danielbriggs
Aug 12, 01:43 PM
I wouldn't hold my breath, the Back to School iPod promo has always been a bait to help clear out old inventory. They won't make it available to buy, online or off, until after the promo ends.
As the promo in the UK ends on the 7th October, does that mean I won't see them filter through until then?
It's a shame if it is.
Why do some end in September and others in October?
http://www.apple.com/uk/backtoschool/?cid=WWW-EUUK-BTS20060801-8EBFY
"* Buy a qualifying Mac and an iPod from the online Apple Store or an Apple retail store � purchase must be made between August 1st and October 7th � and receive a mail-in rebate up to �100 (UK) / �160 (Ireland). Terms and Conditions apply. "
I need one so soon!
As the promo in the UK ends on the 7th October, does that mean I won't see them filter through until then?
It's a shame if it is.
Why do some end in September and others in October?
http://www.apple.com/uk/backtoschool/?cid=WWW-EUUK-BTS20060801-8EBFY
"* Buy a qualifying Mac and an iPod from the online Apple Store or an Apple retail store � purchase must be made between August 1st and October 7th � and receive a mail-in rebate up to �100 (UK) / �160 (Ireland). Terms and Conditions apply. "
I need one so soon!
DeaconGraves
May 4, 05:47 PM
0% Operating Systems in the app store, yet somehow you know exactly how their going to change their politicly on both app store sales and general OS sales, while no one else has any hint that they're be any changes at all.
what else can you see in that crystal ball of yours?
Thank you for making my point for me. Last time I checked you were the one making predictions that Lion was going to be handled in the store exactly like every other app.
All I am saying is that there is no proof to point either way at the moment. But coming to a conclusion that Lion is going to be handled like every other app is like concluding that the iPhone SDK, when released, was going to be exactly like "web apps" were previously.
what else can you see in that crystal ball of yours?
Thank you for making my point for me. Last time I checked you were the one making predictions that Lion was going to be handled in the store exactly like every other app.
All I am saying is that there is no proof to point either way at the moment. But coming to a conclusion that Lion is going to be handled like every other app is like concluding that the iPhone SDK, when released, was going to be exactly like "web apps" were previously.
MacRumors
May 7, 10:02 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2010/05/07/mobileme-to-become-a-free-service/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/05/07/110026-mobileme_cloud.jpg
Food Network Challenge,
quot;Food Network Challenge.quot;
Food Network Challenge.
food network challenge
Food Network Challenge Beauty
Irvine : Food Network
Network challenge carnival
be on the Food Network.
the Food Network Challenge
Food Network Challenge!
Food Network#39;s Challenge:
Next Food Network Star.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2010/05/07/110026-mobileme_cloud.jpg
poppe
Aug 3, 10:42 PM
I can live with fast updates!!!! MBP Merom for college after all!!!
sangv
Mar 27, 10:11 AM
If this is true it might not make people happy at all..
and most of it is that the hackers and jailbreakers will have less hassel in it ..
once they find the holes int he iOS 5 then since no more updates will be there it will make happy to people who rely on unlock..
and sad to those people who needs new and extra features..
Techsangv.com (http://www.techsangv.com) || ALl about tech news
and most of it is that the hackers and jailbreakers will have less hassel in it ..
once they find the holes int he iOS 5 then since no more updates will be there it will make happy to people who rely on unlock..
and sad to those people who needs new and extra features..
Techsangv.com (http://www.techsangv.com) || ALl about tech news
yfile
Apr 24, 04:04 AM
Retina 27'' LCD should be 7200x4080 pixels. I think we can't expect it in near future... but i'd love to see it :)
Multimedia
Jul 22, 04:45 PM
i'm still baffled why nobody's answered my question. anyone with a g5 powermac upgrade to an off the shelf video card yet?
i wonder about video card compatibility because i don't see a single driver on nvidia or ati for mac. and the specifications for the 1900 xfx and nvidia 7950 both don't even list mac compatibility. this is really making me think twice about buying from apple.
anyone please help??You have to buy your Mac Video cards from Apple or from ATI which makes some retail models. But none of ATI's retail models are PCIe yet - IE they will not go into Dual Core G5's including the Quad and obviously not in what's next. Can't count on any PC version of anyone's cards working in Macs. Sorry. Sad but true.
I wish someone would tell me I'm wrong on this please. I don't want to be right. :( I want to buy an ATI PCIe Dual DVI card for my Quad, but no such animal exists.
i wonder about video card compatibility because i don't see a single driver on nvidia or ati for mac. and the specifications for the 1900 xfx and nvidia 7950 both don't even list mac compatibility. this is really making me think twice about buying from apple.
anyone please help??You have to buy your Mac Video cards from Apple or from ATI which makes some retail models. But none of ATI's retail models are PCIe yet - IE they will not go into Dual Core G5's including the Quad and obviously not in what's next. Can't count on any PC version of anyone's cards working in Macs. Sorry. Sad but true.
I wish someone would tell me I'm wrong on this please. I don't want to be right. :( I want to buy an ATI PCIe Dual DVI card for my Quad, but no such animal exists.
-aggie-
May 4, 09:00 PM
Can we get an explanation from the gods, since this is the first game in this format?
Xtremehkr
Mar 28, 12:06 PM
I find this highly implausible. There is no way that Apple is going to let the iPhone fall too far behind Android phones. Maybe the design won't change much but the iPhone will certainly be updated.
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4cbdf9decadcbbe57c020000-400-300/the-iphone-is-now-almost-half-of-apples-revenue.jpg
We already know that the iPhone is going to get the A5 chip in the next iteration and have already seen covers designed for the iP5.
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4cbdf9decadcbbe57c020000-400-300/the-iphone-is-now-almost-half-of-apples-revenue.jpg
We already know that the iPhone is going to get the A5 chip in the next iteration and have already seen covers designed for the iP5.
b_scott
Apr 26, 02:55 PM
it's not surprising. There is one iPhone, and there is eleventy billion Android phone versions.
macenforcer
Aug 7, 05:49 PM
Kinda ugly.
Somewhat. I definately will miss the cool clear shade on the G5. I would always run that computer with the aluminum cover off. Looked so nice. It would have been nice if they put XEON on the inside somewhere. Just too plain inside.
I would swear the mac pro is shorter though. Is it just me?
EDIT: No, its the same exact size. Just 2lbs lighter.
Somewhat. I definately will miss the cool clear shade on the G5. I would always run that computer with the aluminum cover off. Looked so nice. It would have been nice if they put XEON on the inside somewhere. Just too plain inside.
I would swear the mac pro is shorter though. Is it just me?
EDIT: No, its the same exact size. Just 2lbs lighter.
aldejesus
Mar 30, 11:13 PM
Is Lion available to iOS developers as well? Or is it solely for those with paid memberships to the "Mac Developer Program"?
Only for paid membership to Mac Developer Program.
Only for paid membership to Mac Developer Program.
Stridder44
Apr 21, 03:57 PM
Awesome. Just awesome. :D Can't wait to see what these things look like.
mcrain
Apr 19, 12:10 PM
Everyone does pay taxes. The statement that 40+% of the population paid no taxes is a lie. They may have paid no Federal Income Taxes, but that does NOT mean they paid no taxes.
Thataboy
Aug 7, 03:30 PM
There are many of you I want to beat with a spiky stick right now. Let's consolidate you into one bullet-point list of whiners:
on Food Network Challenge:
food network challenge disney
Get me on to the Food Network!
Tags: Food Network Challenge
ccroo
Sep 11, 12:21 AM
If there is no new case design (maybe SR will bring one) it might be easy for Apple to just slip Merom's into the MBP line beneath the iPod/streaming/video fanfare. Without a new look, how big a deal is a 10% speedbump and 64 bit chips that IMACS for Chrissakes have already had for a week?
D4F
Apr 20, 07:13 AM
The nice thing this time around is that everyone seems to have such low expectations that Apple can only meet or exceed them :D
Yet they will stay in line for two days to pay premium for it.
Apple has one great thing.... a lot of quarter-brain organisms that pump $$ to their pocket.
Yet they will stay in line for two days to pay premium for it.
Apple has one great thing.... a lot of quarter-brain organisms that pump $$ to their pocket.
WestonHarvey1
Mar 31, 09:33 AM
Sabertooth.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
That sounds more like a retconned name for Macintosh System Software 1.0.
coder12
Mar 29, 04:12 PM
gynecologist?? :D
Ummmmm... haha, possibly? :D
Ummmmm... haha, possibly? :D
ArizonaKid
Jul 23, 12:05 AM
recent AppleInsider story[/url] had indicated that Intel may have plans to move up Merom's formal launch to next Monday, July 23rd, to coincide with the Core 2 Duo Desktop variant ("Conroe") launch.
Monday is the 24th. This is the third post on this. How long does it take for an admin to correct a simple mistake?
Monday is the 24th. This is the third post on this. How long does it take for an admin to correct a simple mistake?
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 10:46 PM
All this talk about Palm needing to modernize their OS, or it is outdated, or needing to re-write is absolutely hilarious.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
On a phone, I want to use its features quickly and easily. When I have to schedule an appointment, I want to enter that appointment as easily as possible. When I want to add something to my to-do list, I want to do it easily and quickly. And first and foremost, I want to be able to look up a contact and dial it as quickly as possible.
A phone is not a personal computer. I couldn't care less about multitasking, rewriting, "modern" OSes (whatever "modern" means). "Modern" features and look is just eye candy and/or toys. A mobile phone is a gadget of convenience, and it should be convenient to use. Even PalmOS 1.0 was convenient. It was just as easy to use its contact and calendar features as any so-called "modern" OS is today.
I would really like to know how "modernizing" the OS on my phone would help me look up contacts, dial contacts, enter to-do list entries, and entering calendar entries any better that I could today.
Again, I repeat: a phone is not a personal computer. There's no point in treating it as such.
The same point could largely be made about cars, but I don't think either of us would want to be driving a Model T or Model A Ford these days, would we?
The term "Modern" as applied to operating systems has little to do with the interface per se. It primarily concerns the underpinnings of the OS and how forward-looking and/or open-ended it is. Older operating systems, if you want to look at it in this way, were very geared to the hardware of their times, and every time you added a new hardware feature or some new kind of technology came out, you wound up making this big patchwork of an OS, in which you had either an out-dated or obsolete "core" around which was stuck, somewhat unglamorously, lots of crap to allow it to do stuff it wasn't really designed for. Then, you wound up having to write patches for the patches, etc., ad infinitum.
Apple tried to go the internal development route, but that didn't work because their departmental infrastructure was eating them from the inside out at the time and basically poisoned all of their new projects. They considered BeOS because it was an incredibly modern OS at the time that was very capable, unbelievably good at multitasking, memory protection, multimedia tasks, etc. However, that company was so shaky that when Apple decided not to go with them, they collapsed. One of the products which was introduced and sold and almost immediately recalled that used a version of BeOS was Sony's eVilla (you just have to love that name -- try pronouncing it out loud to get the full effect).
Ultimately, they went with NeXT's BSD- and Mach-Kernel-based NeXTStep (which after a bunch of time and effort and -- since lots of it is based on Open Source software, there were a healthy amount of community contributions to) and hence we now have Mac OS X.
I'll leave it to actual developers and/or coders here to better explain and refine (and/or correct) what I've said here, should you wish greater detail beyond what I am able to -- and therefore have -- provided above.
The whole point of going with a modern OS implemented for an imbedded market (i.e. "Mac OS X Mobile") is it gives you much more direct (and probably better implemented and/or better-grounded) access to modern technologies. Everything from basic I/O tasks that reside in the Kernel to audio processing to doing H.264 decoding to having access to IPv4 or IPv6, are all examples of things which a modern OS could do a better job of providing and/or backing.
From what I understand, PalmOS is something that was designed to first and foremost give you basic notepad and daily organizer functionality. When they wrote, as you say, PalmOS 1.0, they happened to implement a way for third parties to write software that could run on it. This has been both a benefit and a bane of PalmOS's existence. First off, they now have the same issues of backwards-compatibility and storage space and memory use/abuse that a regular computer OS has. I said it was both a benefit and a bane; but there's actually two parts to the "bane" side. The first I've already mentioned, but the second is the fact that since apps have been written which can do darn near any conceivable task, people keep wanting more and more and more. And this then goes back to the "patchwork" I described earlier in talking about "older" computer OSs.
Then people want multimedia, and color screens, and apps to take advantage of it, and they want Palm to incorporate DSPs so they can play music, and of course that brings along with it all of the extra patching to then allow for the existence of, and permit the use of, an on-board DSP. And now you want WiFi? Well, shoot, now we gotta have IPv4 as well, and support for TCP/IP, none of which was ever a part of the original concept of PalmOS.
And even if you don't want or need any of those features in your own PDA, I'm sorry but that's really just too bad. Go live in a cave if you like, but if you buy a new PDA, guess what: you're gonna get all that stuff.
And at some point, all of this stretches an "older" OS just a bit too far, or it becomes a bit absurd with all the hoops and turns and wiggling that PalmOne's coders have to go through, so then they say, "Aw **** it, let's just re-write the thing."
Apple comes to this without any of *that* sort of legacy. Doubtless there will be no Newton code on this thing anywhere, but what Apple's got is Mac OS X, which means they also have the power (albeit somewhat indirectly) of an Open Source OS -- Linux. And in case you weren't aware, there are already numerous "imbedded" implementations of Linux -- phones, PDAs, game systems, kiosks, etc. -- all of which are data points and collective experience opportunities which ALREADY EXIST that Apple can exploit.
So no, having a "modern" OS is not a bad thing. It's actually a supremely awesome thing. What you're concerned about is having something that is intuitive AND efficient AND appropriate to the world of telephone interfaces for the user interface on the device you'd go and buy yourself.
All I can say, based on past performance, is give Apple a chance.
Now, here's a larger picture thought to ponder...
If Apple goes to market with the iPhone, then this is going to open up (to some extent) the viability of a F/OSS community cell phone. And this is a really good thing as well because it represents a non-commercial, enthusiast entrance into what up until now has been a totally proprietary, locked-down OS-based product world. It has the potential to do to cell phones what Linux has inspired in Mac OS X.
dgaust
Nov 22, 08:50 PM
Living in Australia, we don't have many technological advantages over the US, but the telecommunications strategy is one.
We, in general, do not have locked phones over here, nor crippled ones like your companies currently provide but they are still subsidised by the telecoms.
I currently have an 02 XDA II Mini, and if Apple did release a phone with even basic PDA features, wi-fi and bluetooth I would dump this Microsoft POS immediately.
The hard thing to get right about a PDA with phone, is that it is a PDA with a phone component added in. It doesn't work brilliantly.
I have no doubt that Apple would do a much better job integrating all the different components together for a seamless experience, even with V.1 of the product.
We, in general, do not have locked phones over here, nor crippled ones like your companies currently provide but they are still subsidised by the telecoms.
I currently have an 02 XDA II Mini, and if Apple did release a phone with even basic PDA features, wi-fi and bluetooth I would dump this Microsoft POS immediately.
The hard thing to get right about a PDA with phone, is that it is a PDA with a phone component added in. It doesn't work brilliantly.
I have no doubt that Apple would do a much better job integrating all the different components together for a seamless experience, even with V.1 of the product.
McGiord
Apr 11, 06:24 AM
I already took that into account. Can't you see?
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
48/2(12) is something we should all be able to agree on. anything in parentheses must be evaluated before anything else.
x/y(a+b) becomes x/y(c). That's the P in PEMDAS and it's done. At this point there are only multiply and divide operations left. This is just x/y*c which should be evaluated left to right. Because it is indistinguishable from x*d*c = x*(1/y)*c. I can commute operands to get x*c*(1/y) and rewrite that as xc/y should I want to.
B
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
cciliberto33
Apr 9, 07:13 PM
Well if that is acting as a fraction bar which acts like a grouping symbol (parentheses). So if then 9+3 = 12 12*2 = 24. 48/24 = 2. However, if that was a normal division symbol. then 9+3 = 12. 48/2 = 24 24*12 = 288. So is it a fraction bar or a division symbol yo.
No comments:
Post a Comment