msb3079
Apr 20, 11:11 AM
No. Don't stretch to the bezel, unless the bezel is getting bigger, which is the same bloody thing as making a bigger phone. I don't want the screen at the edge of the phone, and nobody makes this, for good reason. You have to be able to hold onto something on the phone. Really.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
I'm getting so sick of hearing this excuse. NO ONE holds the phone by the TINY little black glass area next to the screen (right and left in portrait orientation)... the hold it by the metal edge, which has nothing to do with how close the edge of the screen is to the edge of the phone.
So tired of this.
IntelliUser
Apr 10, 12:22 PM
And that is, people, why Math sucks.
conradzoo
Aug 3, 12:18 AM
Leopard preview.
Mac pro.
Mac book pro update.
.Mac (pro) update.
iWeb pro.
:rolleyes:
Mac pro.
Mac book pro update.
.Mac (pro) update.
iWeb pro.
:rolleyes:
kaneda
Aug 7, 09:07 PM
I want a new look....but nice specs...
jayducharme
Apr 24, 03:06 PM
Uhmm, how about 640x480? Or less, with the vic 20.
I had an early PC that sported an amazing 16 color resolution at 320x240. When I later upgraded to 256 colors, I was convinced that computers were the ultimate multimedia machine.
I had an early PC that sported an amazing 16 color resolution at 320x240. When I later upgraded to 256 colors, I was convinced that computers were the ultimate multimedia machine.
2 Replies
Apr 26, 02:42 PM
Once again, the seperating into 'smartphone' and 'tablet' markets makes little sense.
As the capabilities of both devices grow we'll soon find that the only difference between the two is screen size.
Do we consider the 13" Macbook to be in a different market than the 15" Macbook Pro? No, they're both laptops.
And thus, everyone will soon wake up and realize that ALL iOS devices should be compared against ALL Android devices. These 'smartphone only' lists may still make sense in but in 2 or 3 years these kind of measurements will be seen as worthless.
Your argument is so inane it's barely worth a reply.
You do realize that not all tablets require a contract, right?
When it comes to laptops, the only thing that's different between a 13" and a 15" will be the screen size. But a tablet and a phone are INHERENTLY different.
My android tablet is wifi only and serves a totally separate function from my iPhone, my windows laptop, my linux server-cluster or my HTPC.
So why should tablets be dumped into the same category as mobile phones? Just because they share a slightly similar form-factor?
What if the next trend in smart phones is a clam-shell form-factor? Or a wearable hud? Or some implantable device?
Similar form factor does not mean their sales figures can, or should be compared.
Apple's to f'n oranges.
You're basically saying ... meh, they're both round and edible so they're the same.
As the capabilities of both devices grow we'll soon find that the only difference between the two is screen size.
Do we consider the 13" Macbook to be in a different market than the 15" Macbook Pro? No, they're both laptops.
And thus, everyone will soon wake up and realize that ALL iOS devices should be compared against ALL Android devices. These 'smartphone only' lists may still make sense in but in 2 or 3 years these kind of measurements will be seen as worthless.
Your argument is so inane it's barely worth a reply.
You do realize that not all tablets require a contract, right?
When it comes to laptops, the only thing that's different between a 13" and a 15" will be the screen size. But a tablet and a phone are INHERENTLY different.
My android tablet is wifi only and serves a totally separate function from my iPhone, my windows laptop, my linux server-cluster or my HTPC.
So why should tablets be dumped into the same category as mobile phones? Just because they share a slightly similar form-factor?
What if the next trend in smart phones is a clam-shell form-factor? Or a wearable hud? Or some implantable device?
Similar form factor does not mean their sales figures can, or should be compared.
Apple's to f'n oranges.
You're basically saying ... meh, they're both round and edible so they're the same.
dethmaShine
May 4, 03:10 PM
The licence is only for one computer.
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
If I want, I can install Mac OS X SL or Leopard on a 1000 machines using the same CD. :)
If you want to install it on a different machine you must uninstall the original copy first.
The Mac App Store says:
"You can install apps on every Mac you use and even download them again."
That implies that if I go on a friend's computer for 5 minutes once a year I could install Lion on it for no charge.
If I want, I can install Mac OS X SL or Leopard on a 1000 machines using the same CD. :)
pkson
Apr 7, 09:55 PM
So you want Apple to be forced by the government to reduce its manufacturing, tell its customers "sorry, no iPad for you" because the competition needs to catch up? How stupid is that?:rolleyes:
Sadly, that's what happens in South Korea.
Which is the reason why the world has to put up with Samsung.
Sadly, that's what happens in South Korea.
Which is the reason why the world has to put up with Samsung.
Eye4Desyn
Mar 27, 08:13 AM
1. Apple has yet to release any official sales numbers on iPad 2 - at least I haven't come across this anywhere (this would be a perfect piece of anecdotal information at the beginning of a media event)
2. Phil Schiller said "white iPhone 4 coming spring 2011" (it's now officially Spring and we still haven't seen the white iPhone and therefore would make a nice 'Easter egg' with immediate availability also mentioned at the beginning of a media event)
3. Apple has typically held iOS media event previews in April (not saying they would never break cycle, just stating the obvious)
IDK, if I were a betting man, I'd say all signs still point to an April media event at which (during the beginning) SJ would announce official iPad sales numbers (for both U.S. and International launch weekends) as well as immediate availability of said white iPhone before proceeding to dive into some of the intricacies of iOS 5. Just my $0.02.
2. Phil Schiller said "white iPhone 4 coming spring 2011" (it's now officially Spring and we still haven't seen the white iPhone and therefore would make a nice 'Easter egg' with immediate availability also mentioned at the beginning of a media event)
3. Apple has typically held iOS media event previews in April (not saying they would never break cycle, just stating the obvious)
IDK, if I were a betting man, I'd say all signs still point to an April media event at which (during the beginning) SJ would announce official iPad sales numbers (for both U.S. and International launch weekends) as well as immediate availability of said white iPhone before proceeding to dive into some of the intricacies of iOS 5. Just my $0.02.
kcroy
Jul 29, 10:19 PM
I will now be picturing Steve Jobs answering that phone during his Keynote in my dreams. :)
Multimedia
Jul 23, 01:48 AM
I don't know, I'm kinda expecting it. As seen in the past, I'm sure they'll drop to ~$1000. Maybe even cheaper once they get some of their R&D back and chip prices start to fall. Eventually I see a sub $800 laptop even. Maybe.I seriously doubt it. It's not part of Apple's style to appeal to the masses by offering something CHEAP. :eek:
"Profits" on those sub $1k notebooks are next to nothing. Apple wouldn't want to make so little per unit. Plus they don't need to do that. You can buy old Macs for under $1k all the time. Since the refurbished 1.83 GHz Combo MacBook is already only $949, what's the problem? :confused:
You think that isn't low enough? You want Apple to be a welfare agency for those who can't afford $949? Because given the slim margins that would be involved in such a product, that is what they would be doing. Plus they would be canibalizing their above $1k sales. Makes no sense to me. :rolleyes:
"Profits" on those sub $1k notebooks are next to nothing. Apple wouldn't want to make so little per unit. Plus they don't need to do that. You can buy old Macs for under $1k all the time. Since the refurbished 1.83 GHz Combo MacBook is already only $949, what's the problem? :confused:
You think that isn't low enough? You want Apple to be a welfare agency for those who can't afford $949? Because given the slim margins that would be involved in such a product, that is what they would be doing. Plus they would be canibalizing their above $1k sales. Makes no sense to me. :rolleyes:
BRLawyer
Nov 25, 12:52 PM
But the funniest thing will be when Apple introduces iPhone and achieves a success similar to that of the iPod...fanboys will come in droves to say that phone X has "FM tuners" or phone Y has "GPS blabla", without understanding that it's not the feature set that makes a winner, but integration AND simplicity...on verra!
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
p.s.: and yep...without carrier agreements, no chance for a good story...most people get new phones WITH subscriptions that reduce such cell phone prices a lot...period.
PhoneI
Mar 27, 09:33 AM
I will gladly wait a few more months if I get some awesome new features (For the love of all that is right, give me a new notification system).
I get far more excited not for the new OS announcements than the new hardware.
I get far more excited not for the new OS announcements than the new hardware.
SLCentral
Aug 2, 06:20 PM
I agree with you that the 30" display is big. I disagree with you about any larger display as being too big. It may be for you but not for others. When I first starting using my 30" display besides my 23" display I thought it was big. Using it with my 17" PowerBook even makes it seem bigger. But the only thing that could hold me back from purchasing a larger display would be the need of purchasing a new computer to be able to use 2 larger screens at the same time. My 17" PowerBook can only use one. My MDD PowerMac can only use one. But that is really a different question.
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Many people seem to have tunnel vision when they use their computers & are or at least think they are happy with one 15" display. Others can see the need & usefulness of a larger display. At least you use a 30". But if Apple would have come out with a 32", 35" or larger display instead would you have purchased it the same as you did your 30" model? Then it would take a 40" or 45" display to be too larger.
With DualLink only able to support 3840 X 2400 & Single Link only able to support up to 1920 X 1200, there will be a natural size limitation until one of the new systems come around. The need probably isn't there yet, but a couple more size and/or reolution increases would change all of that.
How long do you think it will be before someone else says that his 45" display is all the larger anyone would ever need, so why make one larger? Whan I sold computers many thought that the 17" CRT was too larger, why go larger than 15"?
Bill the TaxMan
I completely get what you're saying. After using my 30" for a little over a year on a daily basis, when using any other system, it's VERY tough. And even when I am using my 30", I often crave even more real estate, especially when working with digital photos, but even when I'm just surfing the web.
But, at this point in time (2006), I think a 40"+ screen is just simply too large for the average deskspace. Perhaps there's a place for them in production studios, etc., but even with that market, which is already limited, cost is just too big of a factor. To make a panel @ 40" with a resolution of 3840x2400, or even smaller, would be ASTRONOMICAL. We're talking at least $6K for each display, and the power needed to run that doesn't yet exist. Even Quad-SLI on PC's are having trouble running games at native res. Imagine Motion (since we all know OS X isn't a gaming platform) at 3840x2400? The power just isn't there yet.
Now, I agree, larger screens are the way of the future. But I just don't think that future is here yet.
Then again, $20 says I'm wrong :).
Hype2k2
Mar 26, 09:30 PM
At least, according to TechCrunch, it is.
Why am I not surprised there?
http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/26/ios-5-likely-pushed-to-the-fall-after-a-cloud-unveiling-at-wwdc/
Speculation.
Why am I not surprised there?
http://techcrunch.com/2011/03/26/ios-5-likely-pushed-to-the-fall-after-a-cloud-unveiling-at-wwdc/
Speculation.
mdntcallr
Jul 23, 02:41 PM
Racist. :p
Kidding. I'm think they'll go with a high end black model eventually. Maybe give it a better video card or something to justify another hundred bucks or so. I'm hoping they do the same with the MacBooks. Maybe a new lowend pro, or a high end nonpro with a built-in video card. That would justify a $1500 purchase over a $1000 one to me.
yeah i would love a MBP with:
Black Case
Better Graphics Chip
Blu-ray drive (perhaps? apple is cutting edge in HD this would solidify it)
Kidding. I'm think they'll go with a high end black model eventually. Maybe give it a better video card or something to justify another hundred bucks or so. I'm hoping they do the same with the MacBooks. Maybe a new lowend pro, or a high end nonpro with a built-in video card. That would justify a $1500 purchase over a $1000 one to me.
yeah i would love a MBP with:
Black Case
Better Graphics Chip
Blu-ray drive (perhaps? apple is cutting edge in HD this would solidify it)
MacsRgr8
Sep 15, 06:19 PM
GeekLaw: A) That phrase above shall be banned for a period of at least 2 years, at whence time it shall be deemed cool and retro when used in reference to overdue product announcements. B) The phrase shall only refer to products which have not been refreshed for over 1 year. (Servers excluded).
LOL.
I absolutely love the phrase: "PowerBook G5 next Tuesday".
It will certainly become a classic remark to us MacRumor's folk. Like Cold Fusion, or Time Travel, it will stand for "the unreachable, the unproducable, never to be achieved by mankind". :D
So, let's not ban this phrase, it should be imprinted in a tombstone with golden letters. We know Apple tried... but they couldn't achieve it... now that is something not often heard.
LOL.
I absolutely love the phrase: "PowerBook G5 next Tuesday".
It will certainly become a classic remark to us MacRumor's folk. Like Cold Fusion, or Time Travel, it will stand for "the unreachable, the unproducable, never to be achieved by mankind". :D
So, let's not ban this phrase, it should be imprinted in a tombstone with golden letters. We know Apple tried... but they couldn't achieve it... now that is something not often heard.
Object-X
Nov 22, 10:30 AM
I know that many Blue Tooth features of my Motorola cell phone is disabled by Verizon. Even if Apple would make the best cell phone possible, how many of those great featues do you think the cell phone companies would actually allow the use of.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
To answer your question: yes, I think it will be a success.
First, there are the rumors that the phone will be sold unlocked. If true, then the carriers will have no control over what features a phone has or can use.
Secondly, most of the features we are talking about are Internet related. As long as the phone has the ability to connect to the Internet all of Apple's .Mac services can be reached.
Last, but not least, Apple has a history of innovating around intrenched limitations. One of the reasons Apple has been successful in changing market dynamics with their products is because they change the game.
Keep in mind that this will just be the first phone of many. It is quite possible that some sort of wireless VOIP phone could bypass cell phone networks entirely. I don't think that will happen at the beginning, but it is a future possibility. Perhaps what is behind the Apple Google connection. Remember, I said Apple has a way of changing market dynamics with their technology.
I don't believe Apple would ever allow some other company to dictate to them what features or technology they can use. If cell phone carriers had that kind of control Apple would simply stay out. This more than anything leads me to believe the "unlocked" phone rumors; that would be very consistant with Apple's way of doing business.
Remember simple things like ring tones, photos & such could easilly be transferred from the cell phone to your home computer. But this is not usually allowed. Could this be because the cell phone companies allow these features only to add to their revenue stream, not to give the cell phone user some additional user or usuable feature?
Unless the an Apple cell phone was available from all cell phone service providers & without many of the cell phone features disabled, do you think that it could be a success?
Bill the TaxMan
To answer your question: yes, I think it will be a success.
First, there are the rumors that the phone will be sold unlocked. If true, then the carriers will have no control over what features a phone has or can use.
Secondly, most of the features we are talking about are Internet related. As long as the phone has the ability to connect to the Internet all of Apple's .Mac services can be reached.
Last, but not least, Apple has a history of innovating around intrenched limitations. One of the reasons Apple has been successful in changing market dynamics with their products is because they change the game.
Keep in mind that this will just be the first phone of many. It is quite possible that some sort of wireless VOIP phone could bypass cell phone networks entirely. I don't think that will happen at the beginning, but it is a future possibility. Perhaps what is behind the Apple Google connection. Remember, I said Apple has a way of changing market dynamics with their technology.
I don't believe Apple would ever allow some other company to dictate to them what features or technology they can use. If cell phone carriers had that kind of control Apple would simply stay out. This more than anything leads me to believe the "unlocked" phone rumors; that would be very consistant with Apple's way of doing business.
NATO
Apr 18, 04:43 PM
Then they should sue google for making android so similar to iOS, not Samsung. And im not sure if the "look" of icons on a screen can be patented anyway.
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
That's the thing, stock Android isn't really anything like iOS, it's Samsung's proprietary UI which is added on top which makes it more iOS-like (in the same way that HTC has their own proprietary 'Sense UI' to differentiate their products from the competition)
kavika411
Mar 28, 10:42 AM
As an owner of way-too-many iPhones, Macs and iPods, I welcome the idea of Apple putting the brakes on hardware while it perfects "the cloud" for both users and developers. I can't think of a single, reasonable upgrade that would make me excited about an iPhone 5 in 2011. I'd rather Apple get the data center/cloud going, teach us how it will help us on it's various hardware platforms (hopefully getting rid of traditional synching of iPhone, iPod and iPad), and then come back in 2012 with new hardware.
RebootD
Mar 30, 09:12 PM
I lol'd. No matter what people will complain. When Snow Leopard was released people wanted more UI changes and more features. Now when Lion is released all people want is under the hood improvements. SMH
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
Reach
Sep 16, 01:07 PM
This is where I read about resindependence:
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 10:42 AM
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
Depends. What size display and what is the normal viewing distance for that type of display ? With both those, we can calculate the required PPI and see if something already exists in that size or not.
You might be surprised to find out it's already out there and quite competitively priced in some cases.
Depends. What size display and what is the normal viewing distance for that type of display ? With both those, we can calculate the required PPI and see if something already exists in that size or not.
You might be surprised to find out it's already out there and quite competitively priced in some cases.
Chupa Chupa
May 4, 02:56 PM
I would get a new iMac now if I knew that Lion would run SL pricing at $29. Otherwise I will wait for a preload. But obviously pricing and a release date won't be forthcoming prior to WWDC at the earliest. Guess we will know more in about 5 weeks.
On yesterday's MacBreak Weekly they were talking about this. The consensus was that the d/l version will be ultra cheap similar to SL b/c Apple wants people to migrate quickly. And then there will be a retail box that will sell for more for those who either can't or don't want to d/l. There is a patter of this in iLife, iWork, Aperture, etc., where the d/l version is much less expensive than the retail box.
On yesterday's MacBreak Weekly they were talking about this. The consensus was that the d/l version will be ultra cheap similar to SL b/c Apple wants people to migrate quickly. And then there will be a retail box that will sell for more for those who either can't or don't want to d/l. There is a patter of this in iLife, iWork, Aperture, etc., where the d/l version is much less expensive than the retail box.
No comments:
Post a Comment