PeterQVenkman
May 4, 09:21 PM
Damn, I can't wait much longer. Come on, apple. Crank that thing out!
Surely
Feb 28, 01:38 PM
I honestly think that he's just ****ing with everyone.
CANEHDN
Aug 15, 04:00 PM
This excites me so. These seem like some nice features. I guess I will have to go buy an external HD to utilize Time Machine. I can't wait to see what the other "hidden" features are going to be. It gets me all tingly.
dethmaShine
Mar 31, 10:34 AM
Just what I wanted to see.
Bye Bye UI Guidelines.
This is going to be huge for Mac OS X. UI Guidelines were great but could stagnant the look. The OS needs to look rich in colour.
Very happy with the change and the development.
Just my 2 cents.
Bye Bye UI Guidelines.
This is going to be huge for Mac OS X. UI Guidelines were great but could stagnant the look. The OS needs to look rich in colour.
Very happy with the change and the development.
Just my 2 cents.
SciFrog
Nov 4, 01:58 AM
i engaged an octo late last week, will set up another tomorrow. they both run 24/7.
the graphic designers using them rarely require more than 1 core anyway :)
Welcome!
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
the graphic designers using them rarely require more than 1 core anyway :)
Welcome!
Please run the bigadv units, you will get much better PPD. It looks like you are running the regular SMP client for now.
Use -smp 8 if the are 2008 or earlier, -smp 16 if they are 2009 otco...
nies
Apr 27, 08:20 PM
im gonna follow with ucfgrad and throw -aggie- out there
firestarter
Apr 24, 08:29 PM
You mean as the perpetrators did, right? Just checking.
I don't understand your point. Yes, the perpetrators were violent and committed assault. :confused:
I don't understand your point. Yes, the perpetrators were violent and committed assault. :confused:
chrisdazzo
Apr 15, 02:29 PM
Can someone just post a damn changelog? Honestly... :mad: I don't want to have to reinstall DP2 over SL to find out if 2011 MBP GFX issues were fixed (screen savers, display blockiness, etc.).
SeanZy
Mar 16, 08:36 AM
Wait are you inside?!?!?! I got here about 5:30 and I couldn't get in. Outside Red Robin.
Good luck with getting one today, my friend is there again second in line I guess. Would have been there if I didnt have class this morning
Good luck with getting one today, my friend is there again second in line I guess. Would have been there if I didnt have class this morning
kbmb
Apr 12, 09:16 AM
Aren't we quickly getting to the point where it's all about the software?
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Ok, so we know iPhone 5 will get dual core A5....big deal. It'll be nice to have the extra power, but the iPhone 4 now is no slouch.
Added RAM.....yeah, that would be nice....but not going to suddenly sell more phones because it has more RAM :p
Display won't get any better resolution-wise. Doubt they'd go with a larger screen either.
Better cameras....ok.....still, the iPhone 4 cameras are no slouch, and it's not like it will reach the quality of a nice DSLR with those tiny sensors.
Better graphics processing.....sure.....but it's not like it has to drive a 9.7" screen like the iPad.
I'd say Apple is smartly switching into software mode. Kick ass with iOS5, revamp notifications, make some much needed overhauls to the system, and optimize performance for todays devices (iPhone 4, iPad & iPad 2).
Apple is going to stay ahead with software. That's the way Apple is and always has been.
-Kevin
Glass
Jul 11, 03:48 PM
They will. Microsoft doing this will definitely cause Apple to be less stingy with the R&D and get some great small products to market.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
God, I really hope that Leopard is more of an upgrade than Tiger was.
You don't think tiger was a significant upgrade? wtf?? lol.. it was packed with new features.
Darrin Bell
Jul 13, 01:31 AM
I hope microsoft has the name 'iBox' trademarked.. wouldn't want apple to ever make an iBox...I know that's facetious, but I agree. I'd rather avoid brand confusion. I still remember having a hard time convincing an elderly friend that her piece of crap computer was not an Apple iMac, it was an eMachine.
eMac4ever
Oct 18, 04:31 PM
Mac sales really have been increasing the past couple of quaters. Hopefully, those new Mac buyers continue buying Apple products. Also, It's a good thing I own some Apple stock. :D
jctevere
Apr 28, 08:44 PM
I just returned my black iPhone 4 32GB and exhanged it for a white 32GB. (thank god for the 30 day return policy). I also upgraded another 3GS to a 16GB iPhone 4.
Both the 16GB and 32GB are the same dimensions. But what I don't recall on the black iPhone 4 I had for 25 days that I immediately noticed on both of my white iPhone 4's is a small raised "lip" or ridge that goes completely around the front face of the iPhone. I don't have a black iPhone 4 anymore on hand to scrutinize this with, but I will comment on it tomorrow when I do.
But I think that this definitely accounts for this minimal difference. This ridge or lip raises the iPhone's glass off of a surface if it is placed face side down - presumably to prevent scratches. This lip is small enough to barely decipher any difference from a black iPhone 4, but enough that I noticed it within 5 minutes of using the phone.
Either way, my white iPhone 4 still fits in the credit card case I bought for my black iPhone 4, but it is a bit more "snug" and appears to not have as much protection or clearance as I had with the black iPhone 4... But the difference really is minimal, not something to make a big "stink" over.
