navguy
Jan 7, 06:14 PM
it definitely is a strong consideration with a few add'l features for $10 more ... including that it works w/ both iphone and ipod touch, works w/ cases/skins, rotation notches seem firmer, and bluetooth works while off mount ... if you can get over the overall cost, the extra $10 is probably worth it.
i received the TT car kit as a gift ... and enjoying it every day :D
i received the TT car kit as a gift ... and enjoying it every day :D
amanset
Aug 2, 12:40 PM
To be clear... that was for the standalone iSight camera not the embedded iSight camera's available in the iMac, MacBook, MacBook Pro, etc.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
Yeah I know, hence me thinking they might release a new iSight one of these days seeing as the old one can't be sold in Europe.
Vegasman
Apr 26, 04:50 PM
And next week there will be a new survey that says the opposite. These reports are getting old. Must be a slow news day.
Unlikely...
Unlikely...
DakotaGuy
Aug 7, 02:43 PM
First of all...it seems to me they should have offered a single dual core processor model...like a single 2.6Ghz model for something like $1599. Second why do you only save $300 when you opt for the 2Ghz model but the 3Ghz model costs $800 more???
This machine would be complete overkill for me, still it is fun to see what it will do. There is a huge gap in their line up between the iMac and Mac Pro now.
This machine would be complete overkill for me, still it is fun to see what it will do. There is a huge gap in their line up between the iMac and Mac Pro now.
Number 41
Apr 20, 12:33 PM
A processor update only matters if software is written that requires it -- and no developer is going to risk cutting off access to a huge segment of the customer base by writting software that specifically requires the latest iPhone.
So, really, you're paying for power that you can't use 99% of the time.
So, really, you're paying for power that you can't use 99% of the time.
techweenie
Apr 25, 10:48 AM
We're not.
Though we could.
Now look at this shiny new thing over here.
- Steve
Though we could.
Now look at this shiny new thing over here.
- Steve
rdowns
Apr 14, 12:30 PM
I am not sure why the increasing erosion of the middle class and income discrepancy between the haves, and have nots, isn't realized as a major security problem in the US. The working middle class and poor can only be pushed around so much until somebody is going to get pissed off. A socialist/populist revolt ala Egypt is not inconceivable.
Our financial situation is recognized by some as a great threat. (http://www.disinfo.com/2010/09/the-single-biggest-threat-to-u-s-national-security-is-its-debt/)
In February the head of U.S. intelligence � Dennis Blair � said that the global financial crisis was the largest threat to America�s national security. All of America�s intelligence agencies apparently agreed.
The same month, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff � Admiral Mullen � also agreed.
Now, Mullen is focusing on a specific economic threat. Specifically, Mullen is focusing on the debt:
The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security, according to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.
�That�s one year�s worth of defense budget,� he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending.
But at least war is good for the economy, right? At least spending on defense will help the economy recover and climb out of this pit of debt, no?
Actually, no...
Our financial situation is recognized by some as a great threat. (http://www.disinfo.com/2010/09/the-single-biggest-threat-to-u-s-national-security-is-its-debt/)
In February the head of U.S. intelligence � Dennis Blair � said that the global financial crisis was the largest threat to America�s national security. All of America�s intelligence agencies apparently agreed.
The same month, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff � Admiral Mullen � also agreed.
Now, Mullen is focusing on a specific economic threat. Specifically, Mullen is focusing on the debt:
The national debt is the single biggest threat to national security, according to Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Tax payers will be paying around $600 billion in interest on the national debt by 2012, the chairman told students and local leaders in Detroit.
�That�s one year�s worth of defense budget,� he said, adding that the Pentagon needs to cut back on spending.
But at least war is good for the economy, right? At least spending on defense will help the economy recover and climb out of this pit of debt, no?
Actually, no...
JoshH
Aug 7, 06:34 PM
Also, if you hit the EJECT key on the keyboard while you have two optical drives installed, will they both open?
Questions, questions...
On my dual G4, the Eject key opens the top tray, and Option Eject opens the bottom. I suspect it is the same...
Questions, questions...
On my dual G4, the Eject key opens the top tray, and Option Eject opens the bottom. I suspect it is the same...
MacRumors
Nov 26, 10:20 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Smarthouse.com.au claims (http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Automation/Display_Panels?Article=/Automation/Display%20Panels/H9R6N2M2) that Apple has a full working prototype of a Mac tablet PC within their labs with plans for a 2007 launch.
According to sources in Taiwan, the targets for this unreleased Mac tablet are expected to be home and education markets rather than the enterprise market.
The Mac tablet has been designed to handle third party applications such as home automation software that will allow users to control lighting, audio, entertainment devices and security feeds. It also acts as a full blown PC has wireless linking for a new generation of Wireless Hi Fi speakers that are currently being tested by Apple.
The Intel-based Tablet Mac would also offer a docking station to provide HDMI output to the appropriate screen. Beyond using the technology documented in Apple's recent patent applications for touch-screen/tablet Macs, Apple is reportedly licensing at least three patents from 3rd party companies.
This is not the first time that there have been rumors about a Mac tablet. In fact, rumors of a Mac tablet culminated in early 2003 with significant evidence that a Mac tablet project was in the works at that time. At the time, one description of the tablet at the time was as follows:
A device that superficially resembles a large iPod with an 8-inch diagonal screen, lacks a keyboard, packs USB and FireWire ports, and runs Mac OS X along with a variety of multimedia goodies.
The tablet, of course, never saw the light of day... though its unclear why Apple never released the tablet (if it did indeed exist).
Smarthouse.com.au claims (http://www.smarthouse.com.au/Automation/Display_Panels?Article=/Automation/Display%20Panels/H9R6N2M2) that Apple has a full working prototype of a Mac tablet PC within their labs with plans for a 2007 launch.
According to sources in Taiwan, the targets for this unreleased Mac tablet are expected to be home and education markets rather than the enterprise market.
The Mac tablet has been designed to handle third party applications such as home automation software that will allow users to control lighting, audio, entertainment devices and security feeds. It also acts as a full blown PC has wireless linking for a new generation of Wireless Hi Fi speakers that are currently being tested by Apple.
The Intel-based Tablet Mac would also offer a docking station to provide HDMI output to the appropriate screen. Beyond using the technology documented in Apple's recent patent applications for touch-screen/tablet Macs, Apple is reportedly licensing at least three patents from 3rd party companies.
This is not the first time that there have been rumors about a Mac tablet. In fact, rumors of a Mac tablet culminated in early 2003 with significant evidence that a Mac tablet project was in the works at that time. At the time, one description of the tablet at the time was as follows:
A device that superficially resembles a large iPod with an 8-inch diagonal screen, lacks a keyboard, packs USB and FireWire ports, and runs Mac OS X along with a variety of multimedia goodies.
The tablet, of course, never saw the light of day... though its unclear why Apple never released the tablet (if it did indeed exist).
cav23j
Nov 27, 11:49 PM
awful program
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
locked up my mac multiple times and possibly was the cause of my bootcamp partition getting completely ruined
was working fine until i ran this
tny
Nov 26, 10:25 PM
Seriously, does anyone here even hear about tablet PCs anymore? Nope.
What happened with Microsoft Origami? Nothing.
This is an iSight shot from the front page of today's CompUSA flyer. The Sony VAIO UX Micro PC with Windows XP Professional is brand new, and an "origami" device.
What happened with Microsoft Origami? Nothing.
This is an iSight shot from the front page of today's CompUSA flyer. The Sony VAIO UX Micro PC with Windows XP Professional is brand new, and an "origami" device.
Collin973
Jul 21, 04:41 PM
Did any one notice that the 23rd is actually a sunday?
I didn't read through all of the posts, but monday is the 24th...
--CP
I didn't read through all of the posts, but monday is the 24th...
--CP
aog
Sep 15, 04:38 PM
I hope the 2.33GHz processor comes standard in the 17" since it�s the highest-end model...:D
bigbossbmb
Jul 21, 02:05 PM
great news, but i think a few will vote it negative because they like to whine...
i may need to bump up my timeline for upgrading my dying 12"
i may need to bump up my timeline for upgrading my dying 12"
HiRez
May 4, 05:57 PM
cons: what if i want to format the hard drive and restart from scratch? or even just archive and install? what if i completely replace my hard drive? what if i want to sell my mac and get a new one, would i retain the license or would the buyer get it? how would they reinstall the OS after I wipe the hard drive? how long is this going to take to download? will we be able and authorized to burn our own install DVDs from the downloaded software?
It'd be cool for Apple to start building a small, fast SSD "drive" (memory chips) into every Mac, that would be dedicated to the core System, and only the System. Small enough to be inexpensive, large enough to easily accommodate current and future System files, fast enough to be faster than any current hard drive. Make the drive say 32-64 GB, with two partitions. One partition holds the installed System, the other partition is just scratch space for downloaded and uninstalled software, including the System itself. Possibly this partition contains some minimal boot system in order to re-download and install the package from the app store in case the installation gets botched.
It'd be cool for Apple to start building a small, fast SSD "drive" (memory chips) into every Mac, that would be dedicated to the core System, and only the System. Small enough to be inexpensive, large enough to easily accommodate current and future System files, fast enough to be faster than any current hard drive. Make the drive say 32-64 GB, with two partitions. One partition holds the installed System, the other partition is just scratch space for downloaded and uninstalled software, including the System itself. Possibly this partition contains some minimal boot system in order to re-download and install the package from the app store in case the installation gets botched.
nateo200
Mar 27, 01:22 PM
If this update isn't less than perfect and awesome then allot of people will be pissed. Notification systems needs to be better well added really since it cant even compare to android but at the same time when they work on it it shouldn't be a copy of android. Something apple-esk...not that I don't think the android notification system isn't cool...I love it but apple always has to be unique. iOS also over all needs some spicing up, I don't mind it but I know a bunch of complainers.
JAT
Apr 5, 01:19 PM
Jail break is legal for personal use. Corporate use of jail break may be another thing altogether.
Why?
Where's the Lexus theme? I don't want a Scion theme.
Why?
Where's the Lexus theme? I don't want a Scion theme.
seedster2
Apr 25, 09:57 AM
Call me naive (or perhaps paranoid) but I've been assuming my location is being tracked since I bought my first smart phone years ago.
I never understand these things.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
Even if Apple were using and collecting tracking locations to build up databases of customer movements, they are not going to shout "YES WE ARE TRACKING PEOPLE"
It's just a silly question to ask, what do you think they will say?
If Apple want to be seen to be squeaky they have a simple answer, put a setting in the iDevices options to turn off location tracking/storage.
Simple.
Pretty much sums it up. I knew these companies would be gathering information for advertising or marketing purposes long ago. I dont care what snarky answer SJ provides, I will assume they are collecting the data and move on with my life. Apple and Google are both for profit corporations so I Im not foolish enough to think one is more honorable than the other.
I never understand these things.
It's like asking a burger "did you steal anything?"
The answer will either be silence or it will be no.
Even if Apple were using and collecting tracking locations to build up databases of customer movements, they are not going to shout "YES WE ARE TRACKING PEOPLE"
It's just a silly question to ask, what do you think they will say?
If Apple want to be seen to be squeaky they have a simple answer, put a setting in the iDevices options to turn off location tracking/storage.
Simple.
Pretty much sums it up. I knew these companies would be gathering information for advertising or marketing purposes long ago. I dont care what snarky answer SJ provides, I will assume they are collecting the data and move on with my life. Apple and Google are both for profit corporations so I Im not foolish enough to think one is more honorable than the other.
Nuvi
Nov 8, 10:12 AM
I was at a local apple store and they are selling the tom tom car kit already. What a rip off, because you have to pay for the app seperate. I got the griffin car mount for $20 at frys and the navigon app, works great.
If you have to pay the suggested retail price then I do admit its a rip off. However, you can get easily 20% off if you just shop around a little bit. Regarding the TomTom app I fully agree. I actually think its way bigger rip off then the dock.
If you have to pay the suggested retail price then I do admit its a rip off. However, you can get easily 20% off if you just shop around a little bit. Regarding the TomTom app I fully agree. I actually think its way bigger rip off then the dock.
daneoni
Apr 20, 09:19 AM
And that update is still an iPhone 5 style update. iPhone 4S and iPhone 5 are the same thing. One just refers to a potential marketing name, the other to the generation of the device.
I don't get what is so hard to grasp here. The iPhone 3G was not the iPhone 3 at all, it was the iPhone 2 (and some would argue, the iPhone 1,2).
What exactly are you arguing about here? all i'm saying is this upgrade regardless of what it's called would be a speed/performance upgrade whilst iPhone 6 would be a new design/overhaul like iPhone 4 was. Even Apple are thinking (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-seeding-high-level-gaming-developers-with-a5-based-iphone-4s/) along this line
PS iPhone 4 carries a 3,1 numbering system. So it can be argued it is iPhone 3 in actuality and iPhone 5 could carry iPhone 3,2 or iPhone 4,1.
I don't get what is so hard to grasp here. The iPhone 3G was not the iPhone 3 at all, it was the iPhone 2 (and some would argue, the iPhone 1,2).
What exactly are you arguing about here? all i'm saying is this upgrade regardless of what it's called would be a speed/performance upgrade whilst iPhone 6 would be a new design/overhaul like iPhone 4 was. Even Apple are thinking (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/04/21/apple-seeding-high-level-gaming-developers-with-a5-based-iphone-4s/) along this line
PS iPhone 4 carries a 3,1 numbering system. So it can be argued it is iPhone 3 in actuality and iPhone 5 could carry iPhone 3,2 or iPhone 4,1.
citizenzen
Apr 15, 08:11 PM
You seemed to have missed it.
I didn't miss it, you did. here, I'll bold it, underline it and put it in red so it's easier for you to catch ...
I am primarily focused on making money through the time decay of the options. So, please, tell me how I am effecting the economy and please be specific.
Then I'll refer to the definition so you might know what that word means ...
pri�ma�ri�ly (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primarily) �adverb
1. essentially; mostly; chiefly; principally
Then I'll give you an example that demonstrates a different perspective on wealth ...
I am a graphic designer. My primary focus is on creating print and web solutions for my clients. While I do get paid, money is neither the source of my production and creativity, nor the material with which I work. It is a by-product of my labors, not the sole focus of them.
Thus I have a different perspective on money and wealth than itcheroni.
I hope that clarifies that for you.
I didn't miss it, you did. here, I'll bold it, underline it and put it in red so it's easier for you to catch ...
I am primarily focused on making money through the time decay of the options. So, please, tell me how I am effecting the economy and please be specific.
Then I'll refer to the definition so you might know what that word means ...
pri�ma�ri�ly (http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/primarily) �adverb
1. essentially; mostly; chiefly; principally
Then I'll give you an example that demonstrates a different perspective on wealth ...
I am a graphic designer. My primary focus is on creating print and web solutions for my clients. While I do get paid, money is neither the source of my production and creativity, nor the material with which I work. It is a by-product of my labors, not the sole focus of them.
Thus I have a different perspective on money and wealth than itcheroni.
I hope that clarifies that for you.
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.
islanders
Jul 23, 11:36 PM
You missed my entire point - Apple can't put off updates just because "sales are strong." The "other guys" (Dell, HP, Sony, etc.) upgrade to new technology as soon as they can ramp up production, and Apple won't be, and can't be, "late to the dance" with technology that they all have simultaneous access to. Particularly CPU's. Graphics chips .... well, there they may fudge a bit, especially with 2 brands to select from, but not processor upgrades.
There's no way we'll wait until "November/December," unless Intel fails to deliver Merom, as predicted. If any laptops have Merom sooner, so will Apple.
:cool:
iBorg
I think you have a reluctance to find some common ground, as was suggested in my previous post.
I said November.
You said �September Maybe.�
Which leaves August unlikely, and December pushing it.
However I will stand by my original post, that if I was planning to upgrade to a MBP Merom, I would be prepared to wait until December. As most experts have predicted a switch before the new year.
Otherwise I think everyone understands both schools of thought here, which have already been suggested numerous times in previous post.
Although, I think Apple will hurt themselves more in the long run if they announce an update and can�t meet demand.
:cool:
There's no way we'll wait until "November/December," unless Intel fails to deliver Merom, as predicted. If any laptops have Merom sooner, so will Apple.
:cool:
iBorg
I think you have a reluctance to find some common ground, as was suggested in my previous post.
I said November.
You said �September Maybe.�
Which leaves August unlikely, and December pushing it.
However I will stand by my original post, that if I was planning to upgrade to a MBP Merom, I would be prepared to wait until December. As most experts have predicted a switch before the new year.
Otherwise I think everyone understands both schools of thought here, which have already been suggested numerous times in previous post.
Although, I think Apple will hurt themselves more in the long run if they announce an update and can�t meet demand.
:cool:
MattInOz
Nov 27, 06:28 PM
The original article here is based on this smarthouse article, and has a link to it :) So unfortunately, the plot stays the same :)
What the hell do any of us know :). Interesting to speculate though.
I'll have to ask my partner about the graphics stuff - she's a high end graphic designer and a painter. My first thought is "the touch screen can't mimic her hand tools"... I figure that the accuracy of where she's touching the screen, the pressure she's exerting etc, will not be enough for real work
Yep a normal touch screen is limited, but then agian Apple have that patent application for a screen with camera pixels interlaced with normal pixels. If they have a screen close to production then a touch screen based on this would not only to do multi-touch control but could see the shape of the tool on the screen. Instead of using pressure to guess the shape the tool has made.
Then again that just makes for another missing piece of the tech puzzle to make a device like this work well.
There seems to be a couple of tech levels for such a device leading to the whole is it a iPod / PDA / laptop replacement. On the plus side i think most people given a quality device would prefer something touch based, pens brushes what ever they feel like.
I think we'll see a new family of devices rolled out over a couple of years as the tech comes online. Much the same way the iPod grew.
What the hell do any of us know :). Interesting to speculate though.
I'll have to ask my partner about the graphics stuff - she's a high end graphic designer and a painter. My first thought is "the touch screen can't mimic her hand tools"... I figure that the accuracy of where she's touching the screen, the pressure she's exerting etc, will not be enough for real work
Yep a normal touch screen is limited, but then agian Apple have that patent application for a screen with camera pixels interlaced with normal pixels. If they have a screen close to production then a touch screen based on this would not only to do multi-touch control but could see the shape of the tool on the screen. Instead of using pressure to guess the shape the tool has made.
Then again that just makes for another missing piece of the tech puzzle to make a device like this work well.
There seems to be a couple of tech levels for such a device leading to the whole is it a iPod / PDA / laptop replacement. On the plus side i think most people given a quality device would prefer something touch based, pens brushes what ever they feel like.
I think we'll see a new family of devices rolled out over a couple of years as the tech comes online. Much the same way the iPod grew.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق