macman2790
Sep 5, 01:27 PM
for some reason i just doubt that. Maybe it's just because i've been waiting for them to update it the past few weeks and nothing's happened
mikeschmeee
Mar 8, 03:23 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5140/5509790275_5e1694a680.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5509790275/)
scott523
Nov 8, 09:36 AM
Yes! 2GB RAM upgrade is $225 (estimate from A$)! Luckily I bought 2GB RAM for $195. :D :p
mfacey
Aug 24, 03:31 PM
Looks like a new battery for me too! Sadly I can't get onto the support page for the recall. Looks like all 1.8 millions users want to make their exchange at the same time!:D
I'm leaving my battery in in the mean time though. I really can't manage to use my powerbook as a desktop for the 4 weeks or more that it'll take to get the new battery. It's worked fine for the past 1.5 years so I don't see why it should suddenly now self destruct!
I'm leaving my battery in in the mean time though. I really can't manage to use my powerbook as a desktop for the 4 weeks or more that it'll take to get the new battery. It's worked fine for the past 1.5 years so I don't see why it should suddenly now self destruct!
jesteraver
Sep 7, 09:23 AM
Agreed. Dream prices:
20"= $450
24"=$600
30"=$1000
They could always fill the $2k dispay spot with a 50", HDTV Capable display that supported 20 million pixles :D
Would be nice to see those prices, but not in the next 3 years lol.
Would be interesting to see able phase out the 20" LCD, just have 24", 30", and a 41 or 42" LCD. All would be HD. True it be nice with the iSight, but arent they working on a new one anyways?
Also when are we going to see Blu-ray in Mac's? Hopefully sometime in 2007.
I have a feeling Apple going to phase out the 17" iMac. So it might give us room for a 30" iMac, anything possible. Thing is if Apple updates the Mac Mini too much, it be the similar to the iMac and pretty much the same price. Would be interesting to have a larger HD, better graphics chip in the Mac Mini. I still like the iMac, seeing its all in one.
20"= $450
24"=$600
30"=$1000
They could always fill the $2k dispay spot with a 50", HDTV Capable display that supported 20 million pixles :D
Would be nice to see those prices, but not in the next 3 years lol.
Would be interesting to see able phase out the 20" LCD, just have 24", 30", and a 41 or 42" LCD. All would be HD. True it be nice with the iSight, but arent they working on a new one anyways?
Also when are we going to see Blu-ray in Mac's? Hopefully sometime in 2007.
I have a feeling Apple going to phase out the 17" iMac. So it might give us room for a 30" iMac, anything possible. Thing is if Apple updates the Mac Mini too much, it be the similar to the iMac and pretty much the same price. Would be interesting to have a larger HD, better graphics chip in the Mac Mini. I still like the iMac, seeing its all in one.
frozencarbonite
Aug 3, 05:25 PM
I guess I'll connect to my ethernet for now to be on the safe side until we get more information.
SwiftLives
Mar 18, 03:03 PM
I think they'll keep the Classic around until the iPod Touch exceeds 100GB. And I'm guessing that will happen in September.
Of course, I've been guessing that will happen "in September" for about 3 years running now.
Of course, I've been guessing that will happen "in September" for about 3 years running now.
surrealestate
Nov 14, 01:30 AM
Anyone complaining about Apple's app approval process has clearly not developed for other mobile devices for the US Carriers. Even with its faults, the App Store is a walk in the park compared to Sprint, AT&T, T-Mobile, or Verizon.
1) All US carriers are very restrictive about what new apps and games they will carry. Even big companies like WB and Disney have had major apps and games turned down. The carrier decks have limited space.
2) The signing/DRM and uploading process for all carriers can be very arcane, with unclear procedures, long delays for hearing back about the status of content, etc.
3) US Carriers require an extensive amount of testing on all builds that they are going to sell. Most of the phones on Verizon, for example, require going through the BREW development process, which entails getting the game build for each handset tested by NSTL, at a cost of $700-1000 per build. Verizon does further testing after that, and neither BREW or Verizon offer a full test bed for network features.
4) European carriers don't do their own testing -- they simply don't guarantee that games and apps will work. As a result, there is a large amount of piracy for apps in the European market, and because devices often aren't tied to a specific carrier/carrier storefront, it's often easier to find the games you want on the pirate sites than it is to buy them.
5)US mobile carriers have very strict content guidelines for most mobile content, including ringtones and graphics. Each carrier has a different content management partner and infrastructure with different procedures.
6)If you plan to submit your game to a US mobile carrier, each carrier will have a list of phones you are required to support, usually about 40 of their better sellers. While this generally includes modern top-of-the-line phones, it also will include some really horrible 4 year old handsets with no features. This has been a big reason for the lack of innovation on the carriers -- it's hard to launch a great new location-aware app if you are required to run it on phones without a GPS, and you can't easily launch a 3D game, since only about 6 or 7 phones will run it, and the other required phones won't.
7)Apple's process puts the onus on the developer to properly test their app, with a minimum of testing on Apple's side. A full test from Apple would cost money, probably hundreds of dollars, and would pretty much eliminate the ability to offer 99 cent apps or free apps. The penalty you pay for insufficient testing is that it may take 3 weeks to get your bug fixes live on the store. Inconvenient, but poetic justice.
8) The Danger Sidekick app store was a real nightmare. Danger prides itself on the fact that nobody submitting an app can get it approved in less than 3 passes. Most of the reasons they turn down apps have to do with how underpowered and buggy the Danger hardware is. Furthermore, in order to sell anything on that store, you have to cut a deal with Danger as well as the carrier offering the device.
So, all said, the reason mobile developers are so excited about iPhone is that for all its faults, the App Store is a breath of fresh air compared to most carrier marketplaces. It's substantially less restrictive than phone carriers or any of the console manufacturers, the cost to get in is minimal, and the process is quite a bit more transparent.
While the process is not perfect, much of the problems people are having are probably attributable to the sheer volume of submissions every week. They are processing thousands of apps during every 40-hour week with a finite staff; the figure I've heard is that the average app gets 6 minutes of review time, which certainly would account for the few flubs they've made.
Considering the hoops Facebook has probably had to jump through for every other phone they support, Hewett just sounds like a whiner. And a web-based Facebook mobile client is even more of a hassle, take it from someone who had to ensure that a major entertainment company's mobile site worked properly on over 500 handsets. If facebook wants to be everywhere, they will pay a price, and the price on the App Store is pretty reasonable.
1) All US carriers are very restrictive about what new apps and games they will carry. Even big companies like WB and Disney have had major apps and games turned down. The carrier decks have limited space.
2) The signing/DRM and uploading process for all carriers can be very arcane, with unclear procedures, long delays for hearing back about the status of content, etc.
3) US Carriers require an extensive amount of testing on all builds that they are going to sell. Most of the phones on Verizon, for example, require going through the BREW development process, which entails getting the game build for each handset tested by NSTL, at a cost of $700-1000 per build. Verizon does further testing after that, and neither BREW or Verizon offer a full test bed for network features.
4) European carriers don't do their own testing -- they simply don't guarantee that games and apps will work. As a result, there is a large amount of piracy for apps in the European market, and because devices often aren't tied to a specific carrier/carrier storefront, it's often easier to find the games you want on the pirate sites than it is to buy them.
5)US mobile carriers have very strict content guidelines for most mobile content, including ringtones and graphics. Each carrier has a different content management partner and infrastructure with different procedures.
6)If you plan to submit your game to a US mobile carrier, each carrier will have a list of phones you are required to support, usually about 40 of their better sellers. While this generally includes modern top-of-the-line phones, it also will include some really horrible 4 year old handsets with no features. This has been a big reason for the lack of innovation on the carriers -- it's hard to launch a great new location-aware app if you are required to run it on phones without a GPS, and you can't easily launch a 3D game, since only about 6 or 7 phones will run it, and the other required phones won't.
7)Apple's process puts the onus on the developer to properly test their app, with a minimum of testing on Apple's side. A full test from Apple would cost money, probably hundreds of dollars, and would pretty much eliminate the ability to offer 99 cent apps or free apps. The penalty you pay for insufficient testing is that it may take 3 weeks to get your bug fixes live on the store. Inconvenient, but poetic justice.
8) The Danger Sidekick app store was a real nightmare. Danger prides itself on the fact that nobody submitting an app can get it approved in less than 3 passes. Most of the reasons they turn down apps have to do with how underpowered and buggy the Danger hardware is. Furthermore, in order to sell anything on that store, you have to cut a deal with Danger as well as the carrier offering the device.
So, all said, the reason mobile developers are so excited about iPhone is that for all its faults, the App Store is a breath of fresh air compared to most carrier marketplaces. It's substantially less restrictive than phone carriers or any of the console manufacturers, the cost to get in is minimal, and the process is quite a bit more transparent.
While the process is not perfect, much of the problems people are having are probably attributable to the sheer volume of submissions every week. They are processing thousands of apps during every 40-hour week with a finite staff; the figure I've heard is that the average app gets 6 minutes of review time, which certainly would account for the few flubs they've made.
Considering the hoops Facebook has probably had to jump through for every other phone they support, Hewett just sounds like a whiner. And a web-based Facebook mobile client is even more of a hassle, take it from someone who had to ensure that a major entertainment company's mobile site worked properly on over 500 handsets. If facebook wants to be everywhere, they will pay a price, and the price on the App Store is pretty reasonable.
KnightWRX
Apr 17, 08:03 AM
I speak with facts. Hardware is facts.
Except you've brought no facts to life. I'm still waiting on that citation that proves Apple uses ASUS boards...
Except you've brought no facts to life. I'm still waiting on that citation that proves Apple uses ASUS boards...
phyzics101
Mar 29, 01:01 AM
I want to be an attendee one day.
doug in albq
Mar 25, 12:52 PM
Gestures still function on iPad?
Compatiblepoker
Jul 23, 12:58 AM
I'm personally not a huge fan of ebooks in the first place but on an iPod....come on. Too much strain for me.
FireFish
May 5, 02:46 AM
[/URL][URL="http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif"]Image (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/04/ios-5-to-finally-deliver-over-the-air-updates/)
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/04/234536-vz2_500.jpg)
According to 9to5Mac (http://www.9to5mac.com/64928/apple-and-verizon-to-deliver-over-the-air-ios-updates-to-verizon-iphone/), Apple is negotiating with Verizon about delivering over-the-air iOS updates starting with iOS 5.An over-the-air update system would allow users to download the iOS update directly to their phone over 3G or Wi-Fi and update their phone to the latest version without connecting to iTunes. Android devices already offer this feature.
Due to the high bandwidth requirement, it seems Apple needs to negotiate deals with individual carriers to allow such a system to take place. We should note that Apple's iOS is partially capable of this functionality already. The Apple TV which is based on iOS 4 offers "over the air" updates with no iTunes syncing required. The Apple TV, however, stores little customer data so backups are not as critical as with iPhone and iPad devices. :eek:
Article Link: iOS 5 to Finally Deliver Over-The-Air Updates? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/04/ios-5-to-finally-deliver-over-the-air-updates/) :)
Wouldn't be a bad idea. Even if they just made "patches" so we aren't downloading half a gb of updates every 2 weeks. :(
Blow through your data cap with 650MB downloads for every point update? Not happening until Apple can deliver smaller downloads for updates.
:rolleyes: I'm starting to get the feeling that people are finding that the Verizon iPhone 4 wasn't all they thought it would be. Granted that the voice quality is better; remember you cannot use 3G while on the phone with Verizon and also remember that phones are more like 'personal communicators' these days. Now that Internet caps are being introduced, everyone is going to loose, just as a Predicted. You have more & more apps that rely heavily on cloud based content that need 3G web access. This is why I kept my AT&T grandfathered Unlimited Data Plan for both my iPhone 4 as well as my wife's iPhone 4 & my iPad 2.
On the new iPad, unlimited cell internet is awesome. You can watch movies from anywhere, etc. all without worrying about your bandwidth or throttle limitations. :apple:
Image (http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/04/234536-vz2_500.jpg)
According to 9to5Mac (http://www.9to5mac.com/64928/apple-and-verizon-to-deliver-over-the-air-ios-updates-to-verizon-iphone/), Apple is negotiating with Verizon about delivering over-the-air iOS updates starting with iOS 5.An over-the-air update system would allow users to download the iOS update directly to their phone over 3G or Wi-Fi and update their phone to the latest version without connecting to iTunes. Android devices already offer this feature.
Due to the high bandwidth requirement, it seems Apple needs to negotiate deals with individual carriers to allow such a system to take place. We should note that Apple's iOS is partially capable of this functionality already. The Apple TV which is based on iOS 4 offers "over the air" updates with no iTunes syncing required. The Apple TV, however, stores little customer data so backups are not as critical as with iPhone and iPad devices. :eek:
Article Link: iOS 5 to Finally Deliver Over-The-Air Updates? (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/04/ios-5-to-finally-deliver-over-the-air-updates/) :)
Wouldn't be a bad idea. Even if they just made "patches" so we aren't downloading half a gb of updates every 2 weeks. :(
Blow through your data cap with 650MB downloads for every point update? Not happening until Apple can deliver smaller downloads for updates.
:rolleyes: I'm starting to get the feeling that people are finding that the Verizon iPhone 4 wasn't all they thought it would be. Granted that the voice quality is better; remember you cannot use 3G while on the phone with Verizon and also remember that phones are more like 'personal communicators' these days. Now that Internet caps are being introduced, everyone is going to loose, just as a Predicted. You have more & more apps that rely heavily on cloud based content that need 3G web access. This is why I kept my AT&T grandfathered Unlimited Data Plan for both my iPhone 4 as well as my wife's iPhone 4 & my iPad 2.
On the new iPad, unlimited cell internet is awesome. You can watch movies from anywhere, etc. all without worrying about your bandwidth or throttle limitations. :apple:
gnasher729
Nov 8, 09:00 AM
About time...but at this stage should i wait for the Santa Rosa platform with the ram drives and all that?? ;)
Yes, you should wait. The more people wait for the next generation, the earlier everyone else can get their MacBooks.
Yes, you should wait. The more people wait for the next generation, the earlier everyone else can get their MacBooks.
X2468
Mar 29, 09:27 PM
BS. 3G was fully matured at the time of release of the first Iphone. It had been commercially adopted for over 5 years at that point in time.
Finally the truth. I know because I've been using 3G phones since the first day AT&T rolled them out. Call quality was immediately improved as was data transfer speeds. The various phones sold in those years all demonstrated the distinct advantage.
Apple and their biased partners in the blogosphere are the masters of spin.
Don't get me wrong I'm a huge Apple enthusiast, but I'm a bigger supporter of the truth.
Hopefully when the day arrives that Jobs moves on, integrity, ethics and truth will be allowed back into the organization.
Finally the truth. I know because I've been using 3G phones since the first day AT&T rolled them out. Call quality was immediately improved as was data transfer speeds. The various phones sold in those years all demonstrated the distinct advantage.
Apple and their biased partners in the blogosphere are the masters of spin.
Don't get me wrong I'm a huge Apple enthusiast, but I'm a bigger supporter of the truth.
Hopefully when the day arrives that Jobs moves on, integrity, ethics and truth will be allowed back into the organization.
Analog Kid
Aug 3, 02:16 AM
It's a usb wireless card, I presume. He holds it up, flicks out the (usb) connector and plugs it into the left side of the Macbook. While he sticks in the card he says: "...we're using 3rd party hardware..."
I hope you're not referring to me when you say "people are so quick to call this an unfair attack on Apple". :confused:
Not referring to you at all, Gekko. You're adding the kind of informed discussion I look forward to here. And thanks for helping the "blind" and cluing me in on what was going on.
I'm finally out from behind the firewall and watched the video, which I have to say is very well done.
The title of the demo is "Device Drivers: Don't build a house on shaky ground." They are drawing attention to a serious problem and most people here are missing the point because all the blood rushed to their heads when they saw the Mac logo.
They clearly say this is not Apple's problem, it's because of buggy code in a 3rd party driver. They're using the Mac for a reason here-- they are specifically making the point that it doesn't matter how much trust you put into your OS vendor, you can get hosed by any poorly made USB thingy that you stick in the side.
Take that home with you-- Apple may have a more secure OS but all of that can go out the window with a bad peripheral. This could just as easily have been a video camera that had a malicious file loaded onto it and a bad driver. Or, it could have been a printer with a bad print driver and a bad Bluetooth implementation that let an attacker pass through the printer into your machine.
They didn't run this demo live because they didn't want anyone in the audience to sniff the traffic and release it into the wild. Very responsible to the verge of being paranoid.
If there is a problem here it with the Washington Post who didn't clearly explain the problem. Maybe they didn't understand it themselves...
Drivers are an achilles heel of any OS. They give direct access to the kernel and bypass any security the OS can try to provide. They almost have to do that if you're going to allow 3rd party hardware to work with the machine. It was also a poorly written driver that allowed the DVD encryption to be cracked-- the vendor left the keychain available in plaintext.
This is a very difficult problem to solve. MS has talked about only allowing "signed drivers" to be run-- meaning that MS has to approve anything before it's loaded and that caused a developer outcry because it made MS the gatekeeper of all new hardware.
One way to minimize the exposure is to rely on a small number of standard interfaces. Less interfaces mean less points of entry that need to be tested. Apple does this very well-- almost out of necessity. Ever notice how every new piece of hardware comes with a disc you need to install under Windows but just seems to work with your Mac? It's because Apple connects through a standard interface (say, Mass Storage, or Digital Camera) and the vendor tries to get fancy for Windows and roll their own. They do it for windows because they think it's worth the effort to "differentiate" themselves in that crowded market while Mac users can see that those bells or whistles aren't necessary.
The point of the video is to show that the bells and whistles can also be dangerous.
I hope you're not referring to me when you say "people are so quick to call this an unfair attack on Apple". :confused:
Not referring to you at all, Gekko. You're adding the kind of informed discussion I look forward to here. And thanks for helping the "blind" and cluing me in on what was going on.
I'm finally out from behind the firewall and watched the video, which I have to say is very well done.
The title of the demo is "Device Drivers: Don't build a house on shaky ground." They are drawing attention to a serious problem and most people here are missing the point because all the blood rushed to their heads when they saw the Mac logo.
They clearly say this is not Apple's problem, it's because of buggy code in a 3rd party driver. They're using the Mac for a reason here-- they are specifically making the point that it doesn't matter how much trust you put into your OS vendor, you can get hosed by any poorly made USB thingy that you stick in the side.
Take that home with you-- Apple may have a more secure OS but all of that can go out the window with a bad peripheral. This could just as easily have been a video camera that had a malicious file loaded onto it and a bad driver. Or, it could have been a printer with a bad print driver and a bad Bluetooth implementation that let an attacker pass through the printer into your machine.
They didn't run this demo live because they didn't want anyone in the audience to sniff the traffic and release it into the wild. Very responsible to the verge of being paranoid.
If there is a problem here it with the Washington Post who didn't clearly explain the problem. Maybe they didn't understand it themselves...
Drivers are an achilles heel of any OS. They give direct access to the kernel and bypass any security the OS can try to provide. They almost have to do that if you're going to allow 3rd party hardware to work with the machine. It was also a poorly written driver that allowed the DVD encryption to be cracked-- the vendor left the keychain available in plaintext.
This is a very difficult problem to solve. MS has talked about only allowing "signed drivers" to be run-- meaning that MS has to approve anything before it's loaded and that caused a developer outcry because it made MS the gatekeeper of all new hardware.
One way to minimize the exposure is to rely on a small number of standard interfaces. Less interfaces mean less points of entry that need to be tested. Apple does this very well-- almost out of necessity. Ever notice how every new piece of hardware comes with a disc you need to install under Windows but just seems to work with your Mac? It's because Apple connects through a standard interface (say, Mass Storage, or Digital Camera) and the vendor tries to get fancy for Windows and roll their own. They do it for windows because they think it's worth the effort to "differentiate" themselves in that crowded market while Mac users can see that those bells or whistles aren't necessary.
The point of the video is to show that the bells and whistles can also be dangerous.
Arquelis
Aug 3, 06:47 PM
As pointed out on the flickr on appleinsider: the speakers of the macbook pro on the banner are smaller than they are on the 15''
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/gallery/qtvr15.html
http://www.apple.com/macbookpro/gallery/qtvr15.html
Sti-R
Oct 10, 07:04 PM
255273
This is the small headquarters of Japan-Saikou.com :)
This is the small headquarters of Japan-Saikou.com :)
kasei
Sep 22, 07:34 PM
Who? Wal what?
pdqgp
Apr 14, 10:53 PM
$3,500?
No. Make that close to $1,500. Don't exaggerate.
No exaggeration here. You must not use much in the way of what I call "real" plugins and actions then. If you saw the full CS5 suite and the major plugins I use in my setup, they actually total more than $3,500. Nik's suites / packages, Topaz Suites / packages, OnOne, Andromedia, DCE Tools, Digital Anarchy, etc.....not small time dollars.
I never contemplated downloading a hacked version.
You don't have to. It involves downloading the full legit demo version and replacing one small file in the system folder. No different than any of the MS Office or Windows OS patches.
No. Make that close to $1,500. Don't exaggerate.
No exaggeration here. You must not use much in the way of what I call "real" plugins and actions then. If you saw the full CS5 suite and the major plugins I use in my setup, they actually total more than $3,500. Nik's suites / packages, Topaz Suites / packages, OnOne, Andromedia, DCE Tools, Digital Anarchy, etc.....not small time dollars.
I never contemplated downloading a hacked version.
You don't have to. It involves downloading the full legit demo version and replacing one small file in the system folder. No different than any of the MS Office or Windows OS patches.
sPAULj
Jul 22, 11:33 PM
Oh, I could sooooo say something here, but it would probably be considered a racist flame-bait, so I'll just steer clear of it.
But I would say that it won't be me needing that particular feature...
*mumbles something to self about this being an English-speaking country and runs out of the thread*
The internet has no country lines; you arn't racist, but you may possibly be unsensitive to the enviorment in which you are speaking as there are a lot of people who would like to learn the spanish language outside the United States.
Additionally, please remember that although America's most commonly spoken language is English (or several varients of true English), there is no official national language in the United States. The easiest way to make sure that the U.S. stays mainly english (if you want it to) is by simply refusing to do otherwise. Complaining about people who want to learn another language in an atempt to get your point across only makes you look uneducated and rude (and thus is why people would jump to use the term "racist").
But I would say that it won't be me needing that particular feature...
*mumbles something to self about this being an English-speaking country and runs out of the thread*
The internet has no country lines; you arn't racist, but you may possibly be unsensitive to the enviorment in which you are speaking as there are a lot of people who would like to learn the spanish language outside the United States.
Additionally, please remember that although America's most commonly spoken language is English (or several varients of true English), there is no official national language in the United States. The easiest way to make sure that the U.S. stays mainly english (if you want it to) is by simply refusing to do otherwise. Complaining about people who want to learn another language in an atempt to get your point across only makes you look uneducated and rude (and thus is why people would jump to use the term "racist").
drlunanerd
Nov 8, 08:29 AM
The C2D MBP was relieved of the whine and some other issues one they moved to C2D. If the MacBook becomes free of these issues as well with this move than the small update is still great news.
No, later CD builds were relieved of the whine. That wasn't solved by a C2D chip, but better quality control.
No, later CD builds were relieved of the whine. That wasn't solved by a C2D chip, but better quality control.
yellow
Aug 2, 04:39 PM
but the compromised code is most likely not Apple's at least.
I concur. They simply chose a Mac to be a cock. How's that for smugness?
So what happens when the owner of the MacBook closes the computer?
Exploit defeated. :)
I concur. They simply chose a Mac to be a cock. How's that for smugness?
So what happens when the owner of the MacBook closes the computer?
Exploit defeated. :)
spicyapple
Nov 27, 10:49 AM
Wow. Here's a cookie.
Chocolate chip cookie? Those are my favourites! :)
Given that Clear Channel banned 4 Beatles songs in the wake of 9/11, the billboard prognostication by R0bert was slightly amusing.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
Chocolate chip cookie? Those are my favourites! :)
Given that Clear Channel banned 4 Beatles songs in the wake of 9/11, the billboard prognostication by R0bert was slightly amusing.
luv ya bunches! xoxoxo
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu