chillywilly
Sep 5, 03:46 PM
I really don't see any MB or MBP updates. Again, I could be off, but I don't see those until later this year.
I'm sure the C2D chips coming out on all sorts of Windows laptops may be putting some pressure on Apple to update their laptop line, but I think it's still too soon.
I'm sure the C2D chips coming out on all sorts of Windows laptops may be putting some pressure on Apple to update their laptop line, but I think it's still too soon.
nonameowns
Apr 11, 06:00 AM
meh ill just pirate it
PCtoMAC?
Sep 24, 01:16 PM
I like a challange but I got frustrated last night when i had to restart the whole level because i eneded up facing off with a couple of those smaller covinant tanks with one rocket and an assault rifle and the check point screwed me.
Also I gotta say the AI is vastly improved but only on the enemy side. Why are my squadmates such mororns?!
Also I gotta say the AI is vastly improved but only on the enemy side. Why are my squadmates such mororns?!
Doctor Q
Apr 1, 11:53 PM
What other explanation could there be for his comments?
bbotte
Nov 12, 02:26 PM
It has always been dumb only 1 person at Facebook works on the iPhone app.
MorphingDragon
Nov 4, 11:32 AM
I'm amazed that you investigated so heavily the CPU usage and yet STILL came to the wrong conclusion, that this is Apple's fault.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Its epic fail on WinMO and Windows and Linux.
For the record, you're completely wrong that FLASH works well on anything but Windows PCs.
Did you not notice in those numbers that FLASH doesn't work well on ALL MACS ON ALL BROWSERS ??? And FLASH is the reason for crashes on both POWERPC and INTEL Macs, even brand new Macs, from what I'm reading in other threads here on MacRumors.
So, how again is this Apple's fault that FLASH doesn't work on any recent Apple platform, iPhone, PowerPC, or INTEL?
Because Adobe doesn't care and has written crappy software. It has nothing to do with Apple.
Not much else crashes any of my Macs, so how is this Apple's fault?
Can you imagine what would happen if Apple let the current version of FLASH on the iPhone and peoples' phones started crashing like their Apple Macs are now? It would be on FOX NEWS!
Apple's making the right call here. The ball is in Adobe's court to get it right first on Macs.
Then I'll insist Apple let FLASH on the iPhone, but not a day sooner.
And I will bet dollars to doughnuts that your Android prediction turns out wrong too, FLASH or no FLASH.
If FLASH is an epic fail on both INTEL and POWERPC Macs and with both Safari and Firefox on Macs, how the hell do you think it's going to do on the iPhone?
This is NOT Apple's problem in my opinion. Adobe has just dropped the ball.
If FLASH crashes on most people's Macs, how do you think it will fair on the iPhone, since it's mostly the same browser?
Please people, think before you put your feet in your mouths.
Its epic fail on WinMO and Windows and Linux.
zorinlynx
Mar 25, 02:14 PM
IIRC, it's a feature, not a flaw.
I actually love this feature, because text messages tend to be more important than other notifications, so if I'm busy and I feel a single-vibrate I know not to worry about it and can look later, wheras if it's a double vibrate I'll look a lot sooner.
I actually love this feature, because text messages tend to be more important than other notifications, so if I'm busy and I feel a single-vibrate I know not to worry about it and can look later, wheras if it's a double vibrate I'll look a lot sooner.
KingYaba
Jul 23, 09:42 AM
These white ear budded headphones remind me of the book fahrenheit 451. Soon iPods will now dictate what people read, on top of what people listen to (music, podcasts, audiobook) and what people watch (movies, tv shows).
iPods will rule the world. :eek:
iPods will rule the world. :eek:
mfr1340
Mar 28, 01:34 PM
I can't believe they are going to start to sell the ipad2 at radio shack, and they haven't improved on my ship date of 4 to 5 weeks. You would think that they would take care of the ones that allready paid full price for theirs. I guess they need the interest that they are getting by holding on to everyones pre-paid orders through their own apple store.:(:(
Shua
Jan 11, 04:23 PM
Spoilsport, I thought we we're having a 'crazy' prediction discussion
Like the intoduction of an iToaster (like the one off Red Dwarf) maybe an iOxygen device so we don't have to worry about pollution
TALKIE TOASTER FTW!
Get the smeg out!
Like the intoduction of an iToaster (like the one off Red Dwarf) maybe an iOxygen device so we don't have to worry about pollution
TALKIE TOASTER FTW!
Get the smeg out!
Freak C
Nov 4, 01:41 AM
So you think that Adobe is bad because CS3 does not run on Snow Leopard?
Think again.
CS3 has been published a long while ago, and Snow Leopard is brand new. A lot of system libraries have changed. I do not expect Windows 3.1 software to run correctly on Windows 7 either.
Are there any Mac developers out there?
Apple must have caused software vendors to rewrite their software a gazillion times:
- they switched from the 68K to the PowerPC to Intel
- they switched from OS9 to Carbon to Cocoa
- for Snow Leopard, if you want to run as a 64-bit app, you have to switch to the Cocoa libraries, and much of Carbon is deprecated.
Apples next OS will most likely drop Carbon altogether. I have written programs for the Mac for a long time now, and I have spent 75% of my productivity just rewriting my programs over and over again to adopt them to Apple's library changes.
Adobe is big, but I bet that many of their Mac programmers are busy just following Apple as they try to leave software vendors in the dust because they switch system libraries and CPUs at will. Did Microsoft ever do this? Yes, partly - they went from 16 to 32 to 64 bits. But I can still run the Reversi game that came with Windows 1.03 on Windows 7!
And you Java lovers - go to the Sun web site and install Java. Just try. I have not seen complaints that this is impossible.
This is not a technical issue. Every skilled team of programmers can make their software run on another platform. This is a battle of lawyers. Apple does not permit any bytecode execution engine (such as the Java and ActionScript VMs) to run on the iPhone. Period.
Think again.
CS3 has been published a long while ago, and Snow Leopard is brand new. A lot of system libraries have changed. I do not expect Windows 3.1 software to run correctly on Windows 7 either.
Are there any Mac developers out there?
Apple must have caused software vendors to rewrite their software a gazillion times:
- they switched from the 68K to the PowerPC to Intel
- they switched from OS9 to Carbon to Cocoa
- for Snow Leopard, if you want to run as a 64-bit app, you have to switch to the Cocoa libraries, and much of Carbon is deprecated.
Apples next OS will most likely drop Carbon altogether. I have written programs for the Mac for a long time now, and I have spent 75% of my productivity just rewriting my programs over and over again to adopt them to Apple's library changes.
Adobe is big, but I bet that many of their Mac programmers are busy just following Apple as they try to leave software vendors in the dust because they switch system libraries and CPUs at will. Did Microsoft ever do this? Yes, partly - they went from 16 to 32 to 64 bits. But I can still run the Reversi game that came with Windows 1.03 on Windows 7!
And you Java lovers - go to the Sun web site and install Java. Just try. I have not seen complaints that this is impossible.
This is not a technical issue. Every skilled team of programmers can make their software run on another platform. This is a battle of lawyers. Apple does not permit any bytecode execution engine (such as the Java and ActionScript VMs) to run on the iPhone. Period.
toddybody
Apr 14, 10:44 AM
From the report:
Do MR gods work full time for the site? Or do you folks have normal 9-5's elsewhere...just curious :)
Oh, and Im glad Apple's growth is positive (so I cant be accused of non-topical posts) :p
Do MR gods work full time for the site? Or do you folks have normal 9-5's elsewhere...just curious :)
Oh, and Im glad Apple's growth is positive (so I cant be accused of non-topical posts) :p
Warbrain
Nov 8, 09:51 AM
Just goes to show that what Apple says about how much faster stuff is a load of bull. How come the MBP is 39% faster and the MB only 25%. Theyre the same chips at the same speeds arent they?
What im trying to say is the MB should be 39% faster than the previous one right?
:confused:
In actuality, the speed increase is only 10 percent instead of 25-39 percent.
What im trying to say is the MB should be 39% faster than the previous one right?
:confused:
In actuality, the speed increase is only 10 percent instead of 25-39 percent.
Signal-11
Mar 19, 02:27 PM
Especially when iPods first hit the scene, price was a big issue for a lot of customers. Apple products have always been on the pricey side. So perhaps the popularity of the larger capacity iPods was impacted by the pricing structure, which impacted Apple's perception of the demand.
Apple's non Mac consumer electronics are not boutique/luxury goods and haven't been for a long time. They're cheaper than competitor hardware with similar specs. Even Samsung CE, a member of Samsung Group which makes the most expensive components that go into Apple's consumer electronics, can't compete with Apple on price due to Apple's volume and pre-emptive supply chain lockup.
It's getting kindof absurd seeing that hard drives keep getting bigger and cheaper. Would an iPod Touch really be that much thicker if it had 128 GB? And just how thick would (dare I say it) a 500 GB iPod Touch be? For the way I would use the device, I wouldn't mind a little extra thickness and weight.
iPod Classics = HDD based storage. iPod Touches = solid state based storage.
You might not mind the extra thickness and weight of HDD based Touch but you'd definitely mind the slower speed. Flash based 500GB? You would definitely mind the price.
Apple's non Mac consumer electronics are not boutique/luxury goods and haven't been for a long time. They're cheaper than competitor hardware with similar specs. Even Samsung CE, a member of Samsung Group which makes the most expensive components that go into Apple's consumer electronics, can't compete with Apple on price due to Apple's volume and pre-emptive supply chain lockup.
It's getting kindof absurd seeing that hard drives keep getting bigger and cheaper. Would an iPod Touch really be that much thicker if it had 128 GB? And just how thick would (dare I say it) a 500 GB iPod Touch be? For the way I would use the device, I wouldn't mind a little extra thickness and weight.
iPod Classics = HDD based storage. iPod Touches = solid state based storage.
You might not mind the extra thickness and weight of HDD based Touch but you'd definitely mind the slower speed. Flash based 500GB? You would definitely mind the price.
Kenso
Mar 28, 02:38 PM
I'll wait until Ross gets them
Friscohoya
May 5, 11:07 AM
The iPad, no matter how parasitic it is, is still a real computer. :rolleyes:
And wow at all the people "finding problems" with OTA updates. Android has been at it for years on many carriers and with many different data caps in place, rooted phones, phones with custom ROMs, etc.. and yet none of those guys whine about OTA updates. The Apple crowd really needs to get with it. It's optional people, it is for Android, no reason it wouldn't be for iPhone.
Options are good.
How can it be a real computer and you cant even turn it on without syncing it to a real computer? So basically to buy an ipad you have to own another $500 piece of hardware to use an ipad. I love my ipad and it has basically replaced my laptops, but its a shame that you cant manage your music, sync your apps or update your OS without being connected to a real computer.
And wow at all the people "finding problems" with OTA updates. Android has been at it for years on many carriers and with many different data caps in place, rooted phones, phones with custom ROMs, etc.. and yet none of those guys whine about OTA updates. The Apple crowd really needs to get with it. It's optional people, it is for Android, no reason it wouldn't be for iPhone.
Options are good.
How can it be a real computer and you cant even turn it on without syncing it to a real computer? So basically to buy an ipad you have to own another $500 piece of hardware to use an ipad. I love my ipad and it has basically replaced my laptops, but its a shame that you cant manage your music, sync your apps or update your OS without being connected to a real computer.
gameface
Mar 3, 09:46 AM
^where is that skyline from
Boston taken from East Boston sort of near Logan Airport.
Boston taken from East Boston sort of near Logan Airport.
noahtk
Apr 13, 06:09 PM
The great price-point is Apple's strategy to make the App Store more mainstream.
Stella
Sep 6, 08:40 AM
Those prices are a bargin. Nice to see a $CA1K model - even if the graphic card stinks - but not everyone needs a decent graphics card.
Makes the Mac Mini look really expensive, and weak...
Makes the Mac Mini look really expensive, and weak...
Bonte
Oct 15, 04:38 PM
Yes, it would be rare for two people who hardly know each other to go start sticking icky things into icky parts of each other's bodies :rolleyes: :D
If they both need a Zune to share the music i'm sure both have there own earbuds, the girl or boy can use there own earbuds so there's no body fluids being shared and it works between an iPod and a Zune and all the rest. Wifi sharing is useless.
If they both need a Zune to share the music i'm sure both have there own earbuds, the girl or boy can use there own earbuds so there's no body fluids being shared and it works between an iPod and a Zune and all the rest. Wifi sharing is useless.
Machead III
Sep 6, 08:42 AM
So do we keep waiting for updated Macbooks and Macbook Pro's or not? :confused:
Yeah I'm wondering the same.
Every manufacturer and their mother has announced Core 2 Duo portables, and most of them consumer models too. Sheesh, I mean there are Core 2 Duo tablets, if they can do that, Apple can do bloody MacBooks.
Yeah I'm wondering the same.
Every manufacturer and their mother has announced Core 2 Duo portables, and most of them consumer models too. Sheesh, I mean there are Core 2 Duo tablets, if they can do that, Apple can do bloody MacBooks.
URFloorMatt
May 5, 01:40 AM
Only on an Apple forum, when new features are raised as possibilities, does a sizeable minority of posts involve griping about "Why would you want to do that?!" or "What kind of stupid feature is that?"
I don't see what's so hard to accept that some times, in some instances, some people might find use of over-the-air updates. Given that Apple always releases new iOS updates at 1pm during weekdays, when the vast majority of us are at work, I can easily invision scenarios where there's a cool new feature in a point update that everyone wants to give a spin. Why not start the download at work so it's ready to test drive before you leave the office?
And, to all those citing bandwidth constraints as curtailing this behavior: Verizon users have no such constraints.
I don't see what's so hard to accept that some times, in some instances, some people might find use of over-the-air updates. Given that Apple always releases new iOS updates at 1pm during weekdays, when the vast majority of us are at work, I can easily invision scenarios where there's a cool new feature in a point update that everyone wants to give a spin. Why not start the download at work so it's ready to test drive before you leave the office?
And, to all those citing bandwidth constraints as curtailing this behavior: Verizon users have no such constraints.
chairguru22
Oct 26, 05:57 PM
im ruuning at 50ish which is what its always at...
andybno1
Mar 25, 12:43 PM
for the person who asked gestures on the iPad are still available you just need to go into xcode again and re-enable iPad for development
Niciun comentariu:
Trimiteți un comentariu