Mitthrawnuruodo
Sep 5, 01:46 PM
Yeah... yeah... Movies for the American audience...
...I don't even get TV shows... :(
...I don't even get TV shows... :(
Hattig
Mar 29, 12:37 PM
Wow, I didnt even realize they took CUT away
They didn't, you're being trolled when someone says you can't cut text.
Files, in Finder, that's another thing, and quite annoying. This is the only place that the comments about Mac OS X lacking cut functionality have any relevance.
They didn't, you're being trolled when someone says you can't cut text.
Files, in Finder, that's another thing, and quite annoying. This is the only place that the comments about Mac OS X lacking cut functionality have any relevance.
macsnjets
Sep 12, 02:18 PM
Now what do I do, I've been waiting since Christmas and this is what I get..UGGGHHHH ? Where is my widescreen iPod Steve ?
Philberttheduck
Sep 12, 06:07 PM
I'm very happy about the gapless playback, and battery life, but generally all these updates are pretty disappointing.
Pretty much sums up my mood hours afterwards. At the time, I was flaming pissed/disappointed. I'm pretty much utterly disappointed by this event.
But this iPod was almost "expected," from a business standpoint. Full screen iPod and iPhone; anything short of a 60/120GB iPod lineup and I'll see it as a huge letdown.
Steve's pre-Holiday event's bar is set at infinity +1.
I blame the no-show turtleneck sweater. :D
Pretty much sums up my mood hours afterwards. At the time, I was flaming pissed/disappointed. I'm pretty much utterly disappointed by this event.
But this iPod was almost "expected," from a business standpoint. Full screen iPod and iPhone; anything short of a 60/120GB iPod lineup and I'll see it as a huge letdown.
Steve's pre-Holiday event's bar is set at infinity +1.
I blame the no-show turtleneck sweater. :D
LandOfTech
Apr 25, 01:04 PM
Hilarious to all those people who jumped on the THUNDERBOLT bandwagon. No thunderbolt devices yet and they have the hideous old case design.
:rolleyes:
I didn't want to buy it because i had a feeling 2012 will be new design but i had to buy it because i needed a mac and couldn't wait another year!
and its not like the 2011 MBP's are the same old thing just with thunderbolt! It had a faster processer (with **** GPU in the 13" lol)
:rolleyes:
I didn't want to buy it because i had a feeling 2012 will be new design but i had to buy it because i needed a mac and couldn't wait another year!
and its not like the 2011 MBP's are the same old thing just with thunderbolt! It had a faster processer (with **** GPU in the 13" lol)
cvaldes
Mar 22, 04:25 PM
There's pretty much no news in this news piece.
We know it's going to include Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt. We know it's unlikely to be re-designed and we know it's going to be between now and May.
Where's the news here?
We need specs. Some CPU and other info, at least.
You'll find out when the rest of us find out: when Apple posts the specs to the new hardware at www.apple.com.
Don't forget: this is MacRumors.com, not MacNews.com.
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
We know it's going to include Sandy Bridge and Thunderbolt. We know it's unlikely to be re-designed and we know it's going to be between now and May.
Where's the news here?
We need specs. Some CPU and other info, at least.
You'll find out when the rest of us find out: when Apple posts the specs to the new hardware at www.apple.com.
Don't forget: this is MacRumors.com, not MacNews.com.
And if you are looking for specs from unannounced products from Apple, you are going to quickly get used to being disappointed.
daneoni
Sep 12, 03:24 PM
what do you mean my windows is close not to upgrade??
and also, is there any chance that i might be succeeding in returning it... or even getting a refund??? i mean i took the vinyl cover off and just totally used it... can i return it right back to the apple store??
I meant return window..its just one day. Im not sure about the return but just give it a shot. If they ask, tell them you'd like to buy the new version. Be polite but firm as much as possible and you should be fine. Worst case scenario is they say no BUT you won't feel bad because you're current iPod is definately not out of date from what i see today
and also, is there any chance that i might be succeeding in returning it... or even getting a refund??? i mean i took the vinyl cover off and just totally used it... can i return it right back to the apple store??
I meant return window..its just one day. Im not sure about the return but just give it a shot. If they ask, tell them you'd like to buy the new version. Be polite but firm as much as possible and you should be fine. Worst case scenario is they say no BUT you won't feel bad because you're current iPod is definately not out of date from what i see today
Warbrain
Apr 20, 10:14 AM
Are you sure? Cause people are claiming that its not in the ToS/ToC.
Section 4b: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
Section 4b: http://images.apple.com/legal/sla/docs/iphone.pdf
iMacZealot
Sep 15, 11:01 PM
May I remind you:
iPod's:
1G 23 Oct 2001
2G 17 July 2002
3G 28 April 2003
4G/Photo July 2004
5G 12 Oct 2005
5G (enhanced) 12 Sep 2006
6G (not ready yet)
iPhone� Clear some space under that (Walnut) tree.
Besides this is not an iPod, it's an iPod Phone�
What about the iPod mini or shuffle?
In retrospect, I should've said product and not just iPod. That's where they release all the toys.
iPod's:
1G 23 Oct 2001
2G 17 July 2002
3G 28 April 2003
4G/Photo July 2004
5G 12 Oct 2005
5G (enhanced) 12 Sep 2006
6G (not ready yet)
iPhone� Clear some space under that (Walnut) tree.
Besides this is not an iPod, it's an iPod Phone�
What about the iPod mini or shuffle?
In retrospect, I should've said product and not just iPod. That's where they release all the toys.
HecubusPro
Sep 4, 07:56 PM
I'm confused. Movie downloads for $10?!? What happened to the whole "Jobs is hammered by the movie industry into movie rentals only" ?!? This CANNOT possibly mean renting a movie for $10!! :eek:
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
My bet is that it's low-res/iPod quality video for purchase. Apple/Steve Jobs have yet to get into the home theater business. So far it's been the mobile entertainment business only. Movie rentals (or purchase for that matter) at home theater quality is a whole other enchilada.
Watching 320x240 movie on my 42" plasma would sort of suck and not be competitive as others have metioned. Would I buy a $10 movie to watch on my iPod? mmm....probably a few to keep me entertained on the treadmill and my son entertained on roadtrips.
Rumors are rampant, but they do bring up a good point, as you do here. Who would want to watch a movie on an iPod? (Well, actually, I have and I do, but that's beside the point.)
The Appleinsider rumor at least makes sense from an itunes/tv/movie purchase standpoint. Renting would be sort of a PITA. Who would want to download a good quality movie, often taking hours or days, unless you have a lot of people torrenting at the same time, just to have it accessible for a week or so? Not me.
This will be a movie purchase service. You buy the movie, DL it from itunes, then do what you want to with it. Watch it on you computer, rip it to DVD and watch it on your TV, run it through an air tunes like device so you don't have to rip it if you don't want.
It sounds pretty interesting to me. We'll see when it happens. Regardless, the quality is going to have be pretty good for people to want to watch them on their TV's. Offering 700mb .avi rips just won't cut it.
macenforcer
Oct 12, 03:47 PM
So how's your Polio treating you?
Cured because the president had polio and before the corporate greed infrastructure took hold. NEXT...
Still making money on the polio vaccinations though ain't they.
Cured because the president had polio and before the corporate greed infrastructure took hold. NEXT...
Still making money on the polio vaccinations though ain't they.
Kariya
Apr 25, 02:06 PM
...which is still a bottleneck.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
an SSD is a moderately better bottleneck?
Also storage is more important than outright speed to some people on the go. Why do you want to take away their options?
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there.
And Apple's SSDs are sooo awesome right? :rolleyes: About the only thing they really have an edge at is booting up and you can thank Snow Leopard enhancements as much as the SSD for that. For all other tasks...average. The kicker is, you can't even upgrade them to something better/larger down the road...as things currently stand anyway.
So what's your point? You like moderetly better bottlenecks?
I'd rather eliminate them altogether.
...and you think most people who buy a MBP won't swap out the drive for a 7200RPM drive or an SSD and max out their memory?
Intelligent...no genius level thinking!
an SSD is a moderately better bottleneck?
Also storage is more important than outright speed to some people on the go. Why do you want to take away their options?
Great. Since Apple puts that crap hard drive in there.
And Apple's SSDs are sooo awesome right? :rolleyes: About the only thing they really have an edge at is booting up and you can thank Snow Leopard enhancements as much as the SSD for that. For all other tasks...average. The kicker is, you can't even upgrade them to something better/larger down the road...as things currently stand anyway.
kurtsayin
Oct 27, 12:37 PM
I'm so sick of environmentalists. It is just self-righteous bigotry that has very little basis in actual facts. We don't live in some kind of uber-polluted country where the air is unbreathable and garbage heaps block scenic viewing. We are not short on trees, we are not short on resources, we are not all dying from PVC poisoning...
Greenpeace's website was talking about how children in far-East countries were poisoned from rummaging through apple computer parts and that it is some how apple's fault?! If Greenpeace had any kind of results-oriented logic, they would focus their efforts on governmental reforms in other countries that [U]buy our garbage![U] Why should apple be forced to change products that function almost perfectly because some backward governments in Asia enslave their people and buy our garbage to let people try and rummage through it for parts?
Greenpeace is a fringe, extremist group that hates industry above all else - Industry that brings us computers, cars, phones, televisions, radios... If they had their way, we would be living in the 18th century again, in which case we would be swiftly taken over by China... :(
Greenpeace's website was talking about how children in far-East countries were poisoned from rummaging through apple computer parts and that it is some how apple's fault?! If Greenpeace had any kind of results-oriented logic, they would focus their efforts on governmental reforms in other countries that [U]buy our garbage![U] Why should apple be forced to change products that function almost perfectly because some backward governments in Asia enslave their people and buy our garbage to let people try and rummage through it for parts?
Greenpeace is a fringe, extremist group that hates industry above all else - Industry that brings us computers, cars, phones, televisions, radios... If they had their way, we would be living in the 18th century again, in which case we would be swiftly taken over by China... :(
shawnce
Aug 23, 07:43 PM
Yes!
What if at this point Creative can sue Microsoft and others for infringing on "their" patents with the backing of Apple!?
In essence Creative can stay alive selling a few MP3 players, sound cards, and iPod accessories. But they can also sue on demand anybody who tries to use a similar interface (read: everybody). Then Apple jumps in and says: "Hey, we paid. So-and-so should too."
It would also force future and current competitors to try to find another interface, which Apple believes won't work as well.
Apple plays chess very well. This may end up being a very slick move!
Exactly. Apple is playing this to their advantage and not giving others the ability to stick it to them (license with Creative lending weight to Creative's claim) while they fought this thing.
wow.....$100 million. yikes :eek:
Apple has over 9 billion in cash currently... this really is a non-issue in terms of cash outlay.
If you compare it to the risk it removes from a product that makes them billions in a year and the fact it makes it harder for others to duplicate the UI (can use Creative against them) you quickly see it really is a win for Apple.
What if at this point Creative can sue Microsoft and others for infringing on "their" patents with the backing of Apple!?
In essence Creative can stay alive selling a few MP3 players, sound cards, and iPod accessories. But they can also sue on demand anybody who tries to use a similar interface (read: everybody). Then Apple jumps in and says: "Hey, we paid. So-and-so should too."
It would also force future and current competitors to try to find another interface, which Apple believes won't work as well.
Apple plays chess very well. This may end up being a very slick move!
Exactly. Apple is playing this to their advantage and not giving others the ability to stick it to them (license with Creative lending weight to Creative's claim) while they fought this thing.
wow.....$100 million. yikes :eek:
Apple has over 9 billion in cash currently... this really is a non-issue in terms of cash outlay.
If you compare it to the risk it removes from a product that makes them billions in a year and the fact it makes it harder for others to duplicate the UI (can use Creative against them) you quickly see it really is a win for Apple.
Indiana82
Sep 14, 04:41 PM
If Jobs is realy taking a plane to the whole way down to germany, I think he is presenting more than a software update. But is he realy comming? Or is it again a live-streaming kinda thing? Or might someone else be leading through the show?
WHO KNOWS!
WHO KNOWS!
israelagm
Mar 30, 12:27 PM
Just for those that insist Microsoft only ever uses the term 'program' . XP dates back to 2001.
http://i.imgur.com/Wdw3y.jpg
Am I missing something from this? You're using a screenshot of Windows showing file types and the only thing showing the use of the term "Application" is on iTunes related files?
How does that prove your point? I really don't know if I missed what you were actually trying to convey? It's kinda like when someone is horribly wrong and because of that you start to question yourself if you were even right in the first place.
http://i.imgur.com/Wdw3y.jpg
Am I missing something from this? You're using a screenshot of Windows showing file types and the only thing showing the use of the term "Application" is on iTunes related files?
How does that prove your point? I really don't know if I missed what you were actually trying to convey? It's kinda like when someone is horribly wrong and because of that you start to question yourself if you were even right in the first place.
Silencio
Dec 30, 06:39 PM
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2010:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2009:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2008:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2007:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
&c. &c.
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2009:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2008:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
McAfee Labs Threat Predictions for 2007:
* Apple: No longer flying under the radar
&c. &c.
Paulhammer
Sep 14, 08:44 AM
The invitation suggests Aperture, but could it also be an extreme closeup of an isight camera on a black anodized MBP? ;) :cool: :D :eek: :confused:
ericinboston
Apr 28, 07:56 PM
Microsoft is DEAD.
This is all you ever say and is a waste of text/space on this site.
MacRumors...how do we ban this guy?
Sheeeeeez.
This is all you ever say and is a waste of text/space on this site.
MacRumors...how do we ban this guy?
Sheeeeeez.
spicyapple
Sep 9, 01:38 AM
Is 20% speed improvement a lot for a core 2 designation?
Zaqfalcon
Apr 22, 05:24 AM
Will this be able to be used on non Apple devices like iTunes currently is?
Apple should invest in networks themselves to make these cloud based services viable vs larger built in storage.
Apple should invest in networks themselves to make these cloud based services viable vs larger built in storage.
Creibold
Oct 12, 03:55 PM
Look at the Story on the front page of the chicago tribune, it's true. It says right there that apple is introducing a Red iPod Nano, it's not photoshoped you goofs.
aristotle
Nov 13, 05:45 PM
You're missing the point. Yes, Apple, as the copyright holder, can define the extent of its license (assuming they haven't already waived the right to do so, which they may have, and assuming it isn't fair use, which it almost certainly is), and, yes, they can decide what goes into the app store, making the extent of the copyright license moot.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
I'm not missing the point. You are. They have a right to determine how their trademarks are to be used and if they did not vigourously defend them, you would see MSFT stealing even icons from OS X.
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
But it doesn't make sense for them to do so! Integration between iphone and mac would only sell more of each. They don't lose money on this sort of use of the icons - it's not like they offer a paid license for those images.
There is no duty to police copyrights to avoid losing them.
And, there is no rational alternative to using those icons (despite your repeated "all they had to do is create their own icons" argument) because Apple is likely to turn around and assert trademark/trade dress.
So all you can do is use words, or images unrelated to the appearance of the machines being represented. If the words say "Macbook Pro," e.g., APple can turn around and say you can't do THAT, either, because that's a trademark. If your handmade image looks too much like a mac, that's trademark infringement too (according to Apple). So you have to make it NOT look like the thing it represents. That totally defeats the POINT of the images in this use.
It's like having to write an article in a newspaper reviewing a concert without mentioning the name of the band or the names of any of the band members.
And Apple is doing it for absolutely no good reason.
I'm not missing the point. You are. They have a right to determine how their trademarks are to be used and if they did not vigourously defend them, you would see MSFT stealing even icons from OS X.
Apple is a company with a responsibility to shareholders. They are not your friends. Google is not your friend either.
The purpose of the image use is on a mac. You are also not looking at it from Apple's point of view that Apple wants to have the iPhone be a success regardless of whether the server used in a client server environment is running OS X, linux, some other unix or windows. If they were to allow some of their third party developer running OS X based services use their icons, the real client server developers running in the cloud would complain about favouritism. They have to keep third party developers under the same rules regardless of whether the app uses a mac based service or not.
Multimedia
Aug 31, 01:50 PM
September 12 SteveNote. Well I must have posted that phrase scores of times earlier this year - just didn't think it would be in San Francisco instead of Paris. All the better. Perfect ending to a wonderful Summer 2006.
Lots for him to talk about.
Core 2 Duo will be the star.
End of Core Solo minis.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
Maybe even "One More Thing"
Lots for him to talk about.
Core 2 Duo will be the star.
End of Core Solo minis.
All new redesigned MacBook Pro.
All new iMac design with Conroe inside.
iTunes Media Store Movie Downloads.
Maybe even "One More Thing"
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar