quietstormSD
Apr 22, 10:04 AM
I'd be highly skeptical if Apple will introduce LTE compatable chips even in 2012. Usually Apple takes it's time to implement technologies that all other phone makers in the market have implemented. They focus on ease of use and to the point where you don't even notice the technology (et. al. there latest iPad 2 commercial) They'll probably delay any LTE implementation until 2013.
That doesn't matter too much for me. All I want is mega awesome battery life. iPad 2 type battery life in my phone. I think that is there focus especially with the phone.
That doesn't matter too much for me. All I want is mega awesome battery life. iPad 2 type battery life in my phone. I think that is there focus especially with the phone.
josece
Apr 14, 12:51 PM
I don't think Apple TV is what the product is, it's too difficult to use some apps only with the IR remote control.
I'm going for an iOS App store and Mac store integration, some of the apps that have been built for iPad could run perfectly on a Mac, and the other way around, plus, Steve even said that they would bring their best technologies "from the iPad to the Mac and with the new multi-touch gestures we believe our Macs will become more intuitive than ever".
This way, all the apps in your iDevices and Macs would be synced at all times.
Either that or Apple's new HDTV with a completely new input method that could let you use iOS apps on your TV properly, but I really don't think this is very likely.
I'm going for an iOS App store and Mac store integration, some of the apps that have been built for iPad could run perfectly on a Mac, and the other way around, plus, Steve even said that they would bring their best technologies "from the iPad to the Mac and with the new multi-touch gestures we believe our Macs will become more intuitive than ever".
This way, all the apps in your iDevices and Macs would be synced at all times.
Either that or Apple's new HDTV with a completely new input method that could let you use iOS apps on your TV properly, but I really don't think this is very likely.
reallynotnick
Apr 23, 09:42 PM
YES! I would love a iPhone on Sprint's everything plan. I know several people with Sprint smart phones and the service they provide is great for only $70! Choice is a good thing for the customer and if the iPhone 5 does have a global chipset, then wider availability would be the best way to go.
Exactly, I had to give up my iPhone 2G for an EVO because Sprint was so much cheaper and while I love my EVO I would love an iPhone more. I just hope the rumors of possibly a bigger screen come true because going from a 4.3in screen to a 3.5in screen would be kind of hard is the only thing. 3.7-4in would be nice but I digress.
Exactly, I had to give up my iPhone 2G for an EVO because Sprint was so much cheaper and while I love my EVO I would love an iPhone more. I just hope the rumors of possibly a bigger screen come true because going from a 4.3in screen to a 3.5in screen would be kind of hard is the only thing. 3.7-4in would be nice but I digress.
SpyderFCS
May 3, 07:37 AM
The iMac page is updated on the US site.
http://www.apple.com/imac/
http://www.apple.com/imac/
more...
rovex
Apr 14, 12:50 PM
Just let us know if Safari --> Youtube links are fixed.
tired of the force quit after the white pages.
That was fixed when I updated to 4.3.1
tired of the force quit after the white pages.
That was fixed when I updated to 4.3.1
SFStateStudent
Apr 14, 08:35 PM
Both iPhone & iPad are updated; can they get the updates to be a FULL GB instead of 666MB? Gawwwwww! :eek:
more...
cvaldes
Apr 24, 02:09 AM
Is this just a European iPhone on T-Mobile there?
Sound more and more like a rumor - AT&T and Verizon are exclusives to the iPhone here...
No, the European iPhone is the same hardware as the AT&T iPhone. It will handle voice and pokey EDGE/GPRS data on the T-Mobile USA network, but not 3G data because they use the AWS band for that.
Whether you believe that there is carrier exclusivity is irrelevant. Apple probably tests on many different carriers around the world.
The fact of the matter is Apple doesn't announce the terms of their contracts with mobile operators, so your so-called "exclusivity" could have ended at midnight yesterday.
Sound more and more like a rumor - AT&T and Verizon are exclusives to the iPhone here...
No, the European iPhone is the same hardware as the AT&T iPhone. It will handle voice and pokey EDGE/GPRS data on the T-Mobile USA network, but not 3G data because they use the AWS band for that.
Whether you believe that there is carrier exclusivity is irrelevant. Apple probably tests on many different carriers around the world.
The fact of the matter is Apple doesn't announce the terms of their contracts with mobile operators, so your so-called "exclusivity" could have ended at midnight yesterday.
MegaSignal
Jul 17, 09:38 PM
Huh? Bluetooth absolutely kicks ass! I have used it extensively with my laptop and my cell-phone, when making data-calls through the phone. No need to have any wires, no need to even take out the phone. Just turn on Bluetooth on the computer and dial. And it just works. Granted, few years ago Bluetooth had all kinds of problems. But it works very very well these days.
Now, it might be that operators in USA cripple Bluetooth (I have heard that they do that). Luckily in Finland they don't do that, and things work very well indeed.
I'm happy that it works well for you.
However: the only reason that I have to reboot and restart any Mac computer in my house is because of this abomination; when Bluetooth is disabled, no problems. Unfortunately, I must use it occasionally with my iBook, and, as such, deal with its dire consequences.
End of story.
Now, it might be that operators in USA cripple Bluetooth (I have heard that they do that). Luckily in Finland they don't do that, and things work very well indeed.
I'm happy that it works well for you.
However: the only reason that I have to reboot and restart any Mac computer in my house is because of this abomination; when Bluetooth is disabled, no problems. Unfortunately, I must use it occasionally with my iBook, and, as such, deal with its dire consequences.
End of story.
more...
trule
Jan 30, 05:09 PM
I understand the theory of what you say, that gold has intrinsic value. However, the theory has never been tested in a true crisis. Trust me, if everything went bankrupt (stocks, bonds, t-bills, banks, etc.), then gold will be of little value as well. The ONLY thing of true value under those circumstances will be food and those things that can be used to barter for food (gold would have some value in that case, but so would a box of ammunition) The fact that someone paid $1000 or $2000 an ounce for gold before a crisis will mean nothing. It will be worth only as much as someone is capable of paying, and that will be very little.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I can only suggest you look at the history of other nations, it happens quite often that complete economic systems collapse. Try Mexico, Argentina, Germany or any war torn nation. In these nations those with gold maintained their wealth, those without had to start from scratch.
Its insurance, just in case...for example when all the things I listed happen at once like they are in the USA right now.
The last run-up in the price of gold in the 80s was met with a rapid drop less than two years later to the $350 range, which is where gold sat for almost twenty years. While I have no idea how much more it will increase in value over the short term, the problem is that when the fall comes it will be quite rapid.
The biggest difference I see between gold and stocks is that one is based on negative gloom/doom thinking, and the other is based on positive/growth thinking. I have little to no interest in investing in gloom/doom, and history is the reason why. Periods of negative thinking tend to be short-lived.
I can only suggest you look at the history of other nations, it happens quite often that complete economic systems collapse. Try Mexico, Argentina, Germany or any war torn nation. In these nations those with gold maintained their wealth, those without had to start from scratch.
Its insurance, just in case...for example when all the things I listed happen at once like they are in the USA right now.
ssk2
Apr 22, 09:29 AM
Interesting:
Apple sues on 'look and feel', whereas Samsung sues on core technological patents. I always assume it'd be the other way around...
No-one wins here either way, its just crap for us consumers.
Apple sues on 'look and feel', whereas Samsung sues on core technological patents. I always assume it'd be the other way around...
No-one wins here either way, its just crap for us consumers.
more...
jaigo
Oct 24, 09:10 AM
Estimated
Shipped By
Oct 30, 2006
Estimated
Delivered By
Nov 1, 2006
MBPRO 15/2.16 CTO
:D
Shipped By
Oct 30, 2006
Estimated
Delivered By
Nov 1, 2006
MBPRO 15/2.16 CTO
:D
hexonxonx
Apr 16, 02:56 AM
I love my AT&T iPhone 4 and 3GS. On the iPhone 4, upgrading to 4.3.1 was flawless with no problems. The 3GS started having battery drain. Within 6 hours, it would be at 60% with just a bit of usage. I would usually be at 60% after 24 hours. I downgraded to 4.1 where I was before. Nothing on 4.3.1 was worth upgrading to. I don't have a supported printer for air printing and for airshare, the only thing I can share back and forth to is my MBP.
Any battery problems on this latest update?
I have had a flawless experience with AT&T over the past few years and will remain with the next iPhone.
Any battery problems on this latest update?
I have had a flawless experience with AT&T over the past few years and will remain with the next iPhone.
more...
ciTiger
Apr 25, 01:17 PM
Finally! Some interesting Mac news! Get that refresh done so we can start talking about the MBP refresh!
jettredmont
Oct 23, 10:20 AM
This is incorrect.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the "licensed device".
I am not a lawyer. However, direct reading of this does not indicate that. Once you install Windows on a machine, inside a VM or otherwise, the device on which it is installed is licensed.
IMHO, the angle Microsoft is going for here is that within a VM you can very easily defeat their Activation controls (activate to the VM, then clone the VM instance a hundred times and all copies are then running activated). It's all about reducing piracy, because MS is absolutely paranoid about piracy. They'd cut off their own left arm if they thought someone might use it to steal a copy of Windows.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the "licensed device".
I am not a lawyer. However, direct reading of this does not indicate that. Once you install Windows on a machine, inside a VM or otherwise, the device on which it is installed is licensed.
IMHO, the angle Microsoft is going for here is that within a VM you can very easily defeat their Activation controls (activate to the VM, then clone the VM instance a hundred times and all copies are then running activated). It's all about reducing piracy, because MS is absolutely paranoid about piracy. They'd cut off their own left arm if they thought someone might use it to steal a copy of Windows.
more...
balamw
Oct 23, 09:29 AM
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
The more "interesting" restriction I saw (and mentioned in the other thread) was the "don't use DRM in a VM" restriction even with business or ultimate. :eek: :rolleyes:
B
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
The more "interesting" restriction I saw (and mentioned in the other thread) was the "don't use DRM in a VM" restriction even with business or ultimate. :eek: :rolleyes:
B
kirk26
Jul 25, 09:44 AM
I can see you've never used one...How rude.:mad:
more...
andrewbecks
Apr 26, 01:41 PM
I stopped buying iMacs the day they went gloss. I now have a bunch of minis with the older Matte Cinema Displays. As simple as that � I put my money where my mouth is. If I couldn't get these, I would buy other branded displays.
When Steve Jobs made a comment a couple of years ago about Apple's customers saying they preferred gloss (or something like that) I wrote to Apple to say that at least one customer doesn't prefer gloss and why, and there is a pretty vocal group of Apple customers who share my sentiments. At least we were given the option on the MacBook Pros. I hate having to pay extra on an already expensive machine, but that's what I've done with my new just-ordered MBP. It's one small and expensive vote for usability to prevail over eye-candy. Sigh.
While I agree disagree with you as it relates to dsiplay preference (I prefer the glossy display over the matte display), I 100% agree with you in principal. Since Apple has customers who want the matte or anti-gloss option, they ought to make it available--simple as that. This way, everyone can be happy. If you want matte, you should be able to get it just as I'm able to get the glossy screen that I like.
(Plus, if they went to all matte, then the matte displays would weird up against the glossy 27" Cinema Displays, IMO.)
When Steve Jobs made a comment a couple of years ago about Apple's customers saying they preferred gloss (or something like that) I wrote to Apple to say that at least one customer doesn't prefer gloss and why, and there is a pretty vocal group of Apple customers who share my sentiments. At least we were given the option on the MacBook Pros. I hate having to pay extra on an already expensive machine, but that's what I've done with my new just-ordered MBP. It's one small and expensive vote for usability to prevail over eye-candy. Sigh.
While I agree disagree with you as it relates to dsiplay preference (I prefer the glossy display over the matte display), I 100% agree with you in principal. Since Apple has customers who want the matte or anti-gloss option, they ought to make it available--simple as that. This way, everyone can be happy. If you want matte, you should be able to get it just as I'm able to get the glossy screen that I like.
(Plus, if they went to all matte, then the matte displays would weird up against the glossy 27" Cinema Displays, IMO.)
NewSc2
Jul 28, 05:43 PM
I think this is great news~ I mean, really a few things would happen:
Zune sucks, doesn't do well (good for Apple)
Zune is well designed, but Apple makes an even better iPod (good for us)
Zune is really really well-designed, better than the iPod. (good for me, I'll get a Zune over an iPod)
Zune sucks, doesn't do well (good for Apple)
Zune is well designed, but Apple makes an even better iPod (good for us)
Zune is really really well-designed, better than the iPod. (good for me, I'll get a Zune over an iPod)
D4F
Apr 28, 04:38 PM
This is THE most retarded thread EVER hahaha
TonyC28
Apr 13, 07:58 PM
Ha...who cares anymore??
bedifferent
Apr 15, 10:29 PM
They used to publish changelogs before they switch to the new ADC.
I miss those days. This iOS style (GUI and OS X beta development) isn't wow'ing me. Not liking the grey icons, launchpad is a useless addition to application organization that works better with iOS multi-touch devices, no TRIM for third party Sandforce SSD's yet, OpenGL is lagging, no R.I., and no more change log's for developers. The iOS $99 membership (a huge drop from the $499+) is simply a way for Apple to grab money from non-developers and possibly receive feedback that is more consumer than developer driven.
I miss those days. This iOS style (GUI and OS X beta development) isn't wow'ing me. Not liking the grey icons, launchpad is a useless addition to application organization that works better with iOS multi-touch devices, no TRIM for third party Sandforce SSD's yet, OpenGL is lagging, no R.I., and no more change log's for developers. The iOS $99 membership (a huge drop from the $499+) is simply a way for Apple to grab money from non-developers and possibly receive feedback that is more consumer than developer driven.
macEfan
Oct 19, 08:35 PM
I knew I should have bought apple stock years ago....:D
joeops57
Jul 28, 07:42 AM
I actually hope it's moderately successful. Hopefully then, Apple will see fit to reduce their pricing schema on the iPods.
Realistically, it could go either way. Despite the debacle that is Windows, Microsoft has had a great deal of success with the XBox. I wouldn't be surprised if Zune isn't as bad as most members of MacRumors will make it out to be.
~Joe
Realistically, it could go either way. Despite the debacle that is Windows, Microsoft has had a great deal of success with the XBox. I wouldn't be surprised if Zune isn't as bad as most members of MacRumors will make it out to be.
~Joe
OhEsTen
Dec 1, 02:20 PM
You don't have a sign behind you that says "Hail Adware," do you? ;) :D
Perhaps he was offering to round-up fellow Mac-users to toil in Adware "sugar-mines"... lol :D
Perhaps he was offering to round-up fellow Mac-users to toil in Adware "sugar-mines"... lol :D
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário