Macsterguy
Apr 25, 12:46 PM
It has been a while since the last refresh and if you follow things here, you would have known to wait.
I have an iPad and use iTeleport on my iPhone 4 and iPad to remote access from my home network and remotely into my iMac. Works fairly well. There is some lag but when you need to get some stuff done, it can be quite useful. I wouldn't recommend it for significant workload.
They won't refresh again before Lion, probably not for another year, but they will ship with Lion when it comes out. Lion will cost you whatever it retails for, whether that is $129 or $29 (and I'm guessing it will be back to the $129 as it isn't the minor bump Snow Leopard was), with the only exception being that once they announce a release date (probably at WWDC), any machines purchased after that and before the release will be eligible for a copy of Lion at $9.99 shipping fee, so you aren't discouraged from buying during that 2-8 week period.
Honestly, I've looked at the dimensions and because of the wider aspect, the lack of an aluminum border, and almost edge to edge screen the 27" iMac is not much larger dimensionally than the 24", though the screen is larger of course.
Personally, I am waiting to update my 24" 2.8 Ghz Extreme iMac (aluminum rev. A - Aug 2007) to a new 27" but will hold out a couple extra months for a 10.7 preloaded machine. I prefer to do a clean OS install which I don't want to repeat so soon. Setting up all those apps, and copying in libraries, files, and other data from a backup is something I only want to do once.
Partition your HD with OS and apps on one, your stuff on another. Then it is all easy.... anytime
I have an iPad and use iTeleport on my iPhone 4 and iPad to remote access from my home network and remotely into my iMac. Works fairly well. There is some lag but when you need to get some stuff done, it can be quite useful. I wouldn't recommend it for significant workload.
They won't refresh again before Lion, probably not for another year, but they will ship with Lion when it comes out. Lion will cost you whatever it retails for, whether that is $129 or $29 (and I'm guessing it will be back to the $129 as it isn't the minor bump Snow Leopard was), with the only exception being that once they announce a release date (probably at WWDC), any machines purchased after that and before the release will be eligible for a copy of Lion at $9.99 shipping fee, so you aren't discouraged from buying during that 2-8 week period.
Honestly, I've looked at the dimensions and because of the wider aspect, the lack of an aluminum border, and almost edge to edge screen the 27" iMac is not much larger dimensionally than the 24", though the screen is larger of course.
Personally, I am waiting to update my 24" 2.8 Ghz Extreme iMac (aluminum rev. A - Aug 2007) to a new 27" but will hold out a couple extra months for a 10.7 preloaded machine. I prefer to do a clean OS install which I don't want to repeat so soon. Setting up all those apps, and copying in libraries, files, and other data from a backup is something I only want to do once.
Partition your HD with OS and apps on one, your stuff on another. Then it is all easy.... anytime
kdarling
Apr 28, 11:01 AM
... perhaps most surprisingly, the iPhone 3GS took second place in the rankings. Despite essentially being a nearly two-year-old device . . .
That speaks volumes.
That low price sells?
According to your past posts, selling phones at a low price ($49 in this case) is a sign of desperation, of an attempt to flood the market.
Heck, that's far cheaper than BOGO sales for other handsets where two people have sign long contracts.
Or, could it just possibly be that people aren't always swayed just by price? That the device itself could be a major factor?
That speaks volumes.
That low price sells?
According to your past posts, selling phones at a low price ($49 in this case) is a sign of desperation, of an attempt to flood the market.
Heck, that's far cheaper than BOGO sales for other handsets where two people have sign long contracts.
Or, could it just possibly be that people aren't always swayed just by price? That the device itself could be a major factor?
Avalontor
Apr 28, 06:53 PM
<snip>
You want rip-off? Microsoft makes its billions charging hundreds for a 10-cent CD in a dollar's worth of packaging. So does Adobe. Where's your outrage?
<snip>
seriously? so does Apple, where's your outrage?
how much is OSX again? maybe it would just be easier if you listed all the Apple software that is priced around $1.10
You want rip-off? Microsoft makes its billions charging hundreds for a 10-cent CD in a dollar's worth of packaging. So does Adobe. Where's your outrage?
<snip>
seriously? so does Apple, where's your outrage?
how much is OSX again? maybe it would just be easier if you listed all the Apple software that is priced around $1.10
lilo777
Apr 23, 12:48 AM
You enjoy seeing every issue from the perspective of someone who wants Apple to fail.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
Apple cares very deeply about their product, which is why they don't give in to every spec junkie who demands the latest and greatest immediately. The current chips don't give a usable battery life in Apple's eyes. If you want to get a phone that eats batteries that's your business, but Apple doesn't have an interest in developing anything like that.
Nope. I see every issue from the consumer perspective - as I should (being a consumer). Any other perspective would be an abomination (unless for those who hold tons of AAPL shares).
Phrases like "in Apple's eyes" is a good example of what I am talking about. Apple does not use iPhones, consumers do. Consumer eyse are the only eyes that matter. And that is exactly why people are switching to Android. If Apple cares more about what they think is right than what I think is right (for me) it would be stupid for me to care about what Apple thinks or does.
They would still have to use two chips as I understand it: one to support CDMA and then the other to support LTE.
I doubt that but even if that was the case then what? Every other phone manufacturer on the planet can design a phone that has LTE and Apple could not? Because they spend on R&D much less than any other hi-tech company of comparable size?
And there we have it friends! This guy has no clue what he's talking about. There are no hybrid LTE/3G chips available yet, so the multiple chips thing has nothing to do with GSM/CDMA. If Apple wanted to support 3G AND LTE which they would have to do considering how scarce LTE is at the moment, the only way for them to do it is to use two chips. Battery life would drain.
Here's a site for you to consider: Thunderbolt Battery Life (http://www.gottabemobile.com/2011/03/18/htc-thunderbolt-battery-life/)
This is what people are talking about when they say the iPhone's battery life would be horrible. It has nothing to do with a hybrid CDMA/GSM chip, and has everything to do with the lack of a hybrid 3G/LTE chip.
In fact, hybrid CDMA/GSM chips exist, and are already being used by Apple.
You miss the point. I did not investigate the details about the number of chips. Not everyone cares. The point here is that there many people who want LTE and the there is Apple with their "single phone fits all" strategy. Here is a piece of relevant information for you from Information Week:
"In its recently quarterly earnings report, Verizon Wireless noted that more than 500,000 customers signed up for LTE services and/or devices during its most recent quarter. Add that to the 65,000 who signed up in December, and Verizon has about 565,000 people using its next-generation wireless network. At this rate, Verizon may have more than 2 million 4G users by the end of the year.
Of the 500,000 who signed up for 4G services this quarter, more than half (260,000) chose a 4G phone--the HTC Thunderbolt--that went on sale in mid-March. It scored a significant number of customers in its first two weeks of availability. That means between January 1 and March 15, about 240,000 people purchased other 4G devices, such as USB modems."
As you can see 260K people bought HTC Thunderbolt since Verizon started selling them (about a month). This translates to about 3 million phones annually. Clearly the demand is there. Also, you keep forgetting that other phones have swappable batteries.
more...
Don't panic
Apr 26, 11:05 AM
hi everybody.
vacation was great thank you for asking :)
Intell, love the theme, of course. are you keeping it through the entire game? do we have assigned roles? :D
nothing of substance going on on day one as usual so i'll vote for ucfgrad93 again because he is the least active (only without vote, if i read the posts correctly.
and here is the current status (majority 7, deadline 5.05 pm EST)
eldiablo 2(3) (nathan, moyank) + aggie, not bolded
nies 2 (plutonius, appleguy)
plutonius 2 (nies, jav)
ibro 1 (chrmjenkins)
chrmjenkins 1 (ibro)
nathanmuir 1 (eldiablo)
ucfgrad 1 (don't panic)
didn't vote yet: ucfgrad93
for those interested, i updated stonyc spreadsheet to this game, and i'll try to keep it current
also, for clarity, when you change a vote, please don't go back to edit the original post (even by simply unbolding), just add the new bolded vote in a new post.
vacation was great thank you for asking :)
Intell, love the theme, of course. are you keeping it through the entire game? do we have assigned roles? :D
nothing of substance going on on day one as usual so i'll vote for ucfgrad93 again because he is the least active (only without vote, if i read the posts correctly.
and here is the current status (majority 7, deadline 5.05 pm EST)
eldiablo 2(3) (nathan, moyank) + aggie, not bolded
nies 2 (plutonius, appleguy)
plutonius 2 (nies, jav)
ibro 1 (chrmjenkins)
chrmjenkins 1 (ibro)
nathanmuir 1 (eldiablo)
ucfgrad 1 (don't panic)
didn't vote yet: ucfgrad93
for those interested, i updated stonyc spreadsheet to this game, and i'll try to keep it current
also, for clarity, when you change a vote, please don't go back to edit the original post (even by simply unbolding), just add the new bolded vote in a new post.
Anonymous Freak
Apr 28, 02:24 PM
Why are you equating "cross-dresser" and "pedophile"?
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
Also you do realize that gender roles and gender distinctions are purely socially constructed concepts that hold no real barring on reality.
Calling someone "creeeeepy" because they do not fit into your preconceived notion of gender is kind of ****ed up no?
The two were separate qualifiers. I wouldn't imagine that a male pedophile that ISN'T cross-dressing would try to walk into a womens' restroom. I was *NOT* meaning to imply that all cross-dressers are pedophiles.
To me, "transgender" means someone who identifies as the opposite of their birth gender the vast majority of the time. "Cross-dresser" means someone who primarily identifies as one gender, but occasionally dresses as the other gender. Yes, it is possible to have a transgender cross-dresser, someone who primarily identifies as the opposite of their birth gender, but occasionally dresses as their birth gender.
I have no problem with "regular" cross-dressers. But if they identify as their birth gender the majority of the time, they should use their birth gender-labeled restroom. If they identify as the opposite gender the majority of the time, even if they are still physically their birth gender, then I don't have a problem with them using their identified-as restroom.
And, yes, I fully agree that calling someone creepy because they do not fit into preconceived notions of gender is ********* up. People are people, regardless of outward appearances.
more...
retroneo
Apr 14, 02:41 AM
It wouldn't be too difficult for Apple to provide something like Rosetta for iDevice apps.
You don't need Rosetta, iOS is Intel 64 native. You get a copy with Xcode called the Simulator.
You don't need Rosetta, iOS is Intel 64 native. You get a copy with Xcode called the Simulator.
(marc)
Apr 24, 04:58 PM
[...]
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
[...]
People get beat up for no reason all the time. It doesn't have to do anything with bullying or the victim being a transgender. From what the victim said, the attackers used a standard "excuse" to start a fight. ("Why are you talking to my man?", if I understood correctly.)
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
[...]
People get beat up for no reason all the time. It doesn't have to do anything with bullying or the victim being a transgender. From what the victim said, the attackers used a standard "excuse" to start a fight. ("Why are you talking to my man?", if I understood correctly.)
more...
seanpholman
Mar 16, 11:06 AM
Ample supply of 64 Verizon at SCP for no, but was told by the mall cop that we were not allowed to "loiter" and he told everyone in the back of the line to leave or we would be forced to leave. Real nice.
--Sean
--Sean
Wozza2010
Apr 14, 05:22 PM
Exactly - when I got my iphone 4 I couldn't believe how smooth/fluid it all was. I just wasn't used to it having only used windoze products where stuttering and lag is quite common.
Up to version 4.2.1 the iphone 4 was very smooth, with 4.3.x some of that feel has been lost.
Same thing happened on iPad going from os 3 to os 4.
The smooth feel was lost forever.
Up to version 4.2.1 the iphone 4 was very smooth, with 4.3.x some of that feel has been lost.
Same thing happened on iPad going from os 3 to os 4.
The smooth feel was lost forever.
more...
puckhead193
Jan 29, 03:50 PM
I *just* opened this a few minutes ago. My girlfriend got it for me for my birthday. I absolutely love it... wanted one for a while. :)
Post pics of it all set up!
Post pics of it all set up!
Jason Beck
Apr 14, 12:08 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5262/5615054082_4466130eb8_z.jpg
Nice! Soft and sharp. Loooove it.
Nice! Soft and sharp. Loooove it.
more...
Eric374
Apr 30, 05:37 PM
seriously? so does Apple, where's your outrage?
how much is OSX again? maybe it would just be easier if you listed all the Apple software that is priced around $1.10
How much is Windows Ultimate??? $320. How much is OSX? $129 for the boxed set that includes Snow Leopard, iLife and iWork. Which is the better deal? OSX hands down, because I can still run that on my 5 year old machine. Can't say that for Windows.
On the Android side, how many Android phones that are selling now as new are running the latest version of Android?
how much is OSX again? maybe it would just be easier if you listed all the Apple software that is priced around $1.10
How much is Windows Ultimate??? $320. How much is OSX? $129 for the boxed set that includes Snow Leopard, iLife and iWork. Which is the better deal? OSX hands down, because I can still run that on my 5 year old machine. Can't say that for Windows.
On the Android side, how many Android phones that are selling now as new are running the latest version of Android?
gh0sted
Jul 15, 09:14 PM
Microsoft is denying it is true. Being that they need the record labels to sign off on their music store, I doubt they'd infringe on already set licenses and risk a music business revolt.
more...
NoNothing
Mar 29, 01:50 PM
The difference being:
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
Another big reason is Google had pre-announced Google I/O with pre-registration active for over a week. This is important if you need to work out schedules at work and such. With Apple, you had 1day to work that out. For Google I/O, you had over a week to decide if the schedule worked for you.
1. 1/3 the price at $450.
2. Google gives all attendees an Android phone.
3. A scalper bought a huge portion of the tickets to resell. Apple does not let you transfer tickets. You must check-in at the registration desk with government issued ID (4th year attending).
Another big reason is Google had pre-announced Google I/O with pre-registration active for over a week. This is important if you need to work out schedules at work and such. With Apple, you had 1day to work that out. For Google I/O, you had over a week to decide if the schedule worked for you.
weg
Jul 12, 05:24 PM
God if those pics are right, I say... welcome to 2002 Microsoft!
