Detlev
Oct 16, 07:37 PM
I am willing to be Apple's test market :D
Eidorian
Jun 17, 07:56 PM
I mean your attempted joke about a newer version coming out by Christmas was a poor effort, and that further attempts could be better.What joke?
The older models aren't being produced anymore.
The older models aren't being produced anymore.
simsaladimbamba
Apr 7, 07:49 AM
Wirelessly posted (iPhone : Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_6 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8E200 Safari/6533.18.5)
Seriously, who wants to wade thru over 500 posts to find out there isn't one? Not I. There should be a sticky. No iPhone app.
... people?
Often it just helps to look at the last page of such long threads.
Seriously, who wants to wade thru over 500 posts to find out there isn't one? Not I. There should be a sticky. No iPhone app.
... people?
Often it just helps to look at the last page of such long threads.
wizzerandchips
Mar 24, 01:21 PM
Are you people seriously applauding this? What a waste of our tax dollars!! I do contracts with the Navy every single day and I know that the technology that they have will not be benefited by the use of iPad/iPod/iPhone. The military does not offer wi-fi to their staff on base. Everything is hard wired and the conduit is sealed with a tamper proof silicon. The Government is very very particular about their SIPRnet (as they call it). Without wi-fi, what use is the iPad for the military other than to give them a little treat and waste our tax dollars? They already have mobile equipment in the vehicles that is far superior to Apple's products.
I dunno, maybe they wanna hone there skills by playing cod4 on an ipad on a rest day!
I dunno, maybe they wanna hone there skills by playing cod4 on an ipad on a rest day!
more...
PowerFullMac
Jan 15, 03:22 AM
I'll join the iChat :)
I didnt know you had a IRC, MacRumors! I'll add that, too!
Thanks :)
I didnt know you had a IRC, MacRumors! I'll add that, too!
Thanks :)
MacBandit
Sep 15, 12:33 PM
Previously posted by Scem0
. I am definitelynot a 'power user', but I am a hardcore gamer. And when I see a friend with a year old PC playin Warcraft with less jumpiness then my 6 month old powermac, it makes me want to switch. Power does matter to me, and you cant get much power for the amount of money I have when it comes to computers from apple.
I'm sorry about the previous two posts. When they posted they did not display right even after editing and then they wouldn't let me delete them so here is my third try. Copy and paste rather than pressing the quote button.
What PowerMac your profile says you have an iMac 333. Also I would like to see a $1600 PC beat a Dual 867/DDR. It wouldn't have a chance when you started heavy multitasking and other real world tests. Then go ahead an move on to your games and if you had a real graphics card in the 867 it would beat the PC in that to all while it was burning a cd, getting mail, surfing the net, and making an iMovie. The biggest thing though is that even at 1600 most PC's do not include all the standard hardware that you get in a Mac.
. I am definitelynot a 'power user', but I am a hardcore gamer. And when I see a friend with a year old PC playin Warcraft with less jumpiness then my 6 month old powermac, it makes me want to switch. Power does matter to me, and you cant get much power for the amount of money I have when it comes to computers from apple.
I'm sorry about the previous two posts. When they posted they did not display right even after editing and then they wouldn't let me delete them so here is my third try. Copy and paste rather than pressing the quote button.
What PowerMac your profile says you have an iMac 333. Also I would like to see a $1600 PC beat a Dual 867/DDR. It wouldn't have a chance when you started heavy multitasking and other real world tests. Then go ahead an move on to your games and if you had a real graphics card in the 867 it would beat the PC in that to all while it was burning a cd, getting mail, surfing the net, and making an iMovie. The biggest thing though is that even at 1600 most PC's do not include all the standard hardware that you get in a Mac.
more...
MikeTheC
Nov 3, 01:19 AM
I'd like to tackle a few points in the discussion here.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
Dirt-Cheap vs. Reasonable Economy (a.k.a. "The Wal-Martization of America"):
Apple has always had the philosophy that their name needs to mean a superior product. They have tended to shy away from producing bargain-basement products because it tends to take away from the "high-quality" reputation they are otherwise known for and desire to continue cultivating.
At direct odds with this is the pervasive and continually-perpetuated attitude in the U.S. (and elsewhere, perhaps) that the universe revolves exclusively around the mantra of "faster, cheaper, better", with emphasis on the latter two: cheaper and better. What I have noticed in my own 34 years on this planet is a considerable change in attitude, most easily summed up as people in general having their tastes almost "anti-cultured". It isn't "... cheaper, better" for them, but rather "cheaper = better". You can see this at all levels. Businesses, despite their claims to the contrary, tend to prioritize the executives specifically and the company generally making money over any other possible consideration. They try and drive their workforce from well-paid, highly competent full-time people, to part-time, no-medical or retirement-benefits-earning, low-experience, low-paid domestic help; and the second prong of their pincer movement is to outsource the rest.
Or, in short, "let's make a lot of money, but don't spend any in the process."
My goal here is not to get into the lengthy and well-trod discussion of corporate exploitation of the masses; rather it is to show the Wal-Mart effect at all levels.
More and more over the years I find that people have no taste. Steve Jobs accuses Microsoft of having no taste (a point I am not trying to argue against); I think however that he's hit a little low of the mark. The attitude out there seems to be one of total self-focus -- and not merely "me first", but rather "me first, me last, and ******* everybody else". They're the "I don't want to know anything", "all I want to do is get out of having to do anything I can, including not using my brain except for pleasure-seeking tasks," and "For God's sake, I surely don't want to have to spend more than the minimum on a computer" bunch.
Now, clearly, not everyone in the U.S. is like this; obviously, if they were, Apple would have no customers at all. But this is a real and fairly large group. Short of Apple practically giving away their computers, it's hard to imagine them being all that specifically attractive to that demographic. Moreover, those people are not merely non-enthusiasts; they want all of the benefits of having this trendy computer thing, but wish to be encumbered by none of the responsibilities.
To my way of thinking, frankly however large this group of people is, I would encourage Apple to avoid appealing to them whenever and wherever possible. If this means continuing the perception mentioned above of being a computer "for yuppies", then so be it.
Market Share Percentage and it's Perception:
Clearly, there is something to be gained by having the perception that "everyone's doing it". It's part of the reason why smoking, drinking, under-age sex, and drugs are so amazingly popular with us human beings the world over. It's part of the reason (maybe even a significant part) that iPods are so incredibly successful. Now, before someone here puts forth the argument that, "Well, you know, Apple's got a better design, and that's what attracts people to it," -- and that's quite true in it's own right -- let's break things down a bit.
Many animals develop and learn through a process called "patterning", and through imitation. Humans are not psychologically exempt from this; we do it all the time, and particularly so when we're younger. It's the fundamental force behind fashion, fads, and trends. There are definitely positive benefits to this. Kids, as they develop their social skills, learn from others the socially approved ways of behaving and interacting. Please note I did not use the term "correct" nor "right", but merely the "approved" (or, one might call it the "accepted") way. We also learn and learn from such things as casualty (actions have consequences), and other factors too numerous to pursue here.
Anyhow, all of these factors are in operation when it comes to buying technology (which is the boiled-down essence of what we're talking about here). Microsoft has learned this game, and has played it well for many years. Regardless of the "technically, we know it's bulls**t" truth, the reality of it is (and has been) when an unsavvy person walks into a store to buy a computer, and they see ten Windows-running computers on the shelf, and only one or two Mac OS-running computers there, they get the prima-facia notion that most computers are Windows computers, and by extension that statistically most people must be running Windows; therefore they should buy a Windows computer, too. There's a whole other subject here about how the ignorant sales people in electronics stores essentially use the same process to unwittingly deceive themselves into thinking the same thing. This is one of the factors which helped catapult Microsoft into the major, successful company they became. In truth, this specific scenario is a bit more 1994 than but it helps to explain why most people today who own a computer have only known life in a Microsoft world. As enough people attained this status, it became the dominant developmental factor in the world at large, which sort of helped to self-perpetuate the effect.
Let's also not lose sight of the fact that these statistics of percentage of platform used by definition leave out one particular group of people -- those who don't use a computer at all. After all, if you don't own a computer, you can't browse the web, send or receive email, or have your computer platform of choice tabulated in any kind of statistical data sample. One might be tempted to think that such a notion is silly, but it isn't. True, once we get to the point that only a statistically insignificant number of people on this planet don't own a computer (which is still far from the reality of today), counting their numbers won't matter for statistical purposes, it does matter. Why? Well, the statistics as presented make it seem like Macs (or Linux, or anything else) are only used by a subset of people on this planet. Not true! They're only used by a subset of a subset, the latter being the number of people on this planet who have a computer to be counted in such statistics in the first place.
Also, statistics vary depending on a variety of factors. It's also easy to write them off as a business or let them drop "below the radar" by various statistical gathering or reporting agencies; or merely through the informal process on the part of business owners of anecdotal evidence. Here's a perfect example of that very factor.
When the Macintosh came on the scene in 1984, and as it continued through it's early incarnations in the mid 1980s, it entered the fray of lots of non-defacto computer platforms. Or, to put it another way, it "came late to the party". So, you had all these computer dealers who were already trying to sell Apple ][s, TRS-80s, Commodore 64s (and later, C128s), Timex Sinclairs, an assortment of other PCs running proprietary OSs, amongst which were those which ran this thing called MS-DOS, and so forth and so on. Also, people who wound up buying Macs didn't exactly fit the same profile as those who had bought the other computers. You had artists -- literary, graphic, musical, etc. -- buying these things. While they didn't mind being technologically self-sufficent, they were not people who were interested in such things as tearing their computer apart and having a go at it's various electronic innards. Anyhow, they formed their own communities, and for various reasons didn't get a lot of support initially from local dealers and computer software stores. However, Apple did get quite a number of companies to write software or build hardware for their Mac platform. These companies started using mail-order as a significant portion of their sales strategy. Consequently, Mac owners used it as their more-and-more-primary computer-stuff purchasing regimen.
Ultimately, fewer and fewer Mac owners were going locally to buy stuff, due to availability and pricing. What then happened largely was this "perception" on the part of shop owners (and later their suppliers, etc.) that nobody out there used a Mac. As a result of their mis-perception, companies began to simply ignore us Mac users (I was around back then), acting as if we didn't exist; or at the least there weren't enough of us to bother supporting us or even trying to make money from us.
Now, at this point there's no denying there's more Windows boxen out there than Mac boxen, but this is still a valid factor and should not be discounted.
Besides, what number you hear quoted still, as it has for many, many years, depends on what your source is. I've heard numbers within the past month that range from 4.1 percent to 6 percent. Which one is correct? Does anyone even really know?
Since we can run Windows, why run Mac OS? (paranoia of market erosion):
I've been hearing this since before Apple ever disclosed their plans to switch to x86. It was actually one of the topics frequently -- and rather hotly, as I recall -- debated in these forums. However, I think the fear is greatly unjustified, and here's why.
First, let's look at it from an economic standpoint: Buying a Mac to run Windows is hardly the most cost-effective approach.
Second, let's look at it from a socio-economic standpoint: People don't buy a Mac to run Windows so much as they buy it to either try something different, or to escape Windows and the onslaught of problems that, in more recent years, it has brought to them.
Third, and while this really applies more to tech-savvy people: Windows represents a security and stability liability which most other operating systems do not.
In other words, by and large, people out there who are switching to a Mac are doing more than merely switching hardware: they're switching OS platforms. The fact that they can run Windows on a Mac is only slightly more of interest to them than is running an x86-based distro of GNU/Linux.
Bottom Line: Apple will appeal to and convert those that they can, and those are the hearts and minds which are the most vital and important anyhow. Let's not forget the relative merits of dummy-dropping. Sometimes, Darwin's theories of Evolution are more satisfyingly applied sociologically than biologically.
hampy
Nov 11, 09:28 AM
Wow, the Japanese Justin looks about a thousand years old. Would you wear that hoodie if you were past 30? I think the actor didn't show up and they had to get the director to be in it. I can't wait for the Gisele one.
more...
peharri
Aug 15, 11:04 AM
I don't think the Apple ads are elitist or snobish, however I do think the HP ads are very cool. By showing what the computer can do in a slick, sci-fiction way, the ads sell the HP computer in a way that the Mac vs. PC ads don't
If Apple's seeing increasing market-share it because they're finally trying to sell the computer and it's this ad presence that is working. The commercials' content doesn't really work, but only die-hard geeks can really get fired up for these commercials.
For Joe Sixpack, the commercials remind him that Mac exist, they're cool and they do neat stuff. And that's the good part.
The bad part is some people think they're being insulted, and some of those people will matter when it's time to buy a computer.
Apple should've gone the HP way, show how cool the computer is and stop mentioning the PC at all.
However, during WWDC, take a shovel to Microsoft is so inclined, that's a time to stir the troops into a fury.
Hear hear!
Excellent examples of good advertising. Nothing about the HP ads insulted the target audience, stereotyped, or posted stuff the viewers knew was false (therefore ensuring distrust of the maker.)
There's so much that's good about the Mac, and the current ads hide those positive traits in favour of defining the Mac in terms of the PC and generating hostility at the same time.
I know a lot of PC users. I know geeks and non-geeks alike. I can't say I've met anyone who thought better of the Mac after watching the "I'm a Mac" ads, and I've met several that thought worse of it. And geeks are telling their families and friends, at the moment, that the ads are misleading, and Apple's reputation is suffering as a result.
If Apple's seeing increasing market-share it because they're finally trying to sell the computer and it's this ad presence that is working. The commercials' content doesn't really work, but only die-hard geeks can really get fired up for these commercials.
For Joe Sixpack, the commercials remind him that Mac exist, they're cool and they do neat stuff. And that's the good part.
The bad part is some people think they're being insulted, and some of those people will matter when it's time to buy a computer.
Apple should've gone the HP way, show how cool the computer is and stop mentioning the PC at all.
However, during WWDC, take a shovel to Microsoft is so inclined, that's a time to stir the troops into a fury.
Hear hear!
Excellent examples of good advertising. Nothing about the HP ads insulted the target audience, stereotyped, or posted stuff the viewers knew was false (therefore ensuring distrust of the maker.)
There's so much that's good about the Mac, and the current ads hide those positive traits in favour of defining the Mac in terms of the PC and generating hostility at the same time.
I know a lot of PC users. I know geeks and non-geeks alike. I can't say I've met anyone who thought better of the Mac after watching the "I'm a Mac" ads, and I've met several that thought worse of it. And geeks are telling their families and friends, at the moment, that the ads are misleading, and Apple's reputation is suffering as a result.
100Teraflops
Mar 22, 03:43 AM
Great thread for all of us green thumbs out there! Of all the specialized forums I have belonged to, none of the folks are as helpful as the photographers. IMHO
For me, photography is a passion for the moment. Maybe one captures a piece of time whether it is for a second or a century. Sometimes I know what I want to capture, but other times I just take pictures in the spur of the moment. An example: lets say you are walking with or without you significant other and it is during the winter. You approach a house with a snowman in the front yard and you think, wow that snowman is cool and it brings back memories, so I had better take a photo to recapture an image from the past. Although, one can look to the future too! This is the beauty of photography! There are no rules, limits, or boundaries, hence zero gravity! :)
For me, photography is a passion for the moment. Maybe one captures a piece of time whether it is for a second or a century. Sometimes I know what I want to capture, but other times I just take pictures in the spur of the moment. An example: lets say you are walking with or without you significant other and it is during the winter. You approach a house with a snowman in the front yard and you think, wow that snowman is cool and it brings back memories, so I had better take a photo to recapture an image from the past. Although, one can look to the future too! This is the beauty of photography! There are no rules, limits, or boundaries, hence zero gravity! :)
more...
GekkePrutser
Apr 26, 06:52 AM
You'd rather USB 3 than Thunderbolt? Why would you want a slower IO rather than a freaking awesome super duper fast IO? Not sure why everyone wants USB 3 rather than Thunderbolt- hype? And don't give me it's gonna be the next FW BS.
Probably because you can actually buy devices with USB 3.0, and at a reasonable price.
I think Thunderbolt is a great idea, and it would be super on the MacBook Air (personally I'd love to see a Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter), which is why I named it in the above list, but USB 3.0 is much more widespread and so the peripherals are cheaper.
Compare it to FireWire 800 devices: It would have been great to have an external drive with that connection but I never bought one because in the end it was too much of a price difference. It's a lot easier to put up with USB 2 speeds if it costs 40% less than FW800.
I hope Apple and intel will push Thunderbolt agressively and won't let it become a niche port like the way FW800 ended up. So yes, I do think there is a high risk of it becoming the next firewire.
Personally I'd prefer both but I don't see it happening in the next MBA, not until intel integrates it in their chipset.
Probably because you can actually buy devices with USB 3.0, and at a reasonable price.
I think Thunderbolt is a great idea, and it would be super on the MacBook Air (personally I'd love to see a Thunderbolt Gigabit Ethernet adapter), which is why I named it in the above list, but USB 3.0 is much more widespread and so the peripherals are cheaper.
Compare it to FireWire 800 devices: It would have been great to have an external drive with that connection but I never bought one because in the end it was too much of a price difference. It's a lot easier to put up with USB 2 speeds if it costs 40% less than FW800.
I hope Apple and intel will push Thunderbolt agressively and won't let it become a niche port like the way FW800 ended up. So yes, I do think there is a high risk of it becoming the next firewire.
Personally I'd prefer both but I don't see it happening in the next MBA, not until intel integrates it in their chipset.
dukebound85
Apr 4, 03:59 PM
In CT we are taxed I believe 50 cents on every gallon. The problem is that as gas prices rise people buy less of it and the taxes dry up.
so they drive less as well if they don't buy gas..
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
No. A car that gets 50mpg is likely much lighter than a car that gets 8mpgs... and hence doesn't put near as much wear on the road
so they drive less as well if they don't buy gas..
But these taxes are historically for funding the construction and upkeep of the highways, not to curb gas usage or to spur efficiency.
A car that gets 60 mpg will do just as much 'damage' to a road surface as a car that get 8 mpg....but the 50mpg car will pay much, MUCH less for upkeep of that road than the other in a gas-tax based situation.
No. A car that gets 50mpg is likely much lighter than a car that gets 8mpgs... and hence doesn't put near as much wear on the road
more...
63dot
Mar 12, 02:12 PM
I know of a company that makes....let's say trailers. They are built in Brazil. They ship them to the US in crates. When they get here, they are uncrated, the wheels and tongue are bolted on, and they slap an "Assembled in the USA" sticker on 'em and sling 'em out the door.
I have no idea about trailers. I got this image of a human tongue and a sticker licked by tongue and made to say, "USA".
I have no idea about trailers. I got this image of a human tongue and a sticker licked by tongue and made to say, "USA".
Ghibli
Jan 14, 02:11 AM
There ia another HUGE drawback in the decision to have over-the-air maps: the roaming fees. If I travel in my country downloading a map can be a boring stuff but you can live with it (although I have to admit that I would not rely on hoping to have cell service in the area where I have to go), but if you go outside the country downloading anything can really boost your cell fees. Imagine to plan a trip from Milan to M�nich (a 5 hour one, not so long) where you have to download data from (in sequence): Italy, Switzerland, Lichtenstein and Germany cell networks...I imagine that a single trip like this can boost your bit up to several hundreds of Euros...
REALLY BAD!
Not buying this...
REALLY BAD!
Not buying this...
more...
SAD*FACED*CLOWN
Jun 10, 12:05 PM
what you non AT&T people don't seem to understand is that your carrier has cheap rates because it has less subscribers and less popular devices...if and when iPhone comes to Teen-Mobile or sprint you will see those unlimited data plans disappear and tiered data in it's place
ThaDoggg
Mar 28, 09:49 AM
Looking forward to this event. Will be great to stream some of these conferences after they happen.
more...
ThomasJL
Oct 6, 09:13 PM
Um, and how would apps written to fit the current screen size work on smaller and larger screens?
spillproof
Nov 5, 11:51 PM
I watched a discovery channel show a few years ago where I think Spain was selling phones with a chip in them to act as a bus pass.
I would really like to see something like the OP become main stream. I like the MasterCard� PayPass� idea but you still need to take out a card and deal with your wallet; but if it was as easy as waving a phone and a pin code, I'd love it.
I would really like to see something like the OP become main stream. I like the MasterCard� PayPass� idea but you still need to take out a card and deal with your wallet; but if it was as easy as waving a phone and a pin code, I'd love it.
kwajo.com
Nov 14, 09:15 PM
Are you interested in taking over the project? There is a position available! :D
wow, I don't know what to say, I mean I want to, but I'm sure you hear a lot that I'm very busy until early December when classes end. I might take a look at it tonight though to see if it's more than I can chew (it probably is :p )
wow, I don't know what to say, I mean I want to, but I'm sure you hear a lot that I'm very busy until early December when classes end. I might take a look at it tonight though to see if it's more than I can chew (it probably is :p )
logandzwon
Apr 5, 11:58 AM
I certainly don't consider myself to be "normal" in regards to my computing needs, but the iPad has been a very welcome addition to my electronics landscape.
It excels at casual uses and has all but replaced my laptop for my traveling needs.
That said, there are times when you just need a 'real' machine to get things done.
ya this.
I've been saying since I got the first iPad, what people will use most of the time will be an evolution of the iPad. A standard computer will be needed, but will be much less used. IE; I family of two adults and two teenagers will share one iMac, but each will have an iPad.
It excels at casual uses and has all but replaced my laptop for my traveling needs.
That said, there are times when you just need a 'real' machine to get things done.
ya this.
I've been saying since I got the first iPad, what people will use most of the time will be an evolution of the iPad. A standard computer will be needed, but will be much less used. IE; I family of two adults and two teenagers will share one iMac, but each will have an iPad.
ham_man
Aug 24, 10:37 PM
Things are about to change...
In order to let version 1.0 of this widget really blow your socks of, some changes had to be made on the ExtremeOverclocking side.
The guys are great in adding some extra info i requested. Small bummer: the current version of the widget doesn't work anymore (it has no idea the xml file changed - no AI yet, sry). I'll try to do a quick fix by the end of the week (should be faster, just not in the mood right now :cool: ). 1.0 should be out before the end of the month (september that is ;)).
Sorry about this,
Keep up the fold,
Cheerio,
me
So that explains why my widget broke today. Looking forward to the new changes. Should be fantastic... :)
In order to let version 1.0 of this widget really blow your socks of, some changes had to be made on the ExtremeOverclocking side.
The guys are great in adding some extra info i requested. Small bummer: the current version of the widget doesn't work anymore (it has no idea the xml file changed - no AI yet, sry). I'll try to do a quick fix by the end of the week (should be faster, just not in the mood right now :cool: ). 1.0 should be out before the end of the month (september that is ;)).
Sorry about this,
Keep up the fold,
Cheerio,
me
So that explains why my widget broke today. Looking forward to the new changes. Should be fantastic... :)
rovex
Apr 5, 11:11 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)
Capacitive home button sounds believable as apple has gone away with buttons on the MacBooks trackpad. Apple likes touch, not clicking. Lol
Capacitive home button (and volume) is the way to go. Plastic makes the expensive feeling iPhone feel cheap. and it will just look sexy having the home button flush with the glass.
Another thing which hasn't been wanted as far as I know is the home button to glow in dark as it were. Pretty annoying to press the wrong side when you are in complete darkness.
Capacitive home button sounds believable as apple has gone away with buttons on the MacBooks trackpad. Apple likes touch, not clicking. Lol
Capacitive home button (and volume) is the way to go. Plastic makes the expensive feeling iPhone feel cheap. and it will just look sexy having the home button flush with the glass.
Another thing which hasn't been wanted as far as I know is the home button to glow in dark as it were. Pretty annoying to press the wrong side when you are in complete darkness.
notjustjay
Mar 23, 03:38 PM
AFAIK DLNA 'pushes'. AirPlay is more of a redirect of the stream.
What I mean is that DLNA seems to be always used in the context of "I am here, and my media is over there". For example, I have music or movies stored on a remote server or a NAS, and I want to bring it into the device I'm currently sitting at (a TV, an iPod or iPad, a PS3, another computer).
Whereas AirPlay seems to be the opposite: "My media is here, but I want to play it over there". You use AirPlay to redirect the audio/video output from your iPhone or iPad or computer to a remote A/V device like your stereo receiver or Apple TV.
What I mean is that DLNA seems to be always used in the context of "I am here, and my media is over there". For example, I have music or movies stored on a remote server or a NAS, and I want to bring it into the device I'm currently sitting at (a TV, an iPod or iPad, a PS3, another computer).
Whereas AirPlay seems to be the opposite: "My media is here, but I want to play it over there". You use AirPlay to redirect the audio/video output from your iPhone or iPad or computer to a remote A/V device like your stereo receiver or Apple TV.
MrFirework
Nov 14, 09:38 AM
so then... maybe...
flyPod?
... just a thought.
flyPod?
... just a thought.
Post a Comment