CheeseFrog
Mar 23, 05:55 PM
I agree with you. if someone is drunk and is still able to operate the app they could be a hazard if they avoid these points.
That's GREAT. Call me crazy, but I actually want to know where these streets are that drunks are avoiding so that I can take them and not have to worry about getting t-boned by Drunky McDrunkerton.
That's GREAT. Call me crazy, but I actually want to know where these streets are that drunks are avoiding so that I can take them and not have to worry about getting t-boned by Drunky McDrunkerton.
aurichie
Apr 30, 11:29 PM
I was wondering why so many people are so opposed to Apple offering Blu-Ray as a BTO option. I have read where Steve Jobs spoke negatively about Blu-Ray, I wonder if these same people would be all gung-ho for BR if Jobs had spoken positively about it? I realize that he is a very smart man, but he isn't God!
You wonder correctly. The best example is a lot of people on here absolutely hated the new iPhone 4 design when it was originally leaked. Hoards of people rushed on to post it was ugly, it was not something Apple would ever design, and there was no way the new iPhone would like those leaked pictures. The moment Apple confirmed that was the new iPhone 4 it suddenly became the most gorgeous mobile handset on god's earth, and these people all wanted to rush out and buy one. Pretty scary really. :)
I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
I have BR on my Windows PC and I honestly *never* use it. I did buy some blank BR media a couple years ago and those discs are still gathering dust in a cupboard somewhere. I'm far happier storing my backups on hard drives and rotating them offsite with members of the family. I wouldn't like to try and manage that with BR media. That said, I am aware backups are supposed to be stored on two different types of media as the golden rule. And BR would make for a good second type of backup media I guess. Personally I prefer the cloud storage option.
You wonder correctly. The best example is a lot of people on here absolutely hated the new iPhone 4 design when it was originally leaked. Hoards of people rushed on to post it was ugly, it was not something Apple would ever design, and there was no way the new iPhone would like those leaked pictures. The moment Apple confirmed that was the new iPhone 4 it suddenly became the most gorgeous mobile handset on god's earth, and these people all wanted to rush out and buy one. Pretty scary really. :)
I always thought that BR would have been a great thing to have on a Mac for things like backing up your iTunes library. Imagine that, being able to back up your entire iTunes library on two or three BR discs. That would have been really nice. I read somewhere the other day that they either have or are getting ready to have BR discs that have a 100GB capacity. What in the world would have been wrong with that?
I have BR on my Windows PC and I honestly *never* use it. I did buy some blank BR media a couple years ago and those discs are still gathering dust in a cupboard somewhere. I'm far happier storing my backups on hard drives and rotating them offsite with members of the family. I wouldn't like to try and manage that with BR media. That said, I am aware backups are supposed to be stored on two different types of media as the golden rule. And BR would make for a good second type of backup media I guess. Personally I prefer the cloud storage option.
Multimedia
Sep 10, 08:20 AM
The iMacs will NEVER see Kentsfields. Apple would have to have put Conroe in the new iMacs for that even to be a remote possibility. Even if they had I would still say it would never get Kentsfields.
I mean people are saying that Conroe is too hot for the iMac as it is (I don't think they are) but Kentsfield is two Conroe dies on one package. Meaning almost double the power consumption and heat generation.You appear to have no imagination. Kentsfield Will Go Into A New iMac Redesign. Have you not seen this mock-up yet? There are options in design that can make the iMac much cooler even with more heat producing elements inside.The iMac is huge (relatively speaking), are you telling me such a huge enclosure won't be able to dissipitate an extra 30W or so? It is only around 30W more!
Like it or not Apple will have to somehow fit the Kentsfield into their lineup, cos their advertising campaigns are going to look very lame when Dell simply cops their "switch" campaign style and come out with a "PC" with 4 heads and a "Mac" with only 2.
When Kentfield replaces Conroes and every $999 Dell ships with quad core, it is quite hard to justify buying a dual (in Apple's case, a $2000+ quad)Exactly generik. Bravo.
I don't buy the notion that the iMac will continue to look like it has for these past two years. The G4 iMac design lasted 2.66 years. We are at the 2 year point of the current design. Why does everyone think the iMac is going to look like it does now in a year? I will be shocked if it does and not surprised at all when it's design changes radically to accomidate more heat from the likes of Kentsfield and Tigerton.
I mean people are saying that Conroe is too hot for the iMac as it is (I don't think they are) but Kentsfield is two Conroe dies on one package. Meaning almost double the power consumption and heat generation.You appear to have no imagination. Kentsfield Will Go Into A New iMac Redesign. Have you not seen this mock-up yet? There are options in design that can make the iMac much cooler even with more heat producing elements inside.The iMac is huge (relatively speaking), are you telling me such a huge enclosure won't be able to dissipitate an extra 30W or so? It is only around 30W more!
Like it or not Apple will have to somehow fit the Kentsfield into their lineup, cos their advertising campaigns are going to look very lame when Dell simply cops their "switch" campaign style and come out with a "PC" with 4 heads and a "Mac" with only 2.
When Kentfield replaces Conroes and every $999 Dell ships with quad core, it is quite hard to justify buying a dual (in Apple's case, a $2000+ quad)Exactly generik. Bravo.
I don't buy the notion that the iMac will continue to look like it has for these past two years. The G4 iMac design lasted 2.66 years. We are at the 2 year point of the current design. Why does everyone think the iMac is going to look like it does now in a year? I will be shocked if it does and not surprised at all when it's design changes radically to accomidate more heat from the likes of Kentsfield and Tigerton.
Shadow
Oct 27, 09:47 AM
I. Hate. Greenpeace. I've wasted seconds of my life 'listening' to them and its all rubbish.
http://www.apple.com/environment/
http://www.apple.com/environment/
twlott
Mar 29, 02:56 PM
Microsoft partnered with Nokia out of desperation. Not because there products are going to be any good.
SilianRail
Apr 14, 04:58 PM
Using the 3.0 drive, the 10-gigabyte folder transferred to the U.S.B. 3.0 drive in 6 minutes, 31 seconds (write speed). The U.S.B. 2.0 drive took 22 minutes, 14 seconds to copy the same 10-gig folder.
In other words, the U.S.B. 3.0 drive copied the data roughly 3.5 times faster than the U.S.B. 2.0 drive. That�s far short of the touted 10X performance gains, but it�s an improvement that you�ll definitely notice.
In my informal tests, the difference in read speeds was not so dramatic. The USB 3.0 drive transferred the 10-gigabyte folder to the desktop in 4 minutes, 13 seconds, while the USB 2.0 drive transferred the same folder in 5 minutes, 14 seconds.http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/testing-real-world-speed-of-usb-3-0-hard-drives/
That is horrible scaling given that USB 2.0 lasted 10 years.
In other words, the U.S.B. 3.0 drive copied the data roughly 3.5 times faster than the U.S.B. 2.0 drive. That�s far short of the touted 10X performance gains, but it�s an improvement that you�ll definitely notice.
In my informal tests, the difference in read speeds was not so dramatic. The USB 3.0 drive transferred the 10-gigabyte folder to the desktop in 4 minutes, 13 seconds, while the USB 2.0 drive transferred the same folder in 5 minutes, 14 seconds.http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/testing-real-world-speed-of-usb-3-0-hard-drives/
That is horrible scaling given that USB 2.0 lasted 10 years.
TheIguana
Nov 13, 11:50 PM
Which law firm please. We'd all like to know for future reference, who to not trust our cases with. While most law has to do with the letter of the law, jury trials often are won or lost based on what the jury believes to be the intent or spirit of the law.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Come off it, cmaier has a darn good point. Apple is being utterly ridiculous in this debacle between themselves and Rogue Amoeba. There was no reason at all that such a debate should have evolved into a 3 month conflict, nor was it necessary that it should have ended with Rogue Amoeba having to indulge their customers in a battle with Apple over icons. Having user interface unity is something Apple strives for in all of their products. By giving 3rd party developers the ninth degree over something so ingrained in this product is simply stupid. It does nothing to help the end user, ingrain the confidence of developers, or aid Apple. It just brings out end users and developers with grievances and sharpened pitchforks.
The british common law legal system was never intended to be like this. The lawyers have destroyed and twisted it beyond all recognition. It was originally supposed to be based on judeo-christian morals and ethics. There is not supposed to be a grey area. You are either deliberately infringing on the rights of others or you are not. The original intent was to have a court case as the last resort where parties would first try to solve the problem by talking to each other, then go to arbitration and then court as a last resort.
Come off it, cmaier has a darn good point. Apple is being utterly ridiculous in this debacle between themselves and Rogue Amoeba. There was no reason at all that such a debate should have evolved into a 3 month conflict, nor was it necessary that it should have ended with Rogue Amoeba having to indulge their customers in a battle with Apple over icons. Having user interface unity is something Apple strives for in all of their products. By giving 3rd party developers the ninth degree over something so ingrained in this product is simply stupid. It does nothing to help the end user, ingrain the confidence of developers, or aid Apple. It just brings out end users and developers with grievances and sharpened pitchforks.
bigjnyc
Apr 25, 12:55 PM
Oh boy I've been trying to hold strong with my perfectly working 2009 MBP and not give in to any updates... This is the longest I've gone with a computer since I started using Macs lol...... But a case re-design might be too much for me.
SilianRail
Apr 14, 03:07 PM
in all seriousness people, this thing http://snowulf.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/USB-3-Mini-B-Connector.jpg is going to scare people off...Hideous
DCJ001
Mar 22, 02:54 PM
Better idea: add an ExpressCard slot so I can put eSATA or USB3 on my iMac. Or you know...put USB3 & eSATA on my iMac for me *hint hint Apple*
You can have an eSATA port added to an iMac through OWC for $169:
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/add_eSATA
You can have an eSATA port added to an iMac through OWC for $169:
http://eshop.macsales.com/shop/turnkey/iMac_2010_27/add_eSATA
karthi
Sep 19, 04:02 PM
I thought TV shows in iTunes won't be a hit, why would any one need to pay $1.99 for the stuff, that is already available in cable, sat, Tivo, DVD's, Block buster, feely on the air in SDTV/HDTV, etc.. and all viewable on big screen TV.:confused:
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
I never bought any TV shows on iTunes, as I use DVR. I see myself buying online movie downloads, mainly for convenience and the fact that it is available on the same day as DVD.:) . Even though blockbuster is less than 5 min away, it will be at least 45 min trip. Of course I will still be renting/buying DVD's.
One more thing many forget about iTV ( Apple soon come with a real name), is that , it is not just for movies, I would happily pay third of its price just to have music and photos on my receiver and TV with the front row screen/remote.
Eidorian
Aug 28, 12:15 PM
I think I'll just purchase a Core 2 Duo myself and drop it in my iMac.
Conroe, right?Merom... (http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom)
Conroe, right?Merom... (http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom)
iMikeT
Oct 27, 04:40 PM
This is just what we need, more hippies....
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:04 AM
I'd rather have none at all. This is a file being stored. It's big bad news.
Of course that's the ideal answer but an impossible answer. So again, Google or your device/computer?
Of course that's the ideal answer but an impossible answer. So again, Google or your device/computer?
skunk
Sep 14, 08:24 AM
Yes it has.It was a MacUser UK cover picture months ago.
macteo
Apr 11, 03:46 PM
http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lji97caR8J1qimcf5o1_r1_400.jpg
Thanks James Laird amazing work.
I've been able to install ShairPort on my iMac.
Here you can find some instructions (http://mmacteo.tumblr.com/post/4533119926/shairport-instructions) to do the same on your mac(s).
It's relatively easy, you need just some very basic terminal experience.
Thanks James Laird amazing work.
I've been able to install ShairPort on my iMac.
Here you can find some instructions (http://mmacteo.tumblr.com/post/4533119926/shairport-instructions) to do the same on your mac(s).
It's relatively easy, you need just some very basic terminal experience.
jelloshotsrule
Oct 27, 09:06 AM
How many trees were harmed in the production of their leaflets?
And were they produced on a "non-green" MAC?
:rolleyes:
your logic is brilliant. since they had to use non-green items in spreading their information, then they are hypocrites and shouldn't push for improvement of materials. good point!
of course you ignore that there are many sources of recycled paper, soy based inks, etc etc which their leaflets could very well have been made from (though i don't know for a fact that they were.)
And were they produced on a "non-green" MAC?
:rolleyes:
your logic is brilliant. since they had to use non-green items in spreading their information, then they are hypocrites and shouldn't push for improvement of materials. good point!
of course you ignore that there are many sources of recycled paper, soy based inks, etc etc which their leaflets could very well have been made from (though i don't know for a fact that they were.)
BornAgainMac
Sep 9, 06:36 AM
It wouldn't have been worth it to wait for these unless you wanted the 24 inch display (and Firewire 800) with your iMac. The iMac really looks like a good switcher machine that gives Pro performance to the masses.
0815
Apr 20, 01:58 PM
You're not getting it. You are looking at a sunny-sky situation where nothing bad ever happens. Let's look at it from my perspective, a real-world perspective: my Macbook, which was used to sync my iPhone and my wife's iPhone, was stolen last fall. So who has all of this supposedly "safe" data now? Whoever has that Macbook. Probably nothing will ever happen, but now I have that little thing in the back of my mind thinking, "Hmm, if that guy happens to read about this and happens to still have it, he could theoretically track our normal daily movements." In other words, he'd know our daily routine - you know, most people have a routine and stick to it and don't think a second thing about it. Conceivably, he could come back and strike again because he has a good feel of when we're not there. I'd say the likelihood of this happening is extremely low. But it could happen because of this. (And we know the Macbook was used for a long, long time because of Zumocast - had it on our iPhones and her computer and saw him logged in all the time, starting a couple days after he stole it. Was actually able to recover some family videos that way, actually.)
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
Finally some sensible example where this might cause a problem .... time for the 'remote erase' feature for MacBooks.
That's what you don't get. People shouldn't even have to worry about this. That kind of data shouldn't be available, period. PERIOD. And don't tell me to encrypt my iPhone backups, that's water under the bridge. Why doesn't iTunes encrypt them automatically, hmm? There's no need for any of this.
Finally some sensible example where this might cause a problem .... time for the 'remote erase' feature for MacBooks.
bigandy
Oct 27, 10:27 AM
and nobody noticed this?
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands.
booth! not both! :rolleyes:
The group had purchased a small both with contract terms to only hand out leaflets within their assigned area and to not take photographs at other stands.
booth! not both! :rolleyes:
Ivan Malagurski
May 4, 12:38 PM
One more amazing Apple product :)
AidenShaw
May 3, 03:54 PM
A couple of years from now TBolt will be as normal as 1394.
Agreed. In a few years - after some software updates, firmware revisions, and motherboard replacements - I also expect TBolt to be a normal (although perhaps expensive) way to connect peripherals.
TBolt on the current Apples (laptops/all-in-ones) is an interesting thing if you don't need it. If you need it to work out-of-the-box - perhaps you should have a backup strategy in place.
Apple couldn't even release laptops that worked right with their current display lineup - (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1114280) - and you expect a brand new bleeding edge hot-plug PCIe interconnect to work when it can't possibly have been tested with off-the-shelf peripherals? That's way too much Kool-Aid!
Agreed. In a few years - after some software updates, firmware revisions, and motherboard replacements - I also expect TBolt to be a normal (although perhaps expensive) way to connect peripherals.
TBolt on the current Apples (laptops/all-in-ones) is an interesting thing if you don't need it. If you need it to work out-of-the-box - perhaps you should have a backup strategy in place.
Apple couldn't even release laptops that worked right with their current display lineup - (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1114280) - and you expect a brand new bleeding edge hot-plug PCIe interconnect to work when it can't possibly have been tested with off-the-shelf peripherals? That's way too much Kool-Aid!
Ricard
Aug 23, 05:43 PM
Apple needs to sell 334,448.160535117 iPods to get the "investment" money back...
Machead III
Sep 1, 03:16 AM
Agreed-UK is next to get TV shows-perhaps BBC will offer its shows.
It had better do. The British public (those who pay license, which like 99% do) has the legal right to every single piece of footage, news story, radio recording etc. etc. the BBC has ever produced, but we have access to about 1% of it.
It's a big point of controversy here. Partly it's been due to technology limitations, but pretty soon there'll be no excuse, and the BBC should be right off the bat finding new ways to deliver what belongs to us.
It had better do. The British public (those who pay license, which like 99% do) has the legal right to every single piece of footage, news story, radio recording etc. etc. the BBC has ever produced, but we have access to about 1% of it.
It's a big point of controversy here. Partly it's been due to technology limitations, but pretty soon there'll be no excuse, and the BBC should be right off the bat finding new ways to deliver what belongs to us.