2011 Nissan Juke
Anonymous Freak
May 3, 04:46 PM
You could just use teleport http://www.abyssoft.com/software/teleport/
Teleport isn't the same. Teleport is a way to CONTROL a second computer, I'm referring to a way to specifically use extra direct-connect monitors.
Not to mention... Why would you want to use the new iMac as a display on an older computer? By the time this iMac is obsolete and ready for re-use as a display, you'll have a newer/faster/better computer to connect it to.
Teleport isn't the same. Teleport is a way to CONTROL a second computer, I'm referring to a way to specifically use extra direct-connect monitors.
Not to mention... Why would you want to use the new iMac as a display on an older computer? By the time this iMac is obsolete and ready for re-use as a display, you'll have a newer/faster/better computer to connect it to.
Rigby
Apr 20, 11:52 AM
Unless I'm missing it in the thread, I didn't see anything on this particular question. Does anyone know if this database on the iPhone is accessible by apps? ie. can you download some app that then scans the database and uploads your information elsewhere behind the scenes?Only if the device is jailbroken. Normally, there is a "sandbox" in place that prevents apps from accessing system files (and files belonging to other apps). Jailbreaking effectively disables this sandbox.
HecubusPro
Sep 14, 09:39 AM
yep i smell both the aperture update,
Aperture update for sure.
Well, considering the box art for Apterture and the invitation to the event on the 24th use virtually the same picture... ya think? ;)
http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/apple_aperture.jpg
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
Aperture update for sure.
Well, considering the box art for Apterture and the invitation to the event on the 24th use virtually the same picture... ya think? ;)
http://www.photographyblog.com/images/products/apple_aperture.jpg
http://guides.macrumors.com/images/1/1b/Photokina.jpg
Mundy
Sep 10, 04:54 PM
Whats wrong with having two dual core processors on one chip? I can understand that the FSB might become a bottleneck but thats not only a issue related to the number of cores/processors is it?
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
The problem is that a double-dual-core solution (like Intel's Kentsfield and Clovertown) still requires that two cores communicate with the other two cores over the FSB. A single, shared FSB is one of the reasons that Intel's first generation of dual-core CPUs could not compete with AMD's 64-bit X2 line.
Intel has its reasons for the way it's doing its first generation of quad-core CPUs, but performance is not one of them. Right now, the primary concern is silicon yields, and the double-dual-core method allows Intel to throw away a bad core without tossing the entire quad-core silicon wafer. A true quad-core CPU would not allow this�i.e. Intel couldn't "cut out" the bad silicon�and therefore the potential for monetary loss is greater.
The truth is that Kentsfield and Clovertown are trial runs. They are stopgap measures in the same way that Yonah was a stopgap on the way to Merom. Once Intel goes to true quad-core CPUs and a 45 nm process, it might be time to worry about the Mac Pro being obsolete. Until then, anything Intel releases will be incremental.
Just my 2 cents.
jayducharme
Mar 29, 11:13 AM
Considering that, when the iPhone was first announced, Jobs stated he would be happy with a 1% share of the market, Apple isn't doing too badly. If MS gets their act together with the Windows phone, I can see it getting a larger share. I guess how big a share depends on how Apple and Google respond with their own innovations.
vitaboy
Aug 24, 04:08 AM
Whoa..
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
Please read my above posts. :-)
The only things I'd like to add is that $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Apple has $10 billion in cash. That money isn't stuffed in Steve Jobs' mattress, it's being invested in short-term investment vehicles that is producing a good return. Even if Apple stuck it in a plain ol' savings account, the $10 billion would be generating around $300 million a year in interest alone, never mind the fact that Apple is adding $3 billion a year to their cash horde.
Secondly, Apple has sold billions of dollars of iPods over the years. It will sell untold billions of dollars more into the future.
For Creative to settle for a mere $100 million when the iPod is virtually guaranteed to generate tens of billions of dollars going forward is sheer lunancy if Creative was really confident about winning.
In fact, the fact that they settled for such a small sum shows that Creative was sweating bullets about losing it all. Apple was the one dictating the terms here.
Creative pays Apple back as it collects additional licensing fees? Sounds like a loan to me.
Creative joins the "Made for iPod" program and pays Apple a percentage of the revenue for iPod-only products? Doesn't sound like the kind of terms a confident victor would be making. Sounds more like a company trying to kick up a new revenue source in light of the fact that Zune is about to eat up its music player business.
The most interesting part is when Zune launches, and how long it will take Creative to sue Microsoft. Apple just turned a 90-lb weakling into a hired assassin!
http://www.macminute.com/2006/08/23/apple-creative/
Guess they realized they couldn't win..
Please read my above posts. :-)
The only things I'd like to add is that $100 million is a drop in the bucket for Apple. Apple has $10 billion in cash. That money isn't stuffed in Steve Jobs' mattress, it's being invested in short-term investment vehicles that is producing a good return. Even if Apple stuck it in a plain ol' savings account, the $10 billion would be generating around $300 million a year in interest alone, never mind the fact that Apple is adding $3 billion a year to their cash horde.
Secondly, Apple has sold billions of dollars of iPods over the years. It will sell untold billions of dollars more into the future.
For Creative to settle for a mere $100 million when the iPod is virtually guaranteed to generate tens of billions of dollars going forward is sheer lunancy if Creative was really confident about winning.
In fact, the fact that they settled for such a small sum shows that Creative was sweating bullets about losing it all. Apple was the one dictating the terms here.
Creative pays Apple back as it collects additional licensing fees? Sounds like a loan to me.
Creative joins the "Made for iPod" program and pays Apple a percentage of the revenue for iPod-only products? Doesn't sound like the kind of terms a confident victor would be making. Sounds more like a company trying to kick up a new revenue source in light of the fact that Zune is about to eat up its music player business.
The most interesting part is when Zune launches, and how long it will take Creative to sue Microsoft. Apple just turned a 90-lb weakling into a hired assassin!
hanpa
Nov 14, 05:49 AM
I've had serious plans for starting to develop software for the iPhone, as an experienced software developer. I've considered buying the latest iMac version for improved performance and a bigger screen than on my 13" MacBook. But I've changed my mind. Why develop for a platform with a defect application approval process? I don't want all that frustration. I'll probably develop for the Android instead. The iPhone is still the best platform but Apple sucks. Period.
theelysium
May 3, 01:05 PM
I think there is an error on the iMac performance page.
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
It shows:
For i5
283912
Then for i7
283913
Shouldn't it show faster performance for the i7?:confused:
I sent an email to someone who works on their website asking them to double check that.:D
Tones2
Apr 22, 09:31 AM
Man, stop it with the cloud service already. :rolleyes: You can't rely on the internet availability for listening to music. It's unreliable. Plus, the streaming will probably be low resolution, drain battery life, eat into data caps, not display lyrics, and generally be a crappy experience. If I wanted to stream, I can do it from my home computer where my music already resides with one of the 100 apps already available and not have to fight through all the bandwidth issues that are probably gonna result from Apple's side. What's the point? I can do this now.
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
Of course what we really need if more friggin' flash memory on our devices! Apple's been stuck on 32 GB on the iPhone for almost 3 years!
Tony
martygras9
Mar 23, 04:16 PM
I actually agree. Pull 'em. It may be censorship, but it's dangerous not to.
Macnoviz
Sep 19, 01:39 PM
During the meanwhilst, any news from Amazon Unbox ?
How well did they do?
Because it's easy to throw numbers at us, but withouth any comparison, it doesn't really say that much (although it's probably very good)
How well did they do?
Because it's easy to throw numbers at us, but withouth any comparison, it doesn't really say that much (although it's probably very good)
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 01:01 PM
In Virginia Tech for instance there was heroics. The professor held his body agains the door and prevented the gunmen from entering and killing more people. The bullets passed through the door and killed the professor but he was a hero Or does he need a gun to be a hero?
