cere
Apr 14, 03:30 PM
I really hope Intel delays USB 3. I have a mid 2007 MBP, even though I use FW800, I have resorted to using my ExpressCard slot with an eSata adapter which is even faster than FW800. If anything, the difference will be made with the companies who make the external HDD to implement thunderbolt technology into their products. I just hate usb in general, I only use it for flash drives and my mouse.
Agreed. Concurrent support will favour USB3 due to familiarity. Device vendors will be the key here.
Agreed. Concurrent support will favour USB3 due to familiarity. Device vendors will be the key here.
skellener
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
C'mon six core iMac!
BC2009
Mar 30, 12:14 PM
Again that doesn't matter as the word Windows doesn't come from the IT industry but existed before. App however was created within the IT industry.
It does not matter if the term was created in the IT industry or not -- it matters if it has a generic defined meaning in that industry. Windows had a generic defined meaning in the IT industry before MS had a trademark. The single word in-and-of-itself was generic in that industry before any trademark existed -- and they got the trademark WITHOUT any descriptive modifiers on the end.
At least Apple is being more specific in their trademark and adding the word "store".
By the way... the term "application" and "app" were not first used in the IT industry either. People were filling out "employment apps" long before they were pounding keys on computers. Back then the word "app" meant a form you filled out (and continued to mean that even back when we referred to "apps" on computers as "programs")
I think that means I have debunked your "origin of the word in the IT industry" in two ways.
I still believe that while these terms are generic, we have many precedents (including Microsoft) of generic terms being given as trademarks.
If you were to describe the "Android Marketplace" it could still be described as an "app store" or "application store", but it could not be branded as "App Store" -- that's what a trademark means. Just like Mac OS could still be described as a "windows operating system" or OpenOffice can still be described as an "office productivity suite". Even names like "OpenOffice" "QuickOffice" are allowed as trademarks because they differentiate from the generic term for which a trademark exists.
Description and Branding/Trademarks are very different. Apple wants to use the term "App Store" as part of their brand. There will still be other things described as "app stores". Given what has been done by other companies I don't see why they should not be allowed.
It does not matter if the term was created in the IT industry or not -- it matters if it has a generic defined meaning in that industry. Windows had a generic defined meaning in the IT industry before MS had a trademark. The single word in-and-of-itself was generic in that industry before any trademark existed -- and they got the trademark WITHOUT any descriptive modifiers on the end.
At least Apple is being more specific in their trademark and adding the word "store".
By the way... the term "application" and "app" were not first used in the IT industry either. People were filling out "employment apps" long before they were pounding keys on computers. Back then the word "app" meant a form you filled out (and continued to mean that even back when we referred to "apps" on computers as "programs")
I think that means I have debunked your "origin of the word in the IT industry" in two ways.
I still believe that while these terms are generic, we have many precedents (including Microsoft) of generic terms being given as trademarks.
If you were to describe the "Android Marketplace" it could still be described as an "app store" or "application store", but it could not be branded as "App Store" -- that's what a trademark means. Just like Mac OS could still be described as a "windows operating system" or OpenOffice can still be described as an "office productivity suite". Even names like "OpenOffice" "QuickOffice" are allowed as trademarks because they differentiate from the generic term for which a trademark exists.
Description and Branding/Trademarks are very different. Apple wants to use the term "App Store" as part of their brand. There will still be other things described as "app stores". Given what has been done by other companies I don't see why they should not be allowed.
displaced
Sep 26, 11:06 AM
Wonderful... why would Apple choose the carrier with the worst coverage and customer service (well, besides Sprint)??? T-Mobile or Verizon would be better choices...
You know, if Cingular didn't spend the $$$ to get all of the cool phones first, I think they would be out of business by now... If someone has had a different experience with Cingular, please let me know ;)
I still think Apple should go the Mobile Virtual Network Operator route ala Virgin Mobile, Helio, Amp'd, mobile ESPN, etc.
Wow... by the sounds of it, there's no single network in the US that actually works for everyone everywhere. Nasty. So perhaps exclusivity's a strange strategy - I hope it's only a short term plan for you guys' sake.
I take it Verizon = CDMA? There's no way Apple would consider a CDMA model since it'd be a serious disadvantage in the global market.
[edit] Also, setting up as a MVNO in each country in which they want to operate would cost a fortune. Besides, they've also then got to market and sell a network - establish a reputation in the mobile phone market as a carrier, and not just as a brand of phone.
You know, if Cingular didn't spend the $$$ to get all of the cool phones first, I think they would be out of business by now... If someone has had a different experience with Cingular, please let me know ;)
I still think Apple should go the Mobile Virtual Network Operator route ala Virgin Mobile, Helio, Amp'd, mobile ESPN, etc.
Wow... by the sounds of it, there's no single network in the US that actually works for everyone everywhere. Nasty. So perhaps exclusivity's a strange strategy - I hope it's only a short term plan for you guys' sake.
I take it Verizon = CDMA? There's no way Apple would consider a CDMA model since it'd be a serious disadvantage in the global market.
[edit] Also, setting up as a MVNO in each country in which they want to operate would cost a fortune. Besides, they've also then got to market and sell a network - establish a reputation in the mobile phone market as a carrier, and not just as a brand of phone.
shecky
Sep 14, 10:08 AM
So is this a stevenote or not? i think that might hint at what caliber of goodies are coming
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
curious about that myself. historically, have there been "special events" like this without a stevenote? (or a philnote, for that matter)
i think that just aperture would not justify a stevenote, but more than just aperture might (tho aperture would be the primary subject)
evilgEEk
Sep 19, 02:58 PM
This is precisely why other companies' attempts to "bring the PC into the living room" have failed (and will continue to do so). Think of the logistics of this (if you will) from an interior design perspective. Are you going to put your media center PC on a TV stand in your living room across from the couch to watch movies/TV? Are you also going to have a desk chair sitting right in front of it for those times you'd like more PC than TV? People (families) do not use computers in their living room and they do not watch movies/TV sitting at a desk.
This is why iTV is brilliant. Living rooms are for content, not computing. Content is the only aspect of your computer that is necessary in the living room, and it is all iTV delivers.
thoughts?
For the average user, I completely agree. Even if you have something like a Mac mini, something that can still look nice next to your home theatre components, you still need an HDTV to be able to use it as a computer. Before Apple jacked the price up $100 on the mini when they switched to Intel, I was going to buy one strictly for the use of Front Row. That would be a rather expensive media streaming box. ;) The iTV is perfect for me, and I think it will be for a lot of other folks as well.
This is why iTV is brilliant. Living rooms are for content, not computing. Content is the only aspect of your computer that is necessary in the living room, and it is all iTV delivers.
thoughts?
For the average user, I completely agree. Even if you have something like a Mac mini, something that can still look nice next to your home theatre components, you still need an HDTV to be able to use it as a computer. Before Apple jacked the price up $100 on the mini when they switched to Intel, I was going to buy one strictly for the use of Front Row. That would be a rather expensive media streaming box. ;) The iTV is perfect for me, and I think it will be for a lot of other folks as well.
Ugg
Apr 17, 03:23 PM
Published in USA today. An article titled "Are Lives Really an Acceptable Price for Fuel Efficiency?"
DDT's effects on malaria are well established, and the consequences of banning DDT in 1972 are also pretty widely accepted. People disagree, however, on whether it was a good thing or not.
and SuperCachetes, I was under the impression that US jobs were going out of the country bc we can't afford Union price tags. But if you "think" making labor more expensive will spur hiring, then keep "thinking" that with your "brain" ;)
Meanwhile, I'll be earning my degree from a top 25 university so that I can get a job that affords healthcare for my children
You're new here so please take a moment to read the rules. One of them quite clearly states that you need to provide links to relevant articles.
Thank You.
DDT's effects on malaria are well established, and the consequences of banning DDT in 1972 are also pretty widely accepted. People disagree, however, on whether it was a good thing or not.
and SuperCachetes, I was under the impression that US jobs were going out of the country bc we can't afford Union price tags. But if you "think" making labor more expensive will spur hiring, then keep "thinking" that with your "brain" ;)
Meanwhile, I'll be earning my degree from a top 25 university so that I can get a job that affords healthcare for my children
You're new here so please take a moment to read the rules. One of them quite clearly states that you need to provide links to relevant articles.
Thank You.
aristotle
Nov 13, 07:07 PM
As a professional developer, I do need to point a couple of items out…
The link that DARING FIREBALL points to (mentioned earlier in this thread) sighting "Public APIs" is not an ADC documentation site.
One of the Desktop APIs being used (sited via the Public API link) is being used in a manner that is specifically reaching into "/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources", this is a very large red flag… Your reaching
into someone else's bundle here.
The other Desktop API is requesting the icon of a document type - I would sure be peeved if I found someone else's Desktop application broadcasting one of *MY* hand made graphics or icons out to their iPhone application.
Regardless, Both of the API being used to obtain the graphics/icons are being called are from the Mac OS X Desktop SDK, not from the iPhone SDK. In addition, the result is being broadcast out to another machine (the phone), an image they don't hold rights to.
Just because you can get hold of an arbitrary image (including a users document) via a "Public" API, doesn't give you the right to use it without permission.
Thank you. You said it better that I could right now as I'm trying to fight off a cold. :o
I'm also a professional developer for that other platform with a monopoly in the desktop market (windows client/server). I've only dabbled with OS X but the general principles are the same regardless of whether you are using OS X APIs or Win32. Just because an API can give you access to an image, it does not mean that you can use it wherever however you wish.
If I was an icon artist, I might be upset if my icons were being used on an iPhone app which were only licensed for use in a specific desktop app whether directly or indirectly because it was set as the default icon for a data type on the server.
The link that DARING FIREBALL points to (mentioned earlier in this thread) sighting "Public APIs" is not an ADC documentation site.
One of the Desktop APIs being used (sited via the Public API link) is being used in a manner that is specifically reaching into "/System/Library/CoreServices/CoreTypes.bundle/Contents/Resources", this is a very large red flag… Your reaching
into someone else's bundle here.
The other Desktop API is requesting the icon of a document type - I would sure be peeved if I found someone else's Desktop application broadcasting one of *MY* hand made graphics or icons out to their iPhone application.
Regardless, Both of the API being used to obtain the graphics/icons are being called are from the Mac OS X Desktop SDK, not from the iPhone SDK. In addition, the result is being broadcast out to another machine (the phone), an image they don't hold rights to.
Just because you can get hold of an arbitrary image (including a users document) via a "Public" API, doesn't give you the right to use it without permission.
Thank you. You said it better that I could right now as I'm trying to fight off a cold. :o
I'm also a professional developer for that other platform with a monopoly in the desktop market (windows client/server). I've only dabbled with OS X but the general principles are the same regardless of whether you are using OS X APIs or Win32. Just because an API can give you access to an image, it does not mean that you can use it wherever however you wish.
If I was an icon artist, I might be upset if my icons were being used on an iPhone app which were only licensed for use in a specific desktop app whether directly or indirectly because it was set as the default icon for a data type on the server.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 4, 12:36 PM
"Shooting To Wound" is purely a product of television, movies, and video games. In real situations where gunfire is exchanged, milliseconds count, and center mass until the target is down is the ONLY reality.
I know. And heroics by gun toting civilians is mostly a product of fantasy as well. The idea of whipping your gun out to save the day is absurd. Most shootings occur with no warning. If you were always hyper-vigelent and ready to brandish your gun, you would likely be a danger to those around you.
I know. And heroics by gun toting civilians is mostly a product of fantasy as well. The idea of whipping your gun out to save the day is absurd. Most shootings occur with no warning. If you were always hyper-vigelent and ready to brandish your gun, you would likely be a danger to those around you.
Macmaniac
Sep 5, 12:08 PM
OOOOOooo! The possibilites, I am really looking forward to this! Lets hope MR finds some way to get live coverage!
RollTide
Apr 30, 09:28 PM
I really hope to see 512 mb vram on the base 21.5, but that will probably never happen.
Maybe in 5 years :rolleyes:
Maybe in 5 years :rolleyes:
EagerDragon
Sep 10, 08:40 PM
I understand the need for a mid level consumer tower, but right now
50%+/- of the market is looking at notebooks.
The cluttered, wire infested desktop is also none too popular with many people.
That's why the AOI iMac is so popular.
The MacBook is already more powerful than the majority of desktops MOST
average users have in their home.
The mini does a respectable job filling the affordable hassle free niche.
Heck, if you don't count the extra RAM cost, the Xeon powered Mac Pro 2.66 Quad is priced neck and neck with the mid level MacBook Pro.
That's amazing when you really think about it.
Even so, I do see a place for a Max mini of some sort starting
with at least the power of half a Mac Pro Tower for $999.00
If the iMac would come with a top of the line graphic card or as a BTO, it would be even more popular.
But the top gamers want more than one card with SLI and that means a different form factor.
I agree something is coming, but it does not have to be a mini. It could be a modified Mac Pro enclosure with liquid cooling for the graphic cards, CPU(s) and chip set. Mini or Maxi not sure. The system will also need to support overclocking of the CPU and Graphic cards. We will find out soon (prob October) for the holidays.;)
50%+/- of the market is looking at notebooks.
The cluttered, wire infested desktop is also none too popular with many people.
That's why the AOI iMac is so popular.
The MacBook is already more powerful than the majority of desktops MOST
average users have in their home.
The mini does a respectable job filling the affordable hassle free niche.
Heck, if you don't count the extra RAM cost, the Xeon powered Mac Pro 2.66 Quad is priced neck and neck with the mid level MacBook Pro.
That's amazing when you really think about it.
Even so, I do see a place for a Max mini of some sort starting
with at least the power of half a Mac Pro Tower for $999.00
If the iMac would come with a top of the line graphic card or as a BTO, it would be even more popular.
But the top gamers want more than one card with SLI and that means a different form factor.
I agree something is coming, but it does not have to be a mini. It could be a modified Mac Pro enclosure with liquid cooling for the graphic cards, CPU(s) and chip set. Mini or Maxi not sure. The system will also need to support overclocking of the CPU and Graphic cards. We will find out soon (prob October) for the holidays.;)
CylonGlitch
Nov 13, 03:58 PM
In a sense, yes. The rules for iPhone development are different than for Mac OS X. I may not always agree with it but there you have it. :)
Exactly, they are technically different operating systems. But even so, just because an OS gives you access to specific images, doesn't give you the rights to take them and use them for something else. Obviously RA had to pull the image from the API and then save it to another file and use it in their iPhone application. Just because it is accessible via API doesn't mean it is free to use. The API is free to use, the data is not.
Example. You buy a CD of a song, you can play it on your CD player. You can use it all you want in your CD player, but try ripping that song off (ie copying the image from the API) and using it in a movie you're making.. Guess what, you can't.
Exactly, they are technically different operating systems. But even so, just because an OS gives you access to specific images, doesn't give you the rights to take them and use them for something else. Obviously RA had to pull the image from the API and then save it to another file and use it in their iPhone application. Just because it is accessible via API doesn't mean it is free to use. The API is free to use, the data is not.
Example. You buy a CD of a song, you can play it on your CD player. You can use it all you want in your CD player, but try ripping that song off (ie copying the image from the API) and using it in a movie you're making.. Guess what, you can't.
Bakerman
Sep 16, 05:21 AM
I would love to see an Apple Phone with these features:
- At least 4 GB storage, preferably 8 GB.
- 3G (UTMS) / 2G (GSM) combo
- iPod/iTunes/Addressbook/iCal integration (duh!)
- BlueTooth
- less than 100g
- clamshell or candybar, no slider please
For less than 600 euros I would buy it instantly.
- At least 4 GB storage, preferably 8 GB.
- 3G (UTMS) / 2G (GSM) combo
- iPod/iTunes/Addressbook/iCal integration (duh!)
- BlueTooth
- less than 100g
- clamshell or candybar, no slider please
For less than 600 euros I would buy it instantly.
nemaslov
Sep 14, 03:55 PM
It will be the Apple HAL 9000 computer . Looks like HAL from 2001 A Space Odyssey :D
"...open the iPod Bay door Hal."
"...open the iPod Bay door Hal."
Manic Mouse
Sep 12, 07:08 AM
BTW, What is with all the Anti Mini Mac Pro hostility??? "I'm sorry, you can't have a Quad 2.67 Ghz CPU and a top of the line graphics card. I'm sure a Mac Mini will more than fulfil your needs, with its Dual 1.86 Ghz Yonah processor and Integrated Graphics. As long as you de-emphasize on productivity, you should find a Mac Mini is plenty fast enough. After all, Apple is perfect, and anything they don't offer should be wanted by you."