Both the 16GB and 32GB are the same dimensions. But what I don't recall on the black iPhone 4 I had for 25 days that I immediately noticed on both of my white iPhone 4's is a small raised "lip" or ridge that goes completely around the front face of the iPhone. I don't have a black iPhone 4 anymore on hand to scrutinize this with, but I will comment on it tomorrow when I do.
But I think that this definitely accounts for this minimal difference. This ridge or lip raises the iPhone's glass off of a surface if it is placed face side down - presumably to prevent scratches. This lip is small enough to barely decipher any difference from a black iPhone 4, but enough that I noticed it within 5 minutes of using the phone.
Either way, my white iPhone 4 still fits in the credit card case I bought for my black iPhone 4, but it is a bit more "snug" and appears to not have as much protection or clearance as I had with the black iPhone 4... But the difference really is minimal, not something to make a big "stink" over.
.jpg "wallpaper emo girl. EMO Boys")
cleanup
Apr 5, 08:08 PM
iPhone shot.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5105/5593973458_f71b63ba1c_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/albertintoronto/5593973458/)
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5105/5593973458_f71b63ba1c_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/albertintoronto/5593973458/)
Alexjungle
Apr 27, 04:45 PM
Ugh! I bought my imac in 2007 and now I'm kicking myself for not waiting till next week.
Eidorian
May 3, 07:53 AM
5 years in the making...
6970!? Yes!They are the Mobility versions. That would be the HD 6570 to the HD 6850 on the desktop side. Also, they admit mobility graphics.
6970!? Yes!They are the Mobility versions. That would be the HD 6570 to the HD 6850 on the desktop side. Also, they admit mobility graphics.
Rowbear
Apr 11, 06:00 PM
The Duddon Valley, this afternoon...
http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6042/daleend.jpg
Congrats on this very nice composition. The white house stands out so much and draws the eyes, helped by the little road leading to it. Well done :)
http://img694.imageshack.us/img694/6042/daleend.jpg
Congrats on this very nice composition. The white house stands out so much and draws the eyes, helped by the little road leading to it. Well done :)
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
Stella
Jul 28, 08:42 AM
Never too late.
Isn't that what people said when Apple released the iPod - its too late... Now look.
It's too late for Microsoft - they are just riding Apple's coattails now, in a desperate attempt to create something that can compete with iTunes+iPod...but thats all it is, a desperate attempt :eek:
Isn't that what people said when Apple released the iPod - its too late... Now look.
It's too late for Microsoft - they are just riding Apple's coattails now, in a desperate attempt to create something that can compete with iTunes+iPod...but thats all it is, a desperate attempt :eek:
GSPice
Apr 26, 01:32 PM
Nice. Another awesome media streaming feature that will be choked by AT&T.
SandynJosh
Apr 29, 10:24 PM
How stupid can Jeff Bozo be?!
By undercutting the already cheap ala cart business model the record labels and the artist and writers etc are going to fell the pain right down to their pockets.
I'm not sure at what price point predatory pricing becomes an issue, but I would think that Amazon may have crossed that line.
Now, it may be possible that Amazon is not offering the same product at $.69 a song. For example I have downloaded a song from Amazon that I paid $.99 for, and was surprised to see it did not have the same sample rate as my iTunes songs.
At some point I can't see the studios nor the artists wanting to take an income-per-song hit without having their say about it. If Amazon is selling music at a loss per song, then the FTC might have a say about that.
By undercutting the already cheap ala cart business model the record labels and the artist and writers etc are going to fell the pain right down to their pockets.
I'm not sure at what price point predatory pricing becomes an issue, but I would think that Amazon may have crossed that line.
Now, it may be possible that Amazon is not offering the same product at $.69 a song. For example I have downloaded a song from Amazon that I paid $.99 for, and was surprised to see it did not have the same sample rate as my iTunes songs.
At some point I can't see the studios nor the artists wanting to take an income-per-song hit without having their say about it. If Amazon is selling music at a loss per song, then the FTC might have a say about that.
MagnusVonMagnum
May 1, 10:43 AM
Apple's 256kbps VBR files didn't do me any good with my last car stereo by JVC. The JVC would play AAC, but not VBR AAC. So I could either convert Apple's AAC VBR to regular AAC (extra conversions are bad for sound quality) OR just buy something that plays out of the box (i.e. Amazon 256 VBR MP3). I chose the latter. I'm not sure about my new stereo that came with my WRX (it plays AAC, but I haven't tested a VBR one), but it doesn't matter much sincee that head unit won't be around much longer. Now that Amazon is cheaper to boot, it's not even a question, really. I prefer buying CDs and transferring it myself, though if I want a whole album.
Macula
Dec 1, 02:24 PM
Apple needs to get serious about security. They cannot develop such an integrated, holistic line of products ("in your den, car, pocket,...") without tightening their security.
Windows Vista is NOT Windows XP. Apple risks lagging behind in that area and, in an ironic reversal of fortune, being widely considered as inferior to Microsoft in terms of security.
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Maybe it's about time Apple closed the Mac OS kernel?
Windows Vista is NOT Windows XP. Apple risks lagging behind in that area and, in an ironic reversal of fortune, being widely considered as inferior to Microsoft in terms of security.
But if we agree that the development of a secure OS is all about utilizing sound design, coding and auditing processes, then we must also accept that the challenge will be very difficult for Apple to meet: You just cannot do that with Open Source...
Maybe it's about time Apple closed the Mac OS kernel?
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar