CharBroiled20s
Jun 27, 03:43 PM
Should have let the charge stand IMO, they agreed to the terms and conditons:rolleyes:
Well IMO you'd feel differently if your credit card incurred an accidental and irreversible thousand dollar charge. :p
Well IMO you'd feel differently if your credit card incurred an accidental and irreversible thousand dollar charge. :p
jav6454
May 1, 10:14 PM
Mission Accomplished now?
bembol
Sep 16, 09:06 PM
Picked up...
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/LouDiamonds/MagicTrackPadKeyboard.jpg
I'm done using the Mouse. I love my new set up with Apple Wireless Keyboard and Magic TrackPad.
I also picked up glee (Season One) on BD. :cool:
http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c251/LouDiamonds/MagicTrackPadKeyboard.jpg
I'm done using the Mouse. I love my new set up with Apple Wireless Keyboard and Magic TrackPad.
I also picked up glee (Season One) on BD. :cool:
Yellowstone2012
Apr 22, 05:48 PM
There is no way it could be that thin.
iPad 2 is thinner than the iPhone 4...
Uhh no. Rounded off edges are a big no-no.
iPad 2 has rounded off edges.
iPad 2 is thinner than the iPhone 4...
Uhh no. Rounded off edges are a big no-no.
iPad 2 has rounded off edges.
more...
Otaillon
Feb 1, 03:05 PM
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_rg1X59WR1ys/TUP70iMavfI/AAAAAAAAGy4/3MZIWOGG8Lk/s640/Black-Ops-First-Strike-Zombie-Ascension-Poster-570x693%20copy.jpg
George Knighton
Apr 15, 08:23 AM
3rd party apps crash, all of the them :mad: The standard Apple apps still work.
Terrible update. :mad:
That's strange. Not having the first problem here.
Terrible update. :mad:
That's strange. Not having the first problem here.
more...
Thunder82
Oct 1, 04:37 PM
Blame Verizon then. Apple approached Verizon first, and Verizon was unwilling to allow Apple to have full control over the OS, the design of the iPhone .
Don't believe everything you read on the web, this is 100% not true. If Apple was in the business of limiting devices sales to the US market, Verizon would have been a great option. Fortunately, or unfortunately, (depending on how you look at it) GSM is essentially the global standard for 2G, so AT&T or T-mobile would have been the only possible carriers for the iPhone
Don't believe everything you read on the web, this is 100% not true. If Apple was in the business of limiting devices sales to the US market, Verizon would have been a great option. Fortunately, or unfortunately, (depending on how you look at it) GSM is essentially the global standard for 2G, so AT&T or T-mobile would have been the only possible carriers for the iPhone
philgilder
Mar 31, 10:28 AM
it looked way better in the last version of lion.
that is seriously ugly, although it works on the ipad.
that is seriously ugly, although it works on the ipad.
more...
SurfSpirit
Mar 31, 10:39 AM
Mac OS and iOS is different things, it seems Apple is loosing that idea, where's the unification OS? Can you imagine how ugly and mess it's going to work with apps each one with different looks and feels, at least we wll get fullscreen single apps, or maybe not, well, more and more Ubuntu seems a better OS
lilo777
Apr 22, 01:48 PM
That's typical Apple. Intel chipset does not support USB 3.0? No USB 3.0 for Apple fans! NVIDIA GPUs do not work with SandyBridge? Stick with outdated C2D CPUs for years. What's more important - CPU/chip or case? In case of Apple, the case always wins. Apple is all about image. Once designed, the case should stay unchanged for many years. Apple will wait until somebody designs a "suitable" chip. Is not it kind of backward? Then we hear excuses from Apple fans why Apple could not use separate USB 3.0 controller. This would require redesign of the motherboard - Wow! Think of it - redesigning a motherboard! Some companies redesign tens of motherboards every year but Apple? No way. Now iPhone users will be stuck with outdated technology for a year or two and they will be feeding us all kinds of excuses why LTE can not be used in iPhone. Just ridiculous.
more...
mikeschmeee
Apr 12, 07:41 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5027/5614415395_b4488929f1.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mikeschmeee/5614415395/)
kirk26
May 4, 09:18 AM
We pretty much knew this already.
more...
Yujenisis
Apr 22, 07:50 AM
Does anyone remember the 'look and feel' case Apple had against the eMachines eOne (http://news.cnet.com/Apple-sues-eMachines-for-iMac-look-alike/2100-1040_3-230054.html)?
http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/3057/eoneversusimac.jpg
Having not read the briefs on either side, I can't really offer a knee jerk reaction in either direction. I do find myself both frustrated with the state of intellectual-copyright law and also with the general stagnation in the industry that leads so many to borrow from other companies (mainly Apple). With the exception of Apple we have seen very little disruptive innovation in the last ten years.
My immediate thoughts is that this goes beyond what can be captured in side-by-side photographs. The iPhone is a wildly desirable device and as such is attractive equally to competitors. The issue becomes that rather than differentiate, overwhelmingly, we are seeing companies synthesize and replicate aspects of the iPhone to gain traction. There are deep 'look and feel' issues at play here and over time there is an extent to which it has become a 'cat and mouse' game.
In the end, just like every other one of these cases, it will end in a settlement and both sides will negotiate the most favorable outcome. That whole Creative-Apple row in 2006 ended with Creative becoming one of the first partners in Apple's Made for iPod initiative.
http://img816.imageshack.us/img816/3057/eoneversusimac.jpg
Having not read the briefs on either side, I can't really offer a knee jerk reaction in either direction. I do find myself both frustrated with the state of intellectual-copyright law and also with the general stagnation in the industry that leads so many to borrow from other companies (mainly Apple). With the exception of Apple we have seen very little disruptive innovation in the last ten years.
My immediate thoughts is that this goes beyond what can be captured in side-by-side photographs. The iPhone is a wildly desirable device and as such is attractive equally to competitors. The issue becomes that rather than differentiate, overwhelmingly, we are seeing companies synthesize and replicate aspects of the iPhone to gain traction. There are deep 'look and feel' issues at play here and over time there is an extent to which it has become a 'cat and mouse' game.
In the end, just like every other one of these cases, it will end in a settlement and both sides will negotiate the most favorable outcome. That whole Creative-Apple row in 2006 ended with Creative becoming one of the first partners in Apple's Made for iPod initiative.
niuniu
Jun 6, 03:59 AM
That's what mommy gets for letting the Cheerios run out
more...
MacDawg
Mar 8, 08:43 AM
Hmmm... Really. That would be interesting but he doesn't have the same feel as a Charlie Sheen IMHO. That might be interesting thou.
Who does? ;)
Who does? ;)
Rodimus Prime
Apr 22, 08:11 PM
Redesign that quick? But than again, a delay till September might be the reason. Who know, sure looks bad ass though.
well lets consider the long list of bad press and problems in the iPhone 4 design. For example the your holding it wrong and piss poor lay out of the antenna. Glass back breaking all the time. I think they wanted to get off that before it got really out of hand. Might as well end it while they have the chance. Also could be the hardware update was going to be well pretty limited so they make the outside chance so people jump to buy a new one. They know Apple fanboys like to show off they have the lastest and greatest so they make it impossible for them to make it look like the could at a glance (for example 3G and 3GS. Unless you saw the back you could never tell)
There is no way it could be that thin.
It could be. The curved edges give it an optical illusion to look thinner than it really is. It is a cheating trick
I hope it's not drastically thinner and lighter. The 4 at the minute is just right, nice to hold feels right.
Maybe It's just my man handling sausage fingers but I wouldn't like to see it similar to the iPod touch.
Yeah there is a limit before you become too small. At a certain point you just can not make it any thinner and lighter and still have it conformable to use.
The iPhone 4 had just the right thickness. Tapering everything to a weak point is bad engineering.
And when has Apple followed good engineering design. They rather look pretty than listen to their engineers and tell them to deal with it. I believe their are multiple reports of Apple own engineers speaking out saying they told them that the design of the iPhone 4 Antenna was bad idea but instead they were told to deal with it and do it. Nothing the engineers could do about it. Apple choose to make their phones look pretty instead of function. Apple is a Form over function company.
Looks top-heavy and tough to hold. Not going to happen.
Top heavy is not really a big issue with something that small and light.
well lets consider the long list of bad press and problems in the iPhone 4 design. For example the your holding it wrong and piss poor lay out of the antenna. Glass back breaking all the time. I think they wanted to get off that before it got really out of hand. Might as well end it while they have the chance. Also could be the hardware update was going to be well pretty limited so they make the outside chance so people jump to buy a new one. They know Apple fanboys like to show off they have the lastest and greatest so they make it impossible for them to make it look like the could at a glance (for example 3G and 3GS. Unless you saw the back you could never tell)
There is no way it could be that thin.
It could be. The curved edges give it an optical illusion to look thinner than it really is. It is a cheating trick
I hope it's not drastically thinner and lighter. The 4 at the minute is just right, nice to hold feels right.
Maybe It's just my man handling sausage fingers but I wouldn't like to see it similar to the iPod touch.
Yeah there is a limit before you become too small. At a certain point you just can not make it any thinner and lighter and still have it conformable to use.
The iPhone 4 had just the right thickness. Tapering everything to a weak point is bad engineering.
And when has Apple followed good engineering design. They rather look pretty than listen to their engineers and tell them to deal with it. I believe their are multiple reports of Apple own engineers speaking out saying they told them that the design of the iPhone 4 Antenna was bad idea but instead they were told to deal with it and do it. Nothing the engineers could do about it. Apple choose to make their phones look pretty instead of function. Apple is a Form over function company.
Looks top-heavy and tough to hold. Not going to happen.
Top heavy is not really a big issue with something that small and light.
more...
dgree03
Apr 28, 12:36 PM
One must assume the carrier would prefer to sell an iPhone, where they don't have to make up the cost of a "free" Android phone over time. Carriers thus would want to sink more advertising dollars and apply more sales pressure for the more profitable iPhone.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
Very true, I am sure Telcos would rather sell you a $199 device AND still lock you into a contract(which is how is happens on high end Android and Iphones.)
Also I think carriers do bogo because they can push THEIR proprietary software that they bloat android devices with and make money that way. They cannot bloat iphone because apple doesnt roll like that. If you notice, T-mobile(who usually sells all the "pure" android devices) never do bogo for them. They will, however do a BOGO for a low end android phone with their apps on it.
Again, let's get the iPhone on Sprint and T-Mobile and see how it all plays out.
Very true, I am sure Telcos would rather sell you a $199 device AND still lock you into a contract(which is how is happens on high end Android and Iphones.)
Also I think carriers do bogo because they can push THEIR proprietary software that they bloat android devices with and make money that way. They cannot bloat iphone because apple doesnt roll like that. If you notice, T-mobile(who usually sells all the "pure" android devices) never do bogo for them. They will, however do a BOGO for a low end android phone with their apps on it.
Cloudane
Jan 25, 06:39 PM
Not a stock expert, but I do know the tech industry on the whole is suffering a bit of a slump at the moment. Redundancy cometh where I work.
Evangelion
Jul 25, 11:50 AM
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
Maybe it's a re-design of the PM. Hell, I have talked of such a system on these forums before, and in that case I talked it as a cheap version of MacPro.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
There are others who want such a system besides gamers. Or are you saying that only gamers buy PowerMacs?
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs?
No, what makes you think that? Apple currently has two lines of laptops, one for coneumers, one for professionals. Apple has three desktop-lines available: two for consumers, one for professionals. Would having a second pro-model really mean that there is "huge selection of models"?
Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result.
Go check history. Back in the nineties, Apple offered zillion different models, with very little differentiation between them (I believe there were some differences in the software, but that's it). In this case there would still be relatively few models available, and each of them would be substantially different from each other. Mac Mini and iMac are substantially different from each other. And MacPro and MacPro Mini would also be significantly different. If Apple wants to expand it's market-share, they will need more models than the current ones.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Maybe they don't sell, because Apple hasn't had any?
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Coming up maybe?
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Apple does sell lots of systems. Does that mean that things and products are perfect and they couldn't do anything better? No it does not. Apple has expanded their product-line in the past (Mac Mini for example), why not do it this time?
But only SOME of you.
And iMac is only ideal for some of you. So what's your point?
Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower?
Maybe they are. Before Apple released the Mini, people were asking "Why doesn't Apple release an inexpensive Mac?". And people like you were saying "Apple is doing well, they know what they are doing, there is no need for cheap Mac".
As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Of course, and two Mac Mini's is more than enough (note: I talked of desk real-estate, not the volume). On the PC-side there are small cases (from Shuttle for example) that are quite small, but they still accept standard components.
MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Maybe, but it would propably be quite expensive. Currently there is a hole in Apple's product-lineup. Some people want a computer in the $1000+-range. What does Apple have to offer there? The iMac. But there are people who don't want an all-in-one.
What about companies? My employer uses lots of desktops, and Apple simply does not have a system that would be suitable. We want a desktop that could be expanded and fixed onsite by the IT-staff if needed. So we have three choices: iMac, Mac Mini and PowerMac. iMac is not expandable and it's hard to service. Mac Mini is not expandable either. PowerMac is, but it's WAY too expensive, and too big. And I bet my employer is not alone here.
Plymouthbreezer
May 2, 12:15 AM
Anyone outside the US — especially the east coast... Boston, NYC, Washington — will feel different than we do. 9/11 hit us hard. I'm not saying other folks weren't (and aren't) affected, but for me, it's not political, it's not about any election or foreign policy: it's what happen to us. United 175 and American 11 flew over my city, my head, and those on board would be dead just minutes later. We lived it first hand, we saw the destruction and cried and prayed and live with reminders every day. We can't just "move on" or "forget." I was 11, but I remember and relive it as vividly as yesterday.
There's a sense of satisfaction that could only come with this news: a sense of achievement and resilience, of resolve and determination. It's not the end of the war, it's not the end of terrorism, and we all know that. It is however, the end of a trying decade that defined many aspects of many peoples lives.
There's a sense of satisfaction that could only come with this news: a sense of achievement and resilience, of resolve and determination. It's not the end of the war, it's not the end of terrorism, and we all know that. It is however, the end of a trying decade that defined many aspects of many peoples lives.
QCassidy352
Dec 1, 02:09 PM
I for one, welcome our new Adware overloards.
You don't have a sign behind you that says "Hail Adware," do you? ;) :D
You don't have a sign behind you that says "Hail Adware," do you? ;) :D
dsensi
Apr 27, 06:14 PM
Seriously, why not an Imac with touch-screen right now? Will we need to wait for the next iMac update to see this technology implemented?
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
Apple is surely working on it:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/7961480/Apple-files-iMac-touch-patent.html
And, besides that, OS X Lion will be 100% focused on touch technology... and we�re not talking about an Ipad OS...
LagunaSol
Apr 28, 06:19 PM
*long list of forgettable Android dreck with a few good models tossed in the mix*
Thats all i can think off.
Care to prove how these phones are "more reliable" than the iPhone?
This should be good.
Thats all i can think off.
Care to prove how these phones are "more reliable" than the iPhone?
This should be good.
macUser2007
Apr 22, 07:26 PM
3.7"?!
This makes the new iPhone similar to an entry-level Android.
Apple needs to bump this to 4" or 4.1".
This makes the new iPhone similar to an entry-level Android.
Apple needs to bump this to 4" or 4.1".
No comments:
Post a Comment