caspersoong
Apr 22, 05:06 AM
Useless to me if it is just for iTunes purchases. Please focus on more important things, Apple.
Farthen
May 3, 12:23 PM
I'm chasing the 32GB RAM option (http://blog.saers.com/archives/2011/05/03/new-mid-2011-imacs-and-32gb-ram/) for the 27" iMac
Be careful! Those RAM modules from Amazon are full size DIMM modules. The iMac needs the smaller SO-DIMM modules though - they won't fit.
Be careful! Those RAM modules from Amazon are full size DIMM modules. The iMac needs the smaller SO-DIMM modules though - they won't fit.
Josias
Sep 14, 01:35 PM
Definiantly - I love it. Defiant + Definitely! I think you just coined a fantacular word!
Think Different
Think Different
dime21
Mar 23, 06:23 PM
136 negatives to this story ... nice. :rolleyes:
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
I wonder how many who posted here in favor of removing these apps, are also supporters of wikileaks? i'm sure it's a significant number. how ironic.
How about you duervo, you a wikileaks fan? hmm?
The true irony here is your blatant assumption that is based on nothing more than a "gut feeling".
ok... so will you answer my question then please?
and silence from duervo. how unsurprising.
Any perceived hit towards censorship obviously trumps the value of human life. :rolleyes:
I wonder how many who posted here in favor of removing these apps, are also supporters of wikileaks? i'm sure it's a significant number. how ironic.
How about you duervo, you a wikileaks fan? hmm?
The true irony here is your blatant assumption that is based on nothing more than a "gut feeling".
ok... so will you answer my question then please?
and silence from duervo. how unsurprising.
addicted44
Apr 25, 02:07 PM
"which is already under development at Quanta in Taiwan"
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
Ummm...that doesn't mean what you are saying at all.
Apple has stated before, in one of their Keynote videos (possibly the one about the Unibody MBP), that they send their designers to Taiwan, and China, where the factories are actually located, to the designing, so they have a complete feel for the entire life of the product. So they have an idea of what the manufacturing facilities will look like, and have quick/easy access to the raw materials, and can easily test the manufacturing capabilities themselves.
Just because the design might be happening at Quanta (still a rumor) doesn't mean Apple is not doing the designing (if it wasn't their designs, why hasn't anyone else been able to make a unibody laptop yet?).
And I was naive enough to think that Apple developed their cases themselves. And if they don't it means that they do not design any hardware at all.
Ummm...that doesn't mean what you are saying at all.
Apple has stated before, in one of their Keynote videos (possibly the one about the Unibody MBP), that they send their designers to Taiwan, and China, where the factories are actually located, to the designing, so they have a complete feel for the entire life of the product. So they have an idea of what the manufacturing facilities will look like, and have quick/easy access to the raw materials, and can easily test the manufacturing capabilities themselves.
Just because the design might be happening at Quanta (still a rumor) doesn't mean Apple is not doing the designing (if it wasn't their designs, why hasn't anyone else been able to make a unibody laptop yet?).
cube
Mar 30, 11:40 AM
The thing to remember is that there are two words for "application". Apple use "application" (with the suffix .app) on OS X. Microsoft uses "Programs" (suffix .exe). Application is linked with Apple, so when they call it the "App Store" it is based on their previous use. "Prog Store" would also not be generic.
Whatever. There was a cross-platform application framework called zApp many years ago already.
Whatever. There was a cross-platform application framework called zApp many years ago already.
Popeye206
Apr 20, 01:55 PM
I fall into the "who cares" category.
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
If someone wants to waste their time figuring out where I've been... have a ball! I might be concerned if I was a drug lord, or cereal murderer (Die! Captain Crunch, die!). :) But since I'm just a software guy... again, who cares?
P.S. Snap, Crackle and Pop... you're next!
~Shard~
Sep 10, 03:11 PM
Dare I dream? How about a quad processor quad core system! 16 cores in all!!!
That's nothing. Just wait for Dunnington or Harpertown. :cool:
That's nothing. Just wait for Dunnington or Harpertown. :cool:
digitalbiker
Sep 13, 09:09 PM
Even if Apple makes a crappy phone, I will probably want this thing. Mainly because I am certain that Apple will make this compatible with iLife, address book, iTunes,etc.
It will be so nice to finally have a phone that can easily connect to my mac and work seemlessly with my existing address book. music, photos, safari faves, maps, etc.
I am so sick of editing syncing, tricking, teasing, and spending hours of wasted time to get data into my phone.
It will be so nice to finally have a phone that can easily connect to my mac and work seemlessly with my existing address book. music, photos, safari faves, maps, etc.
I am so sick of editing syncing, tricking, teasing, and spending hours of wasted time to get data into my phone.
Half Glass
Aug 28, 09:28 PM
Sorry to crash the party, but it would seem a little strange for Apple to upgrade the MacBook and/or MB Pro's until sometime after the 16th when their current college promotion ends. Promotion = clearing out old stock (of notebooks & iPods).
Keep your mom's credit card in her purse for a few more weeks.
This logic is flawed because just as they did with the MacPro, they will add the new laptops to the iPod promotion if they are released.
The ongoing promotion is no reason to delay such an upgrade. As others have stated, the promotion is an effort to clear inventory for the next model.
--HG
Keep your mom's credit card in her purse for a few more weeks.
This logic is flawed because just as they did with the MacPro, they will add the new laptops to the iPod promotion if they are released.
The ongoing promotion is no reason to delay such an upgrade. As others have stated, the promotion is an effort to clear inventory for the next model.
--HG
logandzwon
Mar 30, 01:18 PM
iTunes is made by APPLE so of course its going to have application as the file names. Show a MS production that uses application as a term.
Again why cant MS just call is their MobileApp store? Adding mobile to the front of app would solve their problems no?
Or add WinApp Store. Why isnt MS doing that?
Its because they want to take a shot at apple, its the only small victory they can get since osx is better than windows, and of course the ipod is better than their joke of am mp3 player Zune.
That is MS Explorer calling the iTunes.exe file an Application. It has nothing to do with Apple. Anything ending in .exe will have the same description.
It's all irrelevant to the conversation though... we are discussing "App Store" not "Application."
Again why cant MS just call is their MobileApp store? Adding mobile to the front of app would solve their problems no?
Or add WinApp Store. Why isnt MS doing that?
Its because they want to take a shot at apple, its the only small victory they can get since osx is better than windows, and of course the ipod is better than their joke of am mp3 player Zune.
That is MS Explorer calling the iTunes.exe file an Application. It has nothing to do with Apple. Anything ending in .exe will have the same description.
It's all irrelevant to the conversation though... we are discussing "App Store" not "Application."
sal
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
Had this security guard done nothing and instead hide in a corner somewhere like most of you would, I could only imagine some of the comments you guys would post.
security guards in general get so much heat from the general population. Armed guards are there to protect life and property. they don't respond like they should in these situations, they aren't doing their job. Most guards, don't do their job and this is why they get ridiculed. this guard does his job and you get people saying things like "security guards shouldn't carry guns, OMG"
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
pretty amazing huh? I use to do armed security. Sometimes when I do duty without a gun, I'd get all kinds of wise-ass side remarks about being a rent a cop. when I carried my gun, I got nothing but respect. the "rent-a-cop" remarks stopped. or maybe they just said it very low so I couldn't hear. Not sure why, I am not going to shoot anyone for an insult :D
and yes, if my life or those I am working to protect are threatened by you, this "rent-a-cop" would shoot you in order to save my life or those around me. No questions asked.
How sad,
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life.
when you take your permit to carry a gun, they make it a point NOT to get your permit if you are not emotionally capable of handling taking someone's life. You don't wear a gun for show, you wear it for protection. if you come from the mentality that you could never shoot someone, even if your own life or those around you in is in danger, then leave your gun at home and pick a different job.
I'm sorry but those guys deserved it. Why should the mall guard have to wait until his life in in danger before putting someone else's life in danger?
it's the law, otherwise you open up yourself to be thrown in jail or face a civil lawsuit. the judge has to see that without a reasonable doubt, your life was in danger and you did what was needed in order to protect it or protect the life of those around you.
it's a judgement call you have to make and sometimes it's not an easy one to make because there are so many variables. Having an adrenaline rush and chaos all around you, makes it very easy to make mistakes. such as shooting a suspect as he is running away. missing shots and hitting bystanders. Pulling the trigger preemptively and killing someone without a "real" threat.
the messed part is that armed security guards, don't get the same type of protection police get. Had this been a police shooting, I bet half of these responses would be different.
security guards in general get so much heat from the general population. Armed guards are there to protect life and property. they don't respond like they should in these situations, they aren't doing their job. Most guards, don't do their job and this is why they get ridiculed. this guard does his job and you get people saying things like "security guards shouldn't carry guns, OMG"
Rent-a-cops have guns? And shoot people IN THE HEAD? I'm amazed.
pretty amazing huh? I use to do armed security. Sometimes when I do duty without a gun, I'd get all kinds of wise-ass side remarks about being a rent a cop. when I carried my gun, I got nothing but respect. the "rent-a-cop" remarks stopped. or maybe they just said it very low so I couldn't hear. Not sure why, I am not going to shoot anyone for an insult :D
and yes, if my life or those I am working to protect are threatened by you, this "rent-a-cop" would shoot you in order to save my life or those around me. No questions asked.
How sad,
I mean a person lost his life because of his actions, and the guard now has to live with the fact that he took a life.
when you take your permit to carry a gun, they make it a point NOT to get your permit if you are not emotionally capable of handling taking someone's life. You don't wear a gun for show, you wear it for protection. if you come from the mentality that you could never shoot someone, even if your own life or those around you in is in danger, then leave your gun at home and pick a different job.
I'm sorry but those guys deserved it. Why should the mall guard have to wait until his life in in danger before putting someone else's life in danger?
it's the law, otherwise you open up yourself to be thrown in jail or face a civil lawsuit. the judge has to see that without a reasonable doubt, your life was in danger and you did what was needed in order to protect it or protect the life of those around you.
it's a judgement call you have to make and sometimes it's not an easy one to make because there are so many variables. Having an adrenaline rush and chaos all around you, makes it very easy to make mistakes. such as shooting a suspect as he is running away. missing shots and hitting bystanders. Pulling the trigger preemptively and killing someone without a "real" threat.
the messed part is that armed security guards, don't get the same type of protection police get. Had this been a police shooting, I bet half of these responses would be different.
mike2q
Oct 27, 06:01 PM
I think someone was right when they pointed out that Apple was attacked because Green Peace believed that we as Mac lovers are all tree hugging hippies. I think this thread alone put an end to that train of thought.
This has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, president Bush, or freedom of speech. It has to do with a the organizers of a privately held event kicking out an attendee for violating the terms it had set. As the organizer and funder of the event it had every right to kick out anyone it saw fit for any reason. If green peace was making it slightly uncomfortable for Apples other attendees then they are very justified in their reaction.
Just my 2 cents.
This has NOTHING to do with environmentalism, president Bush, or freedom of speech. It has to do with a the organizers of a privately held event kicking out an attendee for violating the terms it had set. As the organizer and funder of the event it had every right to kick out anyone it saw fit for any reason. If green peace was making it slightly uncomfortable for Apples other attendees then they are very justified in their reaction.
Just my 2 cents.
RMXO
Mar 3, 05:15 PM
In related news:
BBC News - Android hit by rogue app viruses
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12633923
Ouch
This is the downside of "Open Source". I have both Android & iP4. I have to watch what I install on my Android but not with my iP4 (The plus side to "Closed Walled Garden".
BBC News - Android hit by rogue app viruses
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-12633923
Ouch
This is the downside of "Open Source". I have both Android & iP4. I have to watch what I install on my Android but not with my iP4 (The plus side to "Closed Walled Garden".
gri
Apr 22, 11:27 AM
I hope - but afraid it won't - there is a back lit keyboard re-introduced.
asxtb
Sep 5, 07:56 AM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
As you said, Apple is a business and they have to think of the money first. Let's say they sell a media center for $300. That's $300. Upfront. They put it in the bank and turn it into $400. Taking that initial $300, that is 150 TV shows. That's a lot of TV shows. And that money will be gradually trickling in. Being a business, Apple wants your money now, not a couple bucks here and a couple bucks there. Plus there will be a lot of people that won't buy the media center and will continue buying the shows from iTunes.
840quadra
Oct 12, 02:01 PM
Those look Burgundy to me, I was hoping for a more proper red, but alas those are Mock ups!
jasper77
Sep 5, 04:49 PM
I think this is totally feasible, but one question that many of you haven't addressed is: "Do you see this interaction and interface happening for the Windows users?"
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
that's the question of course :) maybe it will be the killer application to convert windows users to mac :p
or windows users can connect their pc's to a tv with a few cables, so that they also can play the movies from the movie store on their tv's… but in that case the pc must be next to the tv.
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
that's the question of course :) maybe it will be the killer application to convert windows users to mac :p
or windows users can connect their pc's to a tv with a few cables, so that they also can play the movies from the movie store on their tv's… but in that case the pc must be next to the tv.
hayesk
May 3, 12:45 PM
You can daisy chain multiple monitors with DisplayPort 1.2, and it has much more bandwidth than a Thunderbolt channel.
DP 1.2 has up to 17.28 Gbps.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
DP 1.2 has up to 17.28 Gbps.
TB has two 10 Gbps channels.
Reverendrun
May 3, 10:20 AM
what about target display mode on the 21/24" models?
I'm curious about this as well. Can you use the target display mode on the 21.5" model?
I'm curious about this as well. Can you use the target display mode on the 21.5" model?
bassfingers
Mar 30, 11:52 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
Dear Microsoft, if you want the App Store, then you should have made the App Store
bluedevil14
Oct 12, 07:51 PM
i cant possibly phantom why ANYBODY would possible rate this negative. Its a new iPod (in my favorite color) thats the same price and has the same specs as the original, and money goes towards AIDS. :) If you dont like the color dont get it. If you think more money should go toward AIDS then ten dollars, the do something about it and donate money out of your own pocket.
That is all.
That is all.
amarcus
Mar 30, 12:53 PM
After a bit of thought I think I'm siding with Apple... here's why:
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...
The strongest argument I've read against the trademark is that 'App Store' is describing the very thing it actually is. Someone likened this to renaming 'Windows' to 'Operating System'.
However what isn't appreciated is that 'App' is in itself an abbreviation. It's debatable whether apple popularised it or not but thats not the point. Basically it would be like renaming 'Windows' to 'Ope System'.
I'd argue that 'Ope System' could be trademarked whereas 'Operating System' couldn't...
rileyes
Mar 29, 03:47 PM
Oracle's lawsuit against Google is airtight. Android's use of a non-compliant virtual machine (the Dalvik VM) is a clear violation of the Java license agreement. And there's legal precedent: Microsoft paid Sun $20 million back in 2001 when Sun successfully sued them for trying to "embrace, extend, and extinguish" Java.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.
Google will lose the lawsuit. And nobody has ever accused Larry Ellison of being Mr. Nice Guy. He doesn't want money this time. He wants to protect the intellectual property Oracle acquired from Sun. He wants all copies of Android to be "impounded and destroyed" (a direct quote from text of the suit.) Because if Google is allowed to plagiarize and distort Java, others will follow. Ellison is making an example of Google, and it's going to be a law school textbook IP case study for the ages.
Soon Android will be off the market while Google is forced to retool their JVM to be 100% Java compliant. Google is already scrambling to get rid of their non-compliant Dalvik VM. They actually hired James Gosling, the "inventor" of Java, so they've got religion now.
And, although money isn't the motivating factor behind the Oracle lawsuit, it is a factor nonetheless. Google will end up paying Oracle a license fee for each and every generic me-too Android iPhone clone and iPad clone that their hardware partners can mash up. And that erases Android's only advantage over WP7. Android will no longer be free.
So, when Android is off the market, Nokia's WP7 phones will have a chance to avoid becoming KIN 2.0. There will be a window of opportunity for Nokia and Microsoft to build up a little market share. Some corporations and consumers will buy Nokia WP7 phones just because Nokia and Microsoft are "too big to die." (And just when Google thinks it's safe, when they've implemented a 100% compliant JVM, Apple can sue them for GUI patent infringement. But that's another story...)
In the meantime, both WP7 and Nokia will have zero market presence. For all of 2011 and part of 2012. That's an eternity.
Even if Google loses any patent lawsuit, the phone wont go off the market.