It looks like a mix between a Rio MP3 player and a 3rd gen iPod
it's prototype.. unless it's a a fake of course. If they manage to seamlessly integrate this into Windows they've a good chance to beat the **** out of the iPod (so far, all the hardware that Microsoft produces is great.. I'm using a Microsoft Natural keyboard as well as a Microsoft Bluetooth mouse with my Powerbook).
It looks like a mix between a Rio MP3 player and a 3rd gen iPod
it's prototype.. unless it's a a fake of course. If they manage to seamlessly integrate this into Windows they've a good chance to beat the **** out of the iPod (so far, all the hardware that Microsoft produces is great.. I'm using a Microsoft Natural keyboard as well as a Microsoft Bluetooth mouse with my Powerbook).
more...
notabadname
Apr 28, 11:27 AM
When your sales numbers for phones are ~50% of that of your competitor; whereas a few years ago they were barely a blip, then yes that means they are getting kicked in the teeth in handset OS sales.
Apple sells its OS ? Google sells its OS?
Funny, last I heard, Apple sells phones, and the iPhone is out-selling every other phone model on the market. Apple even sells more phones than Google :rolleyes: In-fact, Google's phone hardware effort was an Epic Fail by any measure. Funny how people can't grasp the "market" that Apple competes in - hardware. With a greater market cap that exceeds Microsoft or Google, I don't think Apple is too worried.
Apple sells its OS ? Google sells its OS?
Funny, last I heard, Apple sells phones, and the iPhone is out-selling every other phone model on the market. Apple even sells more phones than Google :rolleyes: In-fact, Google's phone hardware effort was an Epic Fail by any measure. Funny how people can't grasp the "market" that Apple competes in - hardware. With a greater market cap that exceeds Microsoft or Google, I don't think Apple is too worried.
wmk461
Jan 30, 05:14 PM
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.
You are right about this, but we have also never lived in a generation of such drastic debt and our markets are not sustainable at this level of debt and the interest which is owed on it... So I do not see it as doom and gloom but prefer to see the realism behind it. We are really in uncharted territories in modern time but in comparison to the Roman Empire we are over extended just like they were. Our military occupies over 200 countries, we are fighting in two wars with the possibility of a third and it all will cost us trillions. The reality of it is that other countries are not putting themselves at economic risk for the safety of the world like we are. In then end it is the American people who are being effected by this.
You are right about this, but we have also never lived in a generation of such drastic debt and our markets are not sustainable at this level of debt and the interest which is owed on it... So I do not see it as doom and gloom but prefer to see the realism behind it. We are really in uncharted territories in modern time but in comparison to the Roman Empire we are over extended just like they were. Our military occupies over 200 countries, we are fighting in two wars with the possibility of a third and it all will cost us trillions. The reality of it is that other countries are not putting themselves at economic risk for the safety of the world like we are. In then end it is the American people who are being effected by this.
iJays
May 4, 03:33 AM
double posting. sorry
monaarts
Apr 14, 02:24 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I am going with either universal apps for iOS and Mac or appletv. Nothing else makes sense.
I am going with either universal apps for iOS and Mac or appletv. Nothing else makes sense.
Mr. Retrofire
Apr 15, 02:27 PM
App Sandboxing? Since when does Lion do that??
Even 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 do that, IIRC.
Even 10.4, 10.5 and 10.6 do that, IIRC.
wovel
Apr 28, 12:28 PM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
There is not a single Android device that outsold the iPhone 3GS. That is pathetisad...
That is Awesome.
There is not a single Android device that outsold the iPhone 3GS. That is pathetisad...
d_and_n5000
Jul 21, 10:13 AM
Sweet!
As long as Apple doesn't grow too fast, this is great news. Get to Gateway in the next few years, and I'll be happy. Just don't grow too big, Apple.
As long as Apple doesn't grow too fast, this is great news. Get to Gateway in the next few years, and I'll be happy. Just don't grow too big, Apple.
neil1980
Apr 25, 11:29 AM
What about a screen bigger than 21.5" but less than 27"?
Skint at the moment but exactly the above.
I was looking at the 24" and held off for the update when they did the 21.5 and 27.
21.5 is too small for me really and 27 is too big.... 24 would have been the ideal size really so I held off and in the end didn't bother.
Will probably get a 24" monitor and a henge dock or maybe a mac mini instead
Skint at the moment but exactly the above.
I was looking at the 24" and held off for the update when they did the 21.5 and 27.
21.5 is too small for me really and 27 is too big.... 24 would have been the ideal size really so I held off and in the end didn't bother.
Will probably get a 24" monitor and a henge dock or maybe a mac mini instead
Няма коментари:
Публикуване на коментар