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
"Heroics???" Who cares about heroics if you're dead??? This isn't a video game. The obvious best-case situation would have been a student pulling a pistol from his backpack and shooting the shooter in the head after the first couple of murders.
Tell you what - you hold your body against the door, I'll use my gun. :rolleyes:
There would have been no preventing that guy from killing. Sure he might have been killed. But he would have killed before people got their guns out to shoot back. And If there had been more people carrying guns there likely would have been cross fire from incompetent gun toters.
Wow, your logic processor needs calibration. Of course he would have killed some. Would he have killed that many? NO.
And notice I keep saying "armed and trained." You don't buy a handgun at the 7-11 and throw it in your pack. To use your quote, "It doesn't work that way."
It is a fantasy story you concoct. But keep dreaming.
I think the only fantasy here is the one playing out in your head.
Perhaps someday you'll get to be the hero. Lets hope you don't wet yourself in the process.
Based on your commentary, I'm sure I'm far more prepared than you. (And being a "hero" has nothing to do with it.)
BWhaler
Sep 14, 02:37 AM
This product cannot come soon enough.
Every single phone on the market stinks.
My wife buster her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
Every single phone on the market stinks.
My wife buster her phone today, and called me for a recommendation. All she wants as a Mom is a phone with a long battery life and great reception.
She left the Cingular store with a crappy phone with a million features she will never use.
Mr. Gates
Mar 23, 04:44 PM
Looks like I have a new $#!T List
optophobia
Mar 23, 06:27 PM
I'd rather have an app that shows police officers donut runs.
While that app would seem fun to begin with, the THOUSANDS of push messages you receive would become annoying quickly.
While that app would seem fun to begin with, the THOUSANDS of push messages you receive would become annoying quickly.
davelanger
Mar 30, 11:59 AM
So?
The other company has got Apple trade marked. They are both in common use but are protected when used in the computer industry.
http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/general.aspx
Apple isnt using Ms for using the term windows, something apple said way before MS. You also dont see apple using MS for using Word, or OFFICE either.
MS can NEVER be orginial they just steal ideas from apple.
Like I said, they could easily call their app store WinApp Store or even Mobile App Store and it would be fine, but they want to be cute and copy apple and just call it app store.
The other company has got Apple trade marked. They are both in common use but are protected when used in the computer industry.
http://www.apple.com/legal/trademark/appletmlist.html
http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/en/us/intellectualproperty/trademarks/usage/general.aspx
Apple isnt using Ms for using the term windows, something apple said way before MS. You also dont see apple using MS for using Word, or OFFICE either.
MS can NEVER be orginial they just steal ideas from apple.
Like I said, they could easily call their app store WinApp Store or even Mobile App Store and it would be fine, but they want to be cute and copy apple and just call it app store.
LaMerVipere
Sep 5, 07:44 PM
I agree with everyone here who says that when Apple starts their own movie store they should also release a new Application along with it.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
Playing video in iTunes is pretty bad.
Flowbee
Aug 31, 07:26 PM
$14.99 for new movies, but $9.99 for older films supposedly.
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... it's really easy to hook an iPod up to a TV (http://podophile.com/2006/08/16/watch-ipod-videos-on-your-tv/) to play videos. Just one cable. You're not limited to the iPod screen or your computer screen. Download movie>copy to iPod>plug into any TV with composite video and audio jacks (yellow, red, white). It's not DVD quality, but it's pretty good. Apple could certainly make it better while still keeping download times reasonable. I downloaded the second season of Lost - all 24 episodes - from the iTMS in less than 4 hours (I'm not sure how much less because I went out while they were downloading). Anyway, that's around 1,032 minutes of video. I'm guessing Apple could raise the video quality and still keep the d/l time of a 120 minute movie to under an hour, which would be reasonable, IMO.
$10 - $15 movie downloads won't replace Netflix for me, but buying DVDs is now a thing of the past. In fact, I'm in the process of selling my prized DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1). I look forward to downloadable "rentals."
Some movies aren't much longer than hour long TV shows, and people have been downloading those regularly from iTunes. And like I said, there are a lot of people out there already downloading movies from the internet. My guess is there are also a lot of people who would love to have an easy option to get their movies online, but aren't tech savvy enough to know what bit-torrent is, or where to find illegal torrent sites, etc. Those types of people would probably jump all over an easy to access and use movie downlaod site. iTunes already has a great reputation, so consumer comfort is high with Apple in that regard.
I've said it before and I'll say it again... it's really easy to hook an iPod up to a TV (http://podophile.com/2006/08/16/watch-ipod-videos-on-your-tv/) to play videos. Just one cable. You're not limited to the iPod screen or your computer screen. Download movie>copy to iPod>plug into any TV with composite video and audio jacks (yellow, red, white). It's not DVD quality, but it's pretty good. Apple could certainly make it better while still keeping download times reasonable. I downloaded the second season of Lost - all 24 episodes - from the iTMS in less than 4 hours (I'm not sure how much less because I went out while they were downloading). Anyway, that's around 1,032 minutes of video. I'm guessing Apple could raise the video quality and still keep the d/l time of a 120 minute movie to under an hour, which would be reasonable, IMO.
$10 - $15 movie downloads won't replace Netflix for me, but buying DVDs is now a thing of the past. In fact, I'm in the process of selling my prized DVD collection (http://search.ebay.com/_W0QQsassZdz-2000QQhtZ-1). I look forward to downloadable "rentals."
JMP
Apr 30, 06:53 PM
Anger management is a good thing.
Thank you
Thank you
redvettez06
Apr 4, 12:11 PM
I'm as pro gun rights as anyone, but this sounds like a problem for the security guard. Unless that guard's life was in danger, there was no reason to shoot anyone, especially in the head. The placement of that shot was no accident.
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
If there are a lot of facts that you don't know, how do you know that the headshot was no accident?
That being said, I'm sure there are a lot of facts we don't know. Innocent until proven guilty, of course.
If there are a lot of facts that you don't know, how do you know that the headshot was no accident?
nospleen
Sep 10, 08:52 AM
My computers will of course not be slower. But the apps, on the other hand, will become more and more demanding. For example, I cant run Aperture on my MDD (2*1.25/2GB RAM/128MB VRAM). Hell, I cant even run Civ IV on it...lol
I think this fact will be more and more emphasized as the "core-war" replaces the "GHz war".
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
I think this fact will be more and more emphasized as the "core-war" replaces the "GHz war".
Gotcha! That would get old quick, at least the old apps would work. It is kind of cool now that a G3 can still run Tiger. Oh well, can't have everything! :)
monaarts
Apr 4, 12:30 PM
Apple needs to start paying it's employees better... Seriously, it seems like there is a robbery at an Apple Store every other day. Maybe TLC will make a movie about it soon, "The Deadliest Retail Job" HAHA
- Joe
- Joe
*LTD*
Apr 28, 10:22 PM
Did you forget that Microsoft is what got the pc world to where it is today?
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
They did. And boy, does it show! Part of the reason Apple has done so remarkably well for years now.
cube
Apr 14, 12:37 PM
The PC industry is plagued with lowest common denominator, low cost crap.
Apple and Intel are trying to move forward. We should support that.
Thunderbolt is a step backwards.
The MBPs could have DisplayPort 1.2 if it were not for the damned connector merge.
Apple and Intel are trying to move forward. We should support that.
Thunderbolt is a step backwards.
The MBPs could have DisplayPort 1.2 if it were not for the damned connector merge.
0 件のコメント:
コメントを投稿
登録 コメントの投稿 [Atom]
<< ホーム