rtharper
Sep 10, 11:08 PM
If they don't happen by then, that's when I will beging looking at yonah MBP's.
I won't buy a Yonah MBP. I would rather have a more future proof computer of a different brand. I use *nix for almost all of my work, I'll just try and buy an open source friendly machine and put windows on a partition just to run WoW and have the other run FreeBSD.
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
I won't buy a Yonah MBP. I would rather have a more future proof computer of a different brand. I use *nix for almost all of my work, I'll just try and buy an open source friendly machine and put windows on a partition just to run WoW and have the other run FreeBSD.
That, of course, is not my first choice, but I won't wait past the shipping dates of other manufacturers (i.e. the 26th is my limit, too).
Lesser Evets
Apr 23, 04:47 PM
My hopes were for smaller iMacs with retina displays. I own a 30" screen and while it isn't a burden, I really don't mind a 20" screen with high res.
The iMac should remain a kind of ultra-compact, semi-portable type computer. 20" should be the biggest, just up to retina. Will they do it this year?
Howabout 800x600? :eek:
I was just thinking of my old iBook with that res. Sheesh. These newer computers are making 1999 look like 1926.
The iMac should remain a kind of ultra-compact, semi-portable type computer. 20" should be the biggest, just up to retina. Will they do it this year?
Howabout 800x600? :eek:
I was just thinking of my old iBook with that res. Sheesh. These newer computers are making 1999 look like 1926.
snebes
Mar 30, 05:57 PM
I really hope they deploy some form of full screen iTunes in this build. Would be nice to see.
Only if a re-write is done on it first. Carbon-to-Cocoa conversions on all of Apples' apps should be of a higher priority.
Only if a re-write is done on it first. Carbon-to-Cocoa conversions on all of Apples' apps should be of a higher priority.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
dethmaShine
Apr 7, 10:23 AM
Good for Apple for being smart enough to secure production. Very smart.
Also... just saw... another Japan Earthquake about 10 mins ago. 7.4.
Not good for Japan!
Ah, *******
Also... just saw... another Japan Earthquake about 10 mins ago. 7.4.
Not good for Japan!
Ah, *******
Glideslope
Apr 5, 02:47 PM
Leave the jailbreak community alone Apple!! What is your ****ing problem??? Can't we just coexist???:mad:
No.
Tim. :apple:
No.
Tim. :apple:
.jpg "couple kissing in the rain. a")
Moyank24
May 3, 05:46 PM
We may need a woman in charge, because Lord knows none of the men will ask for directions. ;)
But, yeah, I'm for exploring the room we are in.
But, yeah, I'm for exploring the room we are in.
koobcamuk
Mar 29, 07:36 PM
Hard for me, even as an Apple fan, to weep too much for a company that chooses to do business overseas isntead of here in America, employing Americans.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
Oh do shut up. America doesn't have the technology. Furthermore, I am sure prices of your beloved Apple products would increase almost tenfold if Apple didn't have to pay Chinese peasants to make your shiny toys.
Hopefully the situation in Japan improves -- for reasons beyond this.
Oh do shut up. America doesn't have the technology. Furthermore, I am sure prices of your beloved Apple products would increase almost tenfold if Apple didn't have to pay Chinese peasants to make your shiny toys.
louis Fashion
Apr 25, 09:02 AM
there's a big difference between the device knowing where it is/has been and that information actually being uploaded to "the mothership".
True, but the opt out system should have a way to erase the .db file. The Wall St. Journal's investigation indicates that the device is collecting data at all times.
True, but the opt out system should have a way to erase the .db file. The Wall St. Journal's investigation indicates that the device is collecting data at all times.
bushido
Apr 20, 06:04 AM
Not if it reduces battery life.
the battery life is bad enough as it is, i don't care if it reduces by half an hour or sth. i have to charge it every night either way. so 4inch bring it on, about time
the battery life is bad enough as it is, i don't care if it reduces by half an hour or sth. i have to charge it every night either way. so 4inch bring it on, about time
SiliconAddict
Nov 22, 11:37 AM
iPod Phone == phone + music
Palm Treo == Tool
Threat averted. Life can go on as usual. :rolleyes:
Palm Treo == Tool
Threat averted. Life can go on as usual. :rolleyes:
Tha Professor
May 6, 05:11 AM
Yes please! Am I the only one that thinks that Intel is crap? Well, maybe it aint crap, but Apple is crappier since Intel... I yet have to see someone running an Intel Mac for several years without a hiccup.. Most Intel Macs I have seen did have problems or died completely in range of 3 years... PowerPCs had far less problems!:apple:
eb6
Sep 11, 08:39 AM
Why is it so hard to believe Apple will add movies to iTunes? They already added short films and TV shows.
DwightSchrute
Jul 22, 02:44 PM
Why does everyone want Apple to change the enclosure of the MBP when it's already perfect?
RobertMartens
Nov 16, 11:23 AM
If you think the virii and malware have been and will always be problems that only windows users will face, then you are mistaken.
OOOoohhh I'm so scared.
Hey you can see the future, that's great.
Who's gonna win the superbowl?
We have been listening to this scarey talk for 10 years and still nothing.
Come on already, hackers, bring it on.
We falling asleep waiting for you
BTW ain't no such word as virii
And why are we so worried about passing on Windows Viruses, doesn't everyone running Windows HAVE TO run AV software. They would be nuts if they didn't. Viruses and malware have been and will always be problems that windows users will face. Just like you said.
couple kissing sketch. couple
couple kissing sketches.
couple kissing sketches.
Kissing as we do now.
OOOoohhh I'm so scared.
Hey you can see the future, that's great.
Who's gonna win the superbowl?
We have been listening to this scarey talk for 10 years and still nothing.
Come on already, hackers, bring it on.
We falling asleep waiting for you
BTW ain't no such word as virii
And why are we so worried about passing on Windows Viruses, doesn't everyone running Windows HAVE TO run AV software. They would be nuts if they didn't. Viruses and malware have been and will always be problems that windows users will face. Just like you said.
Soothsayr
Apr 25, 09:06 AM
I bet the people crying "foul" the loudest are also the ones who have FourSquare installed and update it every 5 seconds.
Jobs is right - big difference with your phone remembering locations, as opposed to Apple actively gathering it.
Jobs is right - big difference with your phone remembering locations, as opposed to Apple actively gathering it.
Nightarchaon
Apr 23, 04:34 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ? Well whatever that GPU is , apple will ship with the one released 2 years ago and half the RAM it shipped with on the PC .
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
I love the mac OS , I love the mac design , I hate the "last years tech with a shiney shell" we seem to have to put up with , super high res screens and faster I/O ports are all well and good , but put a decent GPU in now the mac is becoming a contender as a home gaming platform .
Think I ranted a bit then , sorry :rolleyes:
Grimace
Sep 15, 04:20 PM
MacShrine? Who?
What's their record?
What's their record?
sinsin07
Apr 25, 08:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Too late for that: http://www.spokeo.com/
I don't get the big deal about it. If you want to be anonymous, get off fb, twitter, macrumors, etc. Then cancel all Internet plans you have and your cellular plan. Then no one will ever know where you are unless you tell them.
Too late for that: http://www.spokeo.com/
Tilpots
May 7, 01:46 PM
Is the size of Apple's NC Data Center overkill for just delivering MobileMe services? Or is that the type of facility they would need to bring it in-house with current subscribers?
azentropy
Apr 21, 03:00 PM
I'm more interested in the price/performance improvements on the lower end. The entry level Mac Pro is simply a horrible horrible value in terms of price per performance. I don't care how wonderful the build quality is or what other "features" it has, a $2500 system should have more than 4 DIMM slots and better than a under $300 CPU.
Chundles
Sep 10, 11:22 PM
Mine connection would take around 14 hours, but we have adsl 2+ now which is up to 24mb/sec. Can't wait to upgrade :cool:
This movie store is all exciting and all, but with out world stores, it will be the US who will be enjoying it :(
Yep, downloadable TV shows, movies for purchase or rent, iPhoto photobooks/prints/calendars/cards etc.
Who gives a rat's? Not me because we can't use any of them.
This movie store is all exciting and all, but with out world stores, it will be the US who will be enjoying it :(
Yep, downloadable TV shows, movies for purchase or rent, iPhoto photobooks/prints/calendars/cards etc.
Who gives a rat's? Not me because we can't use any of them.
Multimedia
Aug 3, 08:55 AM
> btw< the macbook pro im using runs at 2.33Ghz. :DI misunderstood the context. Sorry. It's Steve saying that in the SteveNote. My bad. :) :o
notjustjay
Apr 25, 09:34 AM
As many observers have noted, the iOS location database does not record exact GPS data, instead seeking to pinpoint the locations of Wi-Fi access points and cell towers that the device comes within range of, although the database does offer a clear general track of a user's movements.
The bolded parts are key. The phone is simply keeping a cache of what towers and wifi sources are nearby, so it doesn't have to keep repeatedly doing the same searches over and over. It's like your Mac keeps a list of WiFi networks it has been connected to, so it doesn't have to ask you again the next time it sees them. Yes, that data can be used to point to roughly where you are, but it's not pinpoint accuracy like with GPS.
I think the easy solution to all this is simply to have this consolidated.db file roll off the old data after a couple of weeks or so, rather than keep it around for months or years at a stretch.
The bolded parts are key. The phone is simply keeping a cache of what towers and wifi sources are nearby, so it doesn't have to keep repeatedly doing the same searches over and over. It's like your Mac keeps a list of WiFi networks it has been connected to, so it doesn't have to ask you again the next time it sees them. Yes, that data can be used to point to roughly where you are, but it's not pinpoint accuracy like with GPS.
I think the easy solution to all this is simply to have this consolidated.db file roll off the old data after a couple of weeks or so, rather than keep it around for months or years at a stretch.