which they aren't.
So who loses? Samsung every time.
Heres the clue - never sue your customer.
You dont seem to know how much pull Samsung has in the components arena do you?
They are
#1 in RAM Memory
#2 in semiconductor LSI
#1 in flat panel display
#1 in rechargeable battery
#2 in mobile phones over all
#1 in NAND flash memory
$8 billion to a company with revenue generation in excess of $140 billion is chunp change. That is around 4% of total revenue.
Never sue your supplier when your supplier can turn around and gobble up other suppliers and increase the price for all OEM makers, but giving itself the cost effective goods, because it also itself is an OEM maker.
Unlike Apple, who is just a customer, Samsung is BOTH a customer AND a supplier at the same time. Either way, they win.
Quite recently, Samsung attempted to take over Sandisk, the NAND flash memory company. It wasnt successful due to some differences in price offers. That alone tells you that Samsung is willing to strangle hold the market even more than it already has. NAND flash market alone, Samsung has over 30 % of the market all to itself. For RAM memory, it close to 40%.
Apple is barking up the wrong tree.
untypoed
Apr 1, 02:12 PM
Domo.
No comments:
Post a Comment