MacinDoc
Sep 14, 12:57 PM
new here to the forums.
i've been patiently waiting for the MBP to be updated before i ordered but wanted to jump on the iPod deal as well which ends the 16th
if one was to place an order and then these are announced the following week, would Apple upgrade you to the comparable machine?
If the new one is announced before your order ships, it will be automatically upgraded. Otherwise, you should return the unopened product within 2 weeks of purchase for a free upgrade.
i've been patiently waiting for the MBP to be updated before i ordered but wanted to jump on the iPod deal as well which ends the 16th
if one was to place an order and then these are announced the following week, would Apple upgrade you to the comparable machine?
If the new one is announced before your order ships, it will be automatically upgraded. Otherwise, you should return the unopened product within 2 weeks of purchase for a free upgrade.
Piggie
Apr 22, 08:51 AM
How about this:
When you are born, you are given, in effect a serial number. which is yours as a human being for life.
When you buy any digital media, this is linked to our number for life.
This means for as long as you live, and whatever device you buy, you can access this media always.
So I buy and iPad and I pay for the "RIGHTS" to watch/own a movie.
I have paid my money and now that movie is mine to watch any time in the future on whatever device I buy in the future.
When you are born, you are given, in effect a serial number. which is yours as a human being for life.
When you buy any digital media, this is linked to our number for life.
This means for as long as you live, and whatever device you buy, you can access this media always.
So I buy and iPad and I pay for the "RIGHTS" to watch/own a movie.
I have paid my money and now that movie is mine to watch any time in the future on whatever device I buy in the future.
cozmot
Mar 21, 02:16 PM
The point is that MisterMe said nothing that your response would have fit. You can infer all you want, but it's very clear that MisterMe was talking about the market share myth, and was not inferring that Macs are immune to malware.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
No, I just took the first example you posted and saw that it didn't prove your point at all.
That's quite true.
Using your STD example, I have zero need for protection if my wife and I are exclusive with each other, as we are. Likewise, protection isn't currently necessary for a Mac if the user exercises reasonable care and caution. If you want to run AV on your Mac, it's perfectly within your right. It's just not needed for protection.
You alone have the power to stop reading or posting in this thread.
It's not turning a mountain into a mole hill to stand by accurate, factual statements when they're challenged. It's not a "status-quo"; it's the current reality in the Mac computing world. No one is saying that it couldn't change in the future. It just hasn't yet.
You have no idea what attitude "most Mac users" have, unless you've interviewed the many millions of them. If I exercise the reasonable care that I've already described, it can't happen to me, in the current computing environment. If that situation ever changes, such as the introduction of a true Mac virus into the wild, any antivirus app I may have installed today will provide no protection from that event.
It's called "profit motive", which any successful company has.
Again, a personal opinion. Like millions of others, I find their hardware options perfectly acceptable and I don't have a problem with their pricing. If that weren't true, I and millions of others simply wouldn't buy from them.
No one is suggesting that you shouldn't be careful. In fact, that's exactly what we've been saying: if you're careful, you don't need antivirus software to protect your Mac from malware.
I think GGJstudios answered MagnusVonMagnum's contentions, misrepresentations and straw-man arguments perfectly. And Magnus, I hope that you're truly sick of this thread, because I am too with your belaboring the same points, putting words in peoples' mouths and contributing nothing to this thread. Really, enough already! Quit reading and posting here, and get well soon.
GGJstudios
Mar 16, 04:59 PM
It this utter ignorance and false sense of security in the Mac user base that I would use to my advantage if I were a cyber-criminal.
It's neither ignorance nor a false sense of security. It's an awareness that virus threats don't exist and no antivirus can protect against something that doesn't exist.
I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe.
No OS is immune to malware, but it's impossible to protect yourself from something that does not yet exist.
The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice.
Hacking a browser and creating a virus that can infect Mac OS X are two different animals.
I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
The day it "hits the fan", news sites and forums will be buzzing about the threat, making most Mac users aware. At that time a protection to the threat will be introduced. Only an extremely minute percentage of Mac users are likely to ever be infected, should that ever happen. Any antivirus apps installed today will be completely useless in defending against a newly-introduced virus, because they simply don't know what to look for.
It's neither ignorance nor a false sense of security. It's an awareness that virus threats don't exist and no antivirus can protect against something that doesn't exist.
I've seen more than enough evidence over the past few years to tell me that it's far from safe.
No OS is immune to malware, but it's impossible to protect yourself from something that does not yet exist.
The latest Safari/Webkit hacking contest result alone should be enough to cause any reasonable person to take notice.
Hacking a browser and creating a virus that can infect Mac OS X are two different animals.
I think a few people will be changing their tunes the day the crap finally hits the fan.
The day it "hits the fan", news sites and forums will be buzzing about the threat, making most Mac users aware. At that time a protection to the threat will be introduced. Only an extremely minute percentage of Mac users are likely to ever be infected, should that ever happen. Any antivirus apps installed today will be completely useless in defending against a newly-introduced virus, because they simply don't know what to look for.
Westyfield2
Apr 30, 03:00 PM
Hey.... Where is my updated Mac Mini?
Patience child. iMac has to come first, but then the Mini :cool:.
Patience child. iMac has to come first, but then the Mini :cool:.
EricNau
Sep 9, 01:42 AM
Not a huge difference, but every little bit helps.
But those Mac Pros... Wow!
But those Mac Pros... Wow!
vvswarup
Apr 29, 12:46 AM
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Your remark reminds me of a conversation I had with my brother. He was talking about starting a business. Now, to preface my next statement, let me offer a little background. A while ago, I suggested to my brother that he invest in stocks and he was not ready to take on the risk of it, so he refused to invest. So, when he said he wanted to start a business, my response was something like: "So you don't want to invest in stocks because it's too risky but you don't mind starting a business."
His response was: "Stocks have no value to society. With this business that I start, I would be able to make something of value to society."
I did not respond to it then, but after thinking about that remark, my response should have been that if the intention is create a for-profit business, an activity to make money for oneself, the value that the product adds to society is irrelevant. Also, companies use the cash from stock investors to fund capital expenditures. So the argument can be made that stocks indirectly add value to society because companies use the cash from stock investors to make more things that people can consume.
Your left-handed remark about Apple R&D vs. MS R&D is baseless and irrelevant. MS is not a university. It's a business. Businesses exist to make money. Also, Bill Gates did not start MS out of some altruistic intention of doing good for people. He started it to make money. Same goes for Steve Jobs.
Don't blow smoke and make this more than it really is. You were replying to the OP who said that Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting its money's worth on R&D. Don't aggrandize it fact by saying that MS is "adding more better for society" and Apple is "only about profit." The OP is right. Microsoft is not getting its money's worth on its R&D expenditure. Something has to change.
MS is a public corporation. Its first duty is to its shareholders. If spending better on R&D in order to get more profit out of it will enhance shareholder value, then Microsoft has an obligation to do so.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
Your remark reminds me of a conversation I had with my brother. He was talking about starting a business. Now, to preface my next statement, let me offer a little background. A while ago, I suggested to my brother that he invest in stocks and he was not ready to take on the risk of it, so he refused to invest. So, when he said he wanted to start a business, my response was something like: "So you don't want to invest in stocks because it's too risky but you don't mind starting a business."
His response was: "Stocks have no value to society. With this business that I start, I would be able to make something of value to society."
I did not respond to it then, but after thinking about that remark, my response should have been that if the intention is create a for-profit business, an activity to make money for oneself, the value that the product adds to society is irrelevant. Also, companies use the cash from stock investors to fund capital expenditures. So the argument can be made that stocks indirectly add value to society because companies use the cash from stock investors to make more things that people can consume.
Your left-handed remark about Apple R&D vs. MS R&D is baseless and irrelevant. MS is not a university. It's a business. Businesses exist to make money. Also, Bill Gates did not start MS out of some altruistic intention of doing good for people. He started it to make money. Same goes for Steve Jobs.
Don't blow smoke and make this more than it really is. You were replying to the OP who said that Microsoft doesn't seem to be getting its money's worth on R&D. Don't aggrandize it fact by saying that MS is "adding more better for society" and Apple is "only about profit." The OP is right. Microsoft is not getting its money's worth on its R&D expenditure. Something has to change.
MS is a public corporation. Its first duty is to its shareholders. If spending better on R&D in order to get more profit out of it will enhance shareholder value, then Microsoft has an obligation to do so.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 11:07 AM
Not quite true that "Europeans" have a minimum wage of $18/hour. Remember conditions in the UK, France, Germany, Spain etc will be quite different to say Romania and Slovakia (but they will still have minimum standards set by the EU).
Later this year the UK minimum wage will be �6.08 for adults. That's $9.96 today, so $10. Presuming 5 day working week the minimum holiday amount is 28 days (5.6 weeks). The employer can control when you take time off, but can't be silly about it.
Loads of other stuff as well makes it complex. For example, you must either have 24 continual hours off in a 7 day period or 48 continual hours in 14.
Remember, we have high taxes (~20% VAT etc) but better public services in general. The UK average house price is �232k ($380k), I understand your average is ~$280k.
Swings and roundabouts!
Later this year the UK minimum wage will be �6.08 for adults. That's $9.96 today, so $10. Presuming 5 day working week the minimum holiday amount is 28 days (5.6 weeks). The employer can control when you take time off, but can't be silly about it.
Loads of other stuff as well makes it complex. For example, you must either have 24 continual hours off in a 7 day period or 48 continual hours in 14.
Remember, we have high taxes (~20% VAT etc) but better public services in general. The UK average house price is �232k ($380k), I understand your average is ~$280k.
Swings and roundabouts!
bbeagle
Apr 22, 09:35 AM
it not be too long until all music is purchased in digital format and only accessible via a cloud service. this means thats actually having a copy of a song (to share) will be a thing of the past. You pay your $9.99 for an album and happily listen to it for a couple of years, then the labels decided that album is more valuable than the original price and ask you for another $2 if you wish to access it again from the cloud.
I actually expect it to be worse than that.
Imagine if you 'buy' a cloud-only song for 99 cents, The fine-print will say that this 'rental' is only good for 90 days or 1 year. You'll then have to 'buy it again' to keep listening to the song. Or there might be a limit of 100 times to listen to the song. And in 10 years, we'll think of this as the 'norm'.
There are so many ingenious ways to make money when you don't own the actual physical media, and I'm sure the record labels are devising these schemes as we speak.
I actually expect it to be worse than that.
Imagine if you 'buy' a cloud-only song for 99 cents, The fine-print will say that this 'rental' is only good for 90 days or 1 year. You'll then have to 'buy it again' to keep listening to the song. Or there might be a limit of 100 times to listen to the song. And in 10 years, we'll think of this as the 'norm'.
There are so many ingenious ways to make money when you don't own the actual physical media, and I'm sure the record labels are devising these schemes as we speak.
Sean7512
Sep 12, 02:19 PM
Do the "older 5G" ipods support the new tv shows (640x480) and movies???? I don't care about the new search and such...Im just wondering about the movies and games.
bbplayer5
Apr 4, 11:42 AM
and i was all like.. PEW PEW PEW
McDave
Sep 4, 09:46 PM
I really doubt that Apple will put a TV tuner in this thing (if it's real). Think about it -
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
Point 1 - If Apple puts a tuner in then they have to deal with the myriad of different types of TV.
Point 2 - THEY SELL TV SHOWS!
Does Steve want you to Tivo the new episode of "The Office" on your "MediaMac/Airport Express Video/Super iPod" or does he want you to come to the iTunes store and download it for $2? Apple, despite most of our (including my own) beliefs is a business and they have to think of the $$$ first.
Why give something away when you can make money off it? That's still my theory as to why the mini didn't have a tuner from the start.
Too true! Why create a device to capture/de-schedule broadcast TV (with the mis-timings, satellite rain-fade & commercials) when you can sell most of the content directly, with one mouse/remote-click.
I think this will do to movies & TV what the iPod did for music, just don't forget the Blu-Ray player.
McD
Rocketman
Sep 9, 08:58 PM
Any word on the difference between the C2D 2.16 and the 2.33? Is it worth the upgrade price?
The benefit should be nearly linear, so not much. I suggest putting the price difference in a fund toward your next computer in 2 years, when something even more cool and hard top pass up will be available.
Rocketman
The benefit should be nearly linear, so not much. I suggest putting the price difference in a fund toward your next computer in 2 years, when something even more cool and hard top pass up will be available.
Rocketman
askthedust
Sep 13, 01:37 PM
I have the 60GB old 5gb ipod and i updated it to version 1.2 see my previous post on how to do if anyone hasn't figured it out yet. I get the scrolling letter thing. Mine does play games now. Bought Mahjong and played it a few times. It does have a load time to play the game which sucks, I already have to deal with that on my PSP. Once loaded, game plays well and smoothly. do not have the fast search feature under music menu. that would have been nice to have. why give us one and not the other? happy about the support for larger video size. But will probably stick to buying DVD's and using handbrake. ITV would change that if you can download directly to it and sync it with ipod using tv to complete these steps.
CorvusCamenarum
Oct 27, 08:49 AM
Ummm...
How about this one (http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/12/russian-wooden-pc-bigger-than-a-breadbox/)
Or this one (http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/03/suissa-computers-offers-up-custom-wooden-pcs/)
:D
I have no problem with Greenpeace being at the show as long as they back up their findings with facts and conduct themselves in a civil manner. If Microsoft stepped out of line at the show, I would expect them to be kicked out of the show as well.
I love that first one; it's even got the Apple minimalist motif about it.
Didn't the first Apple I's come in a wood case as well?
How about this one (http://www.engadget.com/2005/09/12/russian-wooden-pc-bigger-than-a-breadbox/)
Or this one (http://www.engadget.com/2006/10/03/suissa-computers-offers-up-custom-wooden-pcs/)
:D
I have no problem with Greenpeace being at the show as long as they back up their findings with facts and conduct themselves in a civil manner. If Microsoft stepped out of line at the show, I would expect them to be kicked out of the show as well.
I love that first one; it's even got the Apple minimalist motif about it.
Didn't the first Apple I's come in a wood case as well?
Rodimus Prime
Apr 28, 04:25 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Mobile/8H7)
If you compare their investment in R&D to what they manage to churn out, it's pretty sad.
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
If you compare their investment in R&D to what they manage to churn out, it's pretty sad.
That can be viewed another way. Apple is too cheap to bother risking anything that is not a sure bet.
MS willing to risk R&D and a lot of R&D on things that might be a dead end.
MS R&D is more like a university Research compared to Apple R&D that is only about profit.
Guess which one adds more better for the people. Correct answer is not Apple
gugy
May 3, 11:35 AM
I love the 2 30" external display support. Hopefully Thunderbolt will be able to do the same on the MacBook Pro.
LagunaSol
Apr 4, 12:54 PM
I often wondered what kind of people could find a homeowner who shot an armed intruder guilty of a crime or culpable in civil court. Having read many of the comments in this thread, now I know.
The scary thing is some of these people may be sitting on the jury if this ever happens to you. :eek:
The scary thing is some of these people may be sitting on the jury if this ever happens to you. :eek:
conradzoo
Sep 10, 04:47 PM
I am not worried at all. Yes the next event will be all about the Movie store and next gen iPod.
Some love it some not. For the lather ones, the one more thing, the MBP update, "by public demand".
Everybody is happy. Well almost.
Some love it some not. For the lather ones, the one more thing, the MBP update, "by public demand".
Everybody is happy. Well almost.
Eidorian
Sep 9, 11:53 AM
You may be right.
I couldn't find anything in the Intel technical documentation on the 945 to show a new revision or stepping of the chip - in fact most of the 945 docs at the Intel website don't mention the Core 2 at all....That's what tipped me off as well. I've had to hit those tech pages to glean information off of them.
I couldn't find anything in the Intel technical documentation on the 945 to show a new revision or stepping of the chip - in fact most of the 945 docs at the Intel website don't mention the Core 2 at all....That's what tipped me off as well. I've had to hit those tech pages to glean information off of them.
ctdonath
Mar 23, 08:07 AM
What ThunderPort devices are you planning to buy? When will they be available?
LaCie 1TB Little Big Disk (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=11625), available Summer 2011. 10Gb/s transfer rate; copy an HD movie in 30 seconds.
If I'm going to buy a Mac of any flavor now, I'll delay a bit for a Thunderbolt-capable version 'cuz I'll be stuck with it for long after compatible devices become available.
I heard lame snide remarks like yours when USB first showed up. "Only Macs have it! Are you sure compatible devices will arrive within 22 years? What USB devices are you planning to buy? When will they be available?" You don't even have the name right. Meh.
LaCie 1TB Little Big Disk (http://www.lacie.com/products/product.htm?pid=11625), available Summer 2011. 10Gb/s transfer rate; copy an HD movie in 30 seconds.
If I'm going to buy a Mac of any flavor now, I'll delay a bit for a Thunderbolt-capable version 'cuz I'll be stuck with it for long after compatible devices become available.
I heard lame snide remarks like yours when USB first showed up. "Only Macs have it! Are you sure compatible devices will arrive within 22 years? What USB devices are you planning to buy? When will they be available?" You don't even have the name right. Meh.
mdntcallr
Sep 26, 12:20 PM
well, im a cingular customer. so no problem there. but im hoping that Apple has a model with is a smartphone/pda ie to replace my Treo 650.
unless they have a smart model with a large hard drive, say 60 or 80 gb, with that, i don't think ill buy one right away.
unless they have a smart model with a large hard drive, say 60 or 80 gb, with that, i don't think ill buy one right away.
cube
May 3, 12:25 PM
That is still one display per output though.
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.
If the monitors cannot daisy chain, you need a hub for the port(s) to which you connect multiple such displays.
Casshan
Sep 19, 03:46 PM
Sometimes it helps to do a quick search. ;)
They do have surround sound support. (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304277#faq26)
Yes, they have surround sound, but not Dolby Digital. Quicktime can't even decode 5.1 audio (you need a third party plugin (http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/27300) for that.)
They do have surround sound support. (http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=304277#faq26)
Yes, they have surround sound, but not Dolby Digital. Quicktime can't even decode 5.1 audio (you need a third party plugin (http://www.versiontracker.com/dyn/moreinfo/macosx/27300) for that.)
No comments:
Post a Comment