jc1350
Apr 8, 08:33 AM
The CrunchGear story has been updated to state the rumor is "squashed."
cmaier
Apr 19, 06:16 PM
After reading some of the lawsuit, I had to post this..
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
Proof that Samsung ripped off Apple's rip off of Delicious Library?
gugy
Aug 17, 03:56 PM
They have become the Microsoft of the graphics world. See what having lots of money can do to you? Makes you cocky. That's one big reason I don't want Apple to gain much more market share. I want them to have just enough to keep them working hard... not so much to make them fat and lazy and greedy.
Wow, interesting.
I think Adobe is actually pretty good upgrading their software. As for Photoshop, Illustrator and After Effects they seem to do major upgrades every 18 months. I think is very reasonable. Plus is a normal thing when you are on the top to slow down a little, and frankly I don't think they are doing that.
CS3 will be here next year alongside possibly with After Effects, so what's your problem with Adobe?
As for Microsoft, I agreed that they are very slow when it comes to Office suite for Mac.
Wow, interesting.
I think Adobe is actually pretty good upgrading their software. As for Photoshop, Illustrator and After Effects they seem to do major upgrades every 18 months. I think is very reasonable. Plus is a normal thing when you are on the top to slow down a little, and frankly I don't think they are doing that.
CS3 will be here next year alongside possibly with After Effects, so what's your problem with Adobe?
As for Microsoft, I agreed that they are very slow when it comes to Office suite for Mac.
daze
Aug 25, 03:52 PM
Call it what you want but these new MacBooks are crap. Yea there is people who are enjoying theirs without a hitch but look at all the reports of problems. Not once on this forum have we had a flood of problems with a single unit. Apple dropped the ball on this one. Poorly made unit
Not to put momre fuel on to the fire, but I agree. MacBooks are indeed crap. I had three sent to me, and all had a few things wrong with them. I ended up getting a refund... Now, if Apple could only re-do a new case for the MacBook Pro series, I'd get one in a heart beat.
Not to put momre fuel on to the fire, but I agree. MacBooks are indeed crap. I had three sent to me, and all had a few things wrong with them. I ended up getting a refund... Now, if Apple could only re-do a new case for the MacBook Pro series, I'd get one in a heart beat.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
Bill McEnaney
Apr 28, 12:40 PM
And you sure do like to talk in circles. So doubting and not believing the certificate is legitimate are two different things. What in the heck are you talking about?? You birthers are all alike...in the face of being proven wrong, you just try to make stuff up as you go along.
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.
I ask you whether Rockwell Blake would be a competent President of the United States. You reply, "I have no idea. Who's Rockwell Blake?" You don't believe that he would be a competent President of the United States. You don't doubt that he would do that. You haven't formed any opinion about whether he would be a competent one.
xxBURT0Nxx
Apr 7, 09:54 AM
It's not false per say, at least not 100%. Of course, graphics in such systems are usually IGPs, but before the Core iX line of processors, anyone could license and build chipsets for these processors and include a different IGP than Intel did. Intel however refused to license this for the new processors, including the SB line and thus nVidia who was making chipsets could not produce an IGP for the new platform.
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
So yes, essentially Intel told Apple they had to use the 3000 HD as an IGP, where before, Apple was using nVidia's tech. There was even a massive lawsuit about all of this, between Intel and nVidia which ended with nVidia stepping out of the chipset business alltogether.
So the poster you were replying to wasn't 100% wrong at all. It is in fact a testament to Intel's incompetence how all of this was handled, since an old MBA with a 320m outpaces new SB machines that have a much more powerful CPU in graphics performance.
I know about the whole nvidia/intel lawsuit, but to say that intel forced apple to use the IGP is not correct imo. Yes they may have said if you want to use integrated graphics, they must be our integrated graphics on sandy bridge, but obviously apple could still have chosen to use discrete graphics as they did in some of the macbook pros, however seeing them absent on the airs and the 13" mbp shows that apple didn't have enough space to include discrete on top of the new processors. I see what you are saying, but the op said intel made apple use their graphics in a machine that costs this much!?!? not true apple could have easily added amd graphics if they wanted to, however due to cost/design/whatever they use integrated graphics in their smaller laptops!
littleman23408
Dec 2, 03:03 PM
They kind of cant do more detailed damage to standard cars. Premium cars are modeled exactly right their real counterpart. Each body part is completely separate from the rest and can be torn off in a collision. Standard cars are one big mesh that can be dented, but not broken apart. In order to give the same level of damage to a standard car they'd have to update it to a premium model.
I've heard/read chatter that some patches will update some standard cars to premium, but i dont think i've seen anything official yet. Kaz is way too ambitious and had to cut a lot out of the game already. I expect he'll add it in as time goes on, as patches and not paid DLC.
Ah! I didn't realize that. Good to know!
I've heard/read chatter that some patches will update some standard cars to premium, but i dont think i've seen anything official yet. Kaz is way too ambitious and had to cut a lot out of the game already. I expect he'll add it in as time goes on, as patches and not paid DLC.
Ah! I didn't realize that. Good to know!
Iconoclysm
Apr 19, 08:24 PM
WRONG! They weren't invented at Apple's Cupertino HQ, they were invented back in Palo Alto (Xerox PARC).
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
Secondly, your source is a pro-Apple website. Thats a problem right there.
I'll give you a proper source, the NYTimes (http://www.nytimes.com/1989/12/20/business/xerox-vs-apple-standard-dashboard-is-at-issue.html), which wrote an article on Xerox vs Apple back in 1989, untarnished, in its raw form. Your 'source' was cherry picking data.
Here is one excerpt.
Then Apple CEO John Sculley stated:
^^ thats a GLARING admission, by the CEO of Apple, don't you think? Nevertheless, Xerox ended up losing that lawsuit, with some saying that by the time they filed that lawsuit it was too late. The lawsuit wasn't thrown out because they didn't have a strong case against Apple, but because of how the lawsuit was presented as is at the time.
I'm not saying that Apple stole IP from Xerox, but what I am saying is that its quite disappointing to see Apple fanboys trying to distort the past into making it seem as though Apple created the first GUI, when that is CLEARLY not the case. The GUI had its roots in Xerox PARC. That, is a FACT.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/78/Rank_Xerox_8010%2B40_brochure_front.jpg
Actually, you're WRONG!!!! to say he's wrong. You're trying to say that every GUI element was created at Xerox? EVERY one of them? Sorry, but your argument here is akin to something Fox News would air.
bedifferent
Mar 26, 02:54 PM
My bet is on distribution on custom design USB drives, like this one (http://molotalk.com/new-macbook-air-ships-with-custom-printed-software-reinstall-usb-drive/).
Great for now, but Apple wants to keep going green by slowly eliminating DVD/physical media as done with CD's. ISP's are improving bandwidth (slowly), companies are decreasing the size of their software (some like Adobe and Apple breaking Suites for individual applications) so wireless downloading may prevail.
I do not have any installation DVD's aide from the two which came with my 2010 Mac Pro.
1. All my applications are on another hard drive (3rd SATA bay on my 6-Core Pro, but can easily use an external drive).
2. "Time Machine" backs up all the applications
3. Purchased software almost always emails you a receipt with download links in case you need to re-download an application (plus allowed updates)
4. Instead of installing from a DVD, mount the .dmg and install, much faster.
5. I replace applications with their online updates in lieu of adding another DVD
I've got 150+ applications (Mac and Windows) totaling 187 GB. As with a media library, images are shrinking, downloads are faster (if you can download a 1.5+ movie through Netflix or iTunes, you can easily download software, OS X updates are large sizes as well).
In short, DVD's and USB drives for application installations will eventually fade out. If you need to install an OS from scratch, I'm certain Apple will still package the original DVD's with your computer (or in this case a thumb drive). I'm interested in learning what Apple intends to do with that new server farm in N.C. Storage of applications and/or the rumored storing of your media for access anywhere with an iDevice or Mac/OC.
Great for now, but Apple wants to keep going green by slowly eliminating DVD/physical media as done with CD's. ISP's are improving bandwidth (slowly), companies are decreasing the size of their software (some like Adobe and Apple breaking Suites for individual applications) so wireless downloading may prevail.
I do not have any installation DVD's aide from the two which came with my 2010 Mac Pro.
1. All my applications are on another hard drive (3rd SATA bay on my 6-Core Pro, but can easily use an external drive).
2. "Time Machine" backs up all the applications
3. Purchased software almost always emails you a receipt with download links in case you need to re-download an application (plus allowed updates)
4. Instead of installing from a DVD, mount the .dmg and install, much faster.
5. I replace applications with their online updates in lieu of adding another DVD
I've got 150+ applications (Mac and Windows) totaling 187 GB. As with a media library, images are shrinking, downloads are faster (if you can download a 1.5+ movie through Netflix or iTunes, you can easily download software, OS X updates are large sizes as well).
In short, DVD's and USB drives for application installations will eventually fade out. If you need to install an OS from scratch, I'm certain Apple will still package the original DVD's with your computer (or in this case a thumb drive). I'm interested in learning what Apple intends to do with that new server farm in N.C. Storage of applications and/or the rumored storing of your media for access anywhere with an iDevice or Mac/OC.
asdf542
Apr 10, 10:39 PM
This is kind of ironic. My brother works in the video editing field and I was just talking about this only 5 minutes ago. He was lucky enough to "NAB" a ticket (pun fully intended) literally seconds before they sold out, and he'll be there for the presentation. He was telling me about this radical new overhaul for FCP, and I thought it was kind of weird that I hadn't seen any mention of it seeing as how I check Apple rumor blogs almost daily, so I logged onto macrumors and sure enough, it was the first story listed.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!The guy who 'botched' iMovie is the same person that created Final Cut and continues to work on Final Cut. Randy Ubillos has been the head of Apple's video editing suites/applications for as long as I can remember.
Bradley W
Aug 7, 10:27 PM
_
utahnguy
Apr 10, 10:06 PM
This is kind of ironic. My brother works in the video editing field and I was just talking about this only 5 minutes ago. He was lucky enough to "NAB" a ticket (pun fully intended) literally seconds before they sold out, and he'll be there for the presentation. He was telling me about this radical new overhaul for FCP, and I thought it was kind of weird that I hadn't seen any mention of it seeing as how I check Apple rumor blogs almost daily, so I logged onto macrumors and sure enough, it was the first story listed.
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!
I guess there's a lot of drama among the industry about Apple's refusal to release any kind of road map for FCP, not unlike their other products, and apparently a lot of people are starting to jump ship to Adobe's offerings. Everyone is pretty worried about this new overhaul because the guy who botched iMovie is the guy now in charge of FCP. I'm not into video editing, and I've never never used FCP or any product like it, but after hearing about all the drama and excitement surrounding this new overhaul I'm pretty stoked to see what happens.
My brother is a diehard Apple guy, but he, along with a lot of other people apparently, are basically giving Apple this final shot to fix a lot of FCP's limitations, or they're going to fully move over to Adobe's offering. (I can't remember the name of heir FCP equivalent, and I'm too lazy to look it up) Tuesday can't come soon enough!
Thex1138
Apr 19, 07:34 PM
So what's your point? The presence of competition does not harm a competitor? Seems contrary to that whole "competition" word.
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
And your next point is what? A successful company should allow a competitor to use it's technology/patents to compete with it? All at the same time as just taking it from all the competitors that sue Apple on the other companies' patents, right?
How many anti-Apple suing trolls here are also pro-other company suing Apple trolls in other threads?
So you don't like the way IP law works? Vote for someone who will change the legal structure. Until then, corporations are going to work in the environment your legislators and courts created. Hate the game, not the player.
Where did i say I don't like how IP works buddy? Where in my post does it read 'don't like the way IP law works' ? Wipe your tears and try again... Don't make $#!t up.
the rest of your blurb about stuff in your head that I didn't event write isn't worth responding too...
My anecdote premise was pretty straight forward...
Two dudes who come from some place where they don't read tech feeds as often as the rest of us here... they go to a city shop and get sold phones that look like the ones they heard about...iPhones... the premise is not necessarily from the US... from any country on the planet where average Joes go to a tech shop to buy a smartphone... they look and feel and work in very similar ways which causes confusion.
P.S. The whole point of Apple's patent leverage is that they have... patented everything about their devices... form factor, processes, icons and interface... When you read deep into the context and content of Apple's submission which includes these comparisons and that Samsung copied everything and then applying a slight-of-hand to make it look a little different...
:rolleyes:
Like i say.. a bunch of Jawa's selling second hand Android's
fatfish
Aug 7, 09:06 PM
When I first saw this feature I thought great. I do regular back ups, but some of my AW docs keep corrupting (probably something to do with keep duplicating the same old document and modifying rather than starting anew). Time Machine will help me no end. I was also thrilled that windows had nothing like this........ until I read through these posts.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Then it seemed very similar to what was coming in Vista and I felt a bit dissapointed that Apple had made such a point about M$ copying them, but seemed to do the same themselves with Time Machine.
However on closer examination this is not the case and my confidence in Apple's innovative skills is restored.
Firstly, there has always been back up and restore apps, so if you want to take this copying thing to a ridiculous level, of course you can do. Copying in my book is when an app does and looks the same (just like the screenshots in the presentation, safari RSS/IE7 RSS, ical/M$ calender etc). It appears to me Time Machine does much more than anything before it and has it's own unique UI to boot.
Secondly, I would imagine work on Time machine started long before a beta of Vista was released, even if the two utilities were more or less identical it would be coincidence not copying.
Thirdly, it seems quite clear that Vista's restore (whatever it's called) will not do what Time machine will do. Ultimately you may well be able to restore any deleted or modified file in Vista, but it doesn't appear to occur with the same ease or functionality.
If I create a file, modify it and move it several times, rename it, convert it, modify it some more, move it several times and finally delete it, I rather suspect it would be an absolute nightmare to recover in Vista, whereas it seems that Time Machine would have little problem.
I don't see how it is possible in Vista to perform the recovery with either the same simplicity or pizzaz as Time Machine. Perhaps if M$ had not abandoned their intended file system for Vista it might have been possible, but as it is I doubt it.
Finally it does not appear that Vista has the option to restore within a database application (i.e. iphoto, mail, address book), no doubt if you understand how a particular database works, the possibility exists to restore a particular photo, but let's not pretend it will be easy or anywhere near the experience of time machine.
And finally, finally, although I agree the UI may appear a little childish, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes it so easy to use.
Phobophobia
Jul 20, 01:24 PM
More like $13,950
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
:rolleyes:
You're both wrong. The price is infinite because it doesn't exist, and yet there is demand. ;)
inhrntlyunstabl
Apr 27, 10:05 AM
And once again people give Apple a pass for something that is clearly an issue.
You mean to tell me that Apple...this sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
revelated, beware! Apple is closing in on you with their black helicopters and vans to take you prisoner for mind control experiments.
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right on.
LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
You mean to tell me that Apple...this sounds like something Google would do, not Apple.
revelated, beware! Apple is closing in on you with their black helicopters and vans to take you prisoner for mind control experiments.
OR
If they did this on purpose, maybe they wanted to know why so many people complain about AT&T in certain parts of SF. Or maybe they wanted to know how many users access Internet via all the Starbucks in the world? Maybe they wanted to direct ads at you based upon your location.
All of the above are already being done to you via many other avenues, e.g. your frequent buyer cards, ATMs, CCs, etc.
BUT
If you want to believe there is some BIGGER MYSTERIOUS PURPOSE in mind for them to do this, you go right on.
LOOK OUT BEHIND YOU - WAS THAT A BLACK UNMARKED VAN!!!! :D
jaxstate
Aug 11, 02:41 PM
You guys are looking about a $500.00 phone...atleast.
I would add
2011 CALENDAR UK BANK HOLIDAYS
I would add
70355
Aug 7, 03:53 PM
What I like to say to PC fans that rip on Macs is this: Buy a Mac, use it for a year, and come back to me. Then if you still don't like Macs then at least you have supporting evidence, however I doubt that will be the case!
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
That's quite an offer. I'm sure you get a lot of takers.:rolleyes:
Simiber
Apr 25, 01:54 PM
I'm not from the US so if someone with some legal background over there could point out to me how this would work..? Where I'm from you have to have suffered damages in order to sue someone, otherwise a government regulator would just impose a fine on the company or require them to stop what they are doing..? How have these people (who are suing apple) suffered losses as a result of this apparent spying technology..?
Nuvi
Apr 12, 09:27 AM
The SuperMeet stage show aka FCP (or if **** hits the fan then iMovie Pro) preview begins at 7 pm.
Bosunsfate
Aug 8, 12:39 AM
:p
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
As I had said many times before, we were not going to see just upgraded features. Rather the show stoppers are something no one had thought of before.
You guys and Apple are really doing a sweet job....and yea take the rest of the year off.....but then again, I need Leopard shipped, so get that out first. ;)
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:18 PM
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
Willis
Jul 28, 06:11 AM
gnasher729, thanks for taking the time to explain that. I had to read it twice, but I get it.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
*sigh* REMEMBER! Apple said they were changing in June 06 at the last WWDC. Even though Intel are just annoucing now, im sure if apple was waiting, they might of 'bumped' it up a notch.
Ah well, at least we have some good products now. i cant imagine still looking at a powerbook and ibook still for sale.
So it seems that in many ways we're getting the best of the G5 and the best of Intel with the Core 2 Duo chips. As these kinds of things unfold, Apple's decision to switch to Intel chips makes more and more sense. They probably knew where Intel was going. Interesting.
*sigh* REMEMBER! Apple said they were changing in June 06 at the last WWDC. Even though Intel are just annoucing now, im sure if apple was waiting, they might of 'bumped' it up a notch.
Ah well, at least we have some good products now. i cant imagine still looking at a powerbook and ibook still for sale.
