mkrishnan
Aug 7, 04:22 PM
If Apple had had that feature for years and MS would include it into Vista now, you'd call it copying, no !? ;)
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
*shrug* I don't think TM is a copy of System Restore. But I think how much that feature has caught on with Win users is also not unrelated to the presence of TM in Leopard. All's fair in love, war, and operating systems. :)
Dan==
Jul 27, 04:53 PM
Very nice, indeed... (of course, i expect that Apple release something much more beautiful than waht you did :D :p :D)
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
Thanks, and yes, me too. I just hope they do something to fill that headless hole between the mini and pro. And I hope the innards are more accessible than the mini.
ccrandall77
Aug 11, 01:59 PM
As I said before GSM has 81% of the market. UMTS (W-CDMA) enable hand-over back and forth UMTS and GSM. CDMA2000 can not do hand-over between GSM and CDMA2000. (See Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W-CDMA): "The CDMA family of standards (including cdmaOne and CDMA2000) are not compatible with the W-CDMA family of standards that are based on ITU standards.")
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
Hence all networks that has GSM will transfer to UMTS since this decrases their initial investment as they transfer from 2/2.5G to 3G. Changing network standad is expensive, but the GSM/EDGE marketshare has been growing in US and will most likely continue to grow. At the same time CDMA is non-existant in europe.
The conclusion is simple - CDMA2000 is in the long run as dead as betamax.
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
dmx
Jun 8, 10:20 PM
If you are currently not eligible for an upgrade, but eligible for an "Early iPhone Upgrade" (You will be, you always are, again even if you did an upgrade 5 minutes ago.) Now, that $199 iPhone 4 becomes $399. You can trade in your current model towards that $399 price.
How would I be eligible for the early upgrade? The ATT wireless site tells me.. .
iPhone Upgrade
You can take advantage of our no commitment pricing at a participating retail sales location. You may qualify for a full discount on a standard iPhone upgrade on 01/16/2011
Based off of that, I would think I am NOT eligible for early upgrade pricing..
How would I be eligible for the early upgrade? The ATT wireless site tells me.. .
iPhone Upgrade
You can take advantage of our no commitment pricing at a participating retail sales location. You may qualify for a full discount on a standard iPhone upgrade on 01/16/2011
Based off of that, I would think I am NOT eligible for early upgrade pricing..
teme
Jul 20, 09:00 AM
All these rumors are making it so hard to decide when to get a new computer... my desktop and laptop are both about five years old. Though I don't have an urgent need to get a new ones, something new would surely be nice and useful.
At first I was waiting for a portable with Merom, but now I'm interested in portable with Santa Rosa platform and Merom... and that's not available until March 2007. For desktop I was waiting for Conroe, but it all depends how Apple is gonna use that chip. If they release a minitower (which I'm hoping for), I'm not sure would I get it right now or some months later (if Kentsfield is going to be released this year).
At first I was waiting for a portable with Merom, but now I'm interested in portable with Santa Rosa platform and Merom... and that's not available until March 2007. For desktop I was waiting for Conroe, but it all depends how Apple is gonna use that chip. If they release a minitower (which I'm hoping for), I'm not sure would I get it right now or some months later (if Kentsfield is going to be released this year).
ryanw
Aug 25, 09:26 PM
Funny how I just came across this thread, as I'm in the middle of an Apple support nightmare as well (I have one of those MacBooks that just turns itself off for no reason - completely unacceptable). I have been routed through 12 people over 3 calls, with several promises of "expedited resolution"s but no tangible result.
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
I've seen this happen to me personally... the macbook just shuts down on me. I "THINK" I have linked it to the magnetic money clip in my pocket. I THINK when I put the macbook on my lap it thinks I have shut the cover due to the magnetic latch. Is it possible you're putting near or on something magnetic?
Although it's possible (and likely) that the prevalence of the MacBook defects have been overblown, I do know that Apple's support process puts you through a lot of hoops to get any major issue resolved (e.g., replacing a clearly defective product). Each person I've talked to has been courteous, but in the end I still have no faith in their ability to actually solve my problem in a timely manner.