Indeed. It's as if there's something wrong with asking for something you want. How dare we suggest the Apple lineup isn't perfect!
Indeed. It's as if there's something wrong with asking for something you want. How dare we suggest the Apple lineup isn't perfect!
rmhop81
Apr 22, 08:26 AM
I pity the children of the future when I think back to how I am my friends used to swap Video's, CD's and Computer games with each other, as we only had enough Birthday/Christmas money to afford to buy so much, so we had great fun and enjoyment swapping what we had between friends.
In the same way my elderly mother goes to her weekly meeting and they all bring books they have read in, so others can read their books when they have finished with them. Not everyone can afford to buy new every time.
you are focusing too much on the physical items. maybe bc i like to live simple/minimal....but nowadays too many people want so many physical possessions. to me, less is more.....
In the same way my elderly mother goes to her weekly meeting and they all bring books they have read in, so others can read their books when they have finished with them. Not everyone can afford to buy new every time.
you are focusing too much on the physical items. maybe bc i like to live simple/minimal....but nowadays too many people want so many physical possessions. to me, less is more.....
G4DP
Mar 22, 01:30 PM
Glad all the consumers machines get this first. All the kinks can be worked out before the MacPro gets it at the end of the year.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
LaCie have started making drives etc with Cripplepeak connectivity. There are a few others.
vwcruisn
Mar 23, 05:38 PM
Stay classy Austin :rolleyes:
As for the Senator's request, they cannot be required to take it down. If cops are so overt that apps can bust their checkpoints, maybe they should be floating checkpoints?
It's illegal. Police need to publicly announce check points before setting up. Ironic they would want to pull the app since this is the basis that makes them legal in the first place.
As for the Senator's request, they cannot be required to take it down. If cops are so overt that apps can bust their checkpoints, maybe they should be floating checkpoints?
It's illegal. Police need to publicly announce check points before setting up. Ironic they would want to pull the app since this is the basis that makes them legal in the first place.
Cinch
Oct 12, 02:40 PM
It makes me so happy to know that there are still plenty of stupid people in the world.
Thank you
no need to respond to such obvious bait
;)
Cinch
Thank you
no need to respond to such obvious bait
;)
Cinch
Dmac77
Apr 25, 12:57 AM
I think the point is that traffic laws were made to prevent stuff like this in the first place. Had you been obeying the law, there would be no issue, other than maybe a slight annoyance for a couple minutes driving a little slow.
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
If I'm reading this correctly, neither the woman nor you had a right to drive like that. Just because someone pulls something like a brake check, doesn't give you or anyone else the right to act dangerously. Aggressive driving is what gets people hurt or killed.
The simple fact is that I should not have to obey a 70mph speed limit if I don't want to. Why would I even bother driving a car that can hit 186mph (with the speed governor removed, with the governor top speed is 155mph) at 70 mph? A Ford Fiesta can hit those speeds, what's the point of fast cars if you're going to follow the speed limit in them?
EDIT: @ Rodimus - Had she hit me when I slammed on the brakes, she would have been at fault. All I have to do is tell the cop that I thought I saw an animal run across the road. She is supposed to keep enough distance to be able to stop if I slam on the brakes. Doesn't matter than I cut her off, she has to prove that I did, and she also has to prove that I slammed on the breaks with malice.
-Don
Object-X
Aug 28, 03:12 PM
I'll bet we see a Mini refresh tomorrow.
That would be good news for me since I just bought a mini last week. I could return it and get a new one. Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
That would be good news for me since I just bought a mini last week. I could return it and get a new one. Anyone know of benchmarks comparing the core duo with the core 2 duo?
Bubba Satori
Mar 23, 11:55 AM
I'm going to have a hard time wiping the fingerprints off that on my t-shirt. ;)
Yabutt they'll be nice, easy to find glossy fingerprints.
Yabutt they'll be nice, easy to find glossy fingerprints.
Dagless
Mar 22, 02:04 PM
Can't wait! But I will have to. Now we're getting this close and the rumours are starting - there's no way I would ever buy a new iMac until the update. If my current one breaks then the real waiting game begins.
No comments:
Post a Comment