Frustrated Apple User
I've seen this happen to me personally... the macbook just shuts down on me. I "THINK" I have linked it to the magnetic money clip in my pocket. I THINK when I put the macbook on my lap it thinks I have shut the cover due to the magnetic latch. Is it possible you're putting near or on something magnetic?
FleurDuMal
Sep 12, 11:28 AM
A bit pointless given that no software utilises the extra cores yet. But nice to know, I guess.
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
I'm still getting used to having two cores in my laptop!
bdkennedy1
Mar 26, 01:09 PM
I find this extremely hard to believe considering how unfinished the beta was 2 months ago.
Riemann Zeta
Apr 27, 09:42 AM
Whether or not the behavior of this cache was in fact "a bug", I think the update that flushes the cache files when Location Services is disabled will settle the issue.
Zwhaler
Sep 18, 11:17 PM
Can this mean the wait is almost over? Gosh that would be nice.
ZoomZoomZoom
Sep 19, 02:19 AM
What is wrong with you people? Meroms in other brands of laptops haven't, or are only *just* starting to ship, and you people wail that Apple is doomed, when in the worst case scenario, they'll be a few days behind Dell. If they don't ship by next month, then sure, complain, but really, most of those who moan that Apple is "OMG SO OUTDATED MEROM MBPS SHOULD HAVE BEEN RELEASED 2 MONTHS AGO!!!" are out of touch with reality.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
Except that:
(1) Meroms in other brands of laptops have been shipping for nearly 3 weeks. A quick Google shows that some people have been receiving them on their doorstep by the first day of September.
(2) Those of us that buy Macbook Pros are throwing down $2500+ for top-of-the-line laptops. Sub-$1000 laptops have had a better processor than Apple's flagship laptops for nearly a month now. If you can still defend Apple after this, do a reality check on the fanboyism.
DoFoT9
Aug 11, 07:42 PM
I mean, if we don't get to compare GT to NFS because of that, then surely you shouldn't compare GT to Forza for the same reason.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
goes GT allow dragging/drifting ? :p
its kind of like comparing two different beasts imo.
raymondso
Sep 19, 09:18 AM
0710 PDT - no updates yet - keep counting :-(
1:40 to go :p
1:40 to go :p
samh004
Nov 28, 07:14 PM
I was under the assumption that the money paid to Universal was to allow the streaming of music from one device to another. I assumed that was the real reason behind the payment.
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Seeing as Apple does not stream music to random devices, they shouldn't have to pay a royalty.
I don't think I voiced my opinion about this last time it was brought up, but I reckon although the iPod makes enough profit so as not to pass that royalty onto the consumer (in price), I would still feel like I was paying that royalty, were I to buy an iPod.
If I felt like I paid a royalty, and was already downloading songs legally from iTunes anyway, I'd want to download more stuff illegally than I have before, just to make use of that royalty.
That's what I will do if I have to buy an iPod in the future with a pre-paid royalty. You heard me... this tactic will only encourage more piracy. Stupid really !
Rodimus Prime
Apr 27, 02:43 PM
They're not. The proper file is flat. I downloaded and opened the PDF from the White House. Flat in both Illustrator and Photoshop, just one group on one layer... and no security on the PDF. No embedded fonts.
This is a fraud.
could be you 2 are using different version of Illustrator or have different settings on them.
I have only played with Illustrator/ photohop ect but I would not be surprised that it could automatically being doing that when you open the file trying to detected Text and signatures and giving you the ability to remove/move them easily for editing purposes.
Hell I while I was working I scanned in a document and used software to pull of my signature and save it so i could easily attached it to other documents I was emailing out. Mind you some security got embeded in the file when I was putting it on other PDFs.
could be any number of reasons.
This is a fraud.
could be you 2 are using different version of Illustrator or have different settings on them.
I have only played with Illustrator/ photohop ect but I would not be surprised that it could automatically being doing that when you open the file trying to detected Text and signatures and giving you the ability to remove/move them easily for editing purposes.
Hell I while I was working I scanned in a document and used software to pull of my signature and save it so i could easily attached it to other documents I was emailing out. Mind you some security got embeded in the file when I was putting it on other PDFs.
could be any number of reasons.
NoSmokingBandit
Dec 6, 02:50 PM
I'm letting my B-Spec driver earn me some cash. He is so slow..... He is only Lvl3 right now, but i'm really impatient!
I got the Lotus Top Gear race done today. Took me a whole hour. About 40 minutes in i got pissed and turned ABS all the way up and ASM on. It helped so much, but the AI made it difficult to finsh. They'd ram into me and i'd get a dsq. Pissed me off.
If anyone is having trouble, try turning off TCS completely, ABS all the way up, ASM on, and the front brake bias to 10. It makes up for the awful tires they put on it.
I accepted littleman and psychofetus as friends, so if either of you want to trade cars let me know what you are looking for.
I got the Lotus Top Gear race done today. Took me a whole hour. About 40 minutes in i got pissed and turned ABS all the way up and ASM on. It helped so much, but the AI made it difficult to finsh. They'd ram into me and i'd get a dsq. Pissed me off.
If anyone is having trouble, try turning off TCS completely, ABS all the way up, ASM on, and the front brake bias to 10. It makes up for the awful tires they put on it.
I accepted littleman and psychofetus as friends, so if either of you want to trade cars let me know what you are looking for.
ECUpirate44
Apr 11, 11:27 AM
Makes my recent iPhone 4 purchase look like a good decision. Sorry for those who are waiting for the 5 :o
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:32 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
Chundles
Jul 20, 08:14 AM
I wonder what they're going to call them, Quad sounds cool but "Octa or Octo" just sounds a bit silly.
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
MacPro8?
The Mactopus??
Cougarcat
Mar 26, 07:44 PM
It's crap that is no longer needed.
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
It's needed for me.
Look, Rosetta isn't a part of OS X by default. If it is installed, then it is needed by the user, and thus isn't "crap." If the user doesn't need it, it won't be installed. For most users, it will be "cut out." I don't see why having the option there for people who need it stifles progress.
CFreymarc
Apr 6, 03:33 PM
I'd rather buy like a tablet running a modified version of Windows 7 or something similar. Not an Android tablet. Unfortunately I don't think I've seen anything like that released :(
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
What you are talking about are these "tablet netbooks" running on the Intel Atom. You can swing the display so it closes to hide the keyboard while still showing the screen. Models like ASUS Eee PC T101MT-EU17-B and Lenovo Ideapad Tablet are what you are talking about.
IMO these "tablet netbooks" are the biggest sleeper product out there. Cheaper than you typical iPad, runs Windows apps and are quite compatible. I have one myself alongside with my iPad for development and IT issues since this is what most whom I work with use. I'm impressed by both.
bibbz
Jun 14, 06:02 PM
@NJRonbo...
Reservations with a pin attached DO guarantee you a phone on launch day. This is how our DC knows how many to send. Otherwise there would be no point in doing a reservation. Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took. If a store tells you the reservation will not guarantee you a phone, go to a diff RS bc that store doest know what theya re talking about.
:apple: says we cannot call it a "pre-order" and we cannot take money for the iPhone 4 before launch day!
Reservations with a pin attached DO guarantee you a phone on launch day. This is how our DC knows how many to send. Otherwise there would be no point in doing a reservation. Basically if a store takes 20 reservations, they will get 20 phones plus a few extra based on how many reservations they took. If a store tells you the reservation will not guarantee you a phone, go to a diff RS bc that store doest know what theya re talking about.
:apple: says we cannot call it a "pre-order" and we cannot take money for the iPhone 4 before launch day!
troller
Apr 19, 03:10 PM
and the even bigger joke ist...all the apple stuff is produced for a small budget in china and sold like Karl Lagerfeld himself produced every little piece. Sorry but that's a shame!
ไม่มีความคิดเห็น:
แสดงความคิดเห็น