gkarris
Jan 15, 04:14 PM
Happy for my :apple:TV.
I'm glad Apple has decided to return to the sub-note market - great job Apple!
I'm glad Apple has decided to return to the sub-note market - great job Apple!
cocky jeremy
Apr 25, 02:47 PM
That looks fine actually.
I'm fine with Apple not changing the overall design from the iPhone 4. It's already pretty sexy. This will just be like iPhone 3G ->iPhone 3Gs. They just make it better.
Now where can I pay?! :D
Same here. They can keep the iPhone 4 design for years and years. I love it. As far as a bigger screen, i don't really care either way. Give me dual-core A5, doubled RAM, and 64 GB, a better camera sensor, and i'm happy. I don't want 8 MP camera, just a 5 MP camera with a bigger/better sensor. :)
I'm fine with Apple not changing the overall design from the iPhone 4. It's already pretty sexy. This will just be like iPhone 3G ->iPhone 3Gs. They just make it better.
Now where can I pay?! :D
Same here. They can keep the iPhone 4 design for years and years. I love it. As far as a bigger screen, i don't really care either way. Give me dual-core A5, doubled RAM, and 64 GB, a better camera sensor, and i'm happy. I don't want 8 MP camera, just a 5 MP camera with a bigger/better sensor. :)
bboucher790
May 2, 10:44 AM
You're tracking us wrong.
ericschmerick
Sep 28, 12:12 PM
I wonder what the hold up is with releasing this update? :o
Yeah man, I've been waiting too! I think I've checked software update more in the last 3 days than I have in the last year.
I wonder if 10.4.8 is required? There was a separate thread about 10.4.8 being close to done. As I understand it, the RAW conversion stuff is built into the OS, so I wonder if there's a co-dependency between the two updates.
Anyway, I'm hoping "this week" means tomorrow, not Sunday.
EE
http://www.essersinchina.com/
Yeah man, I've been waiting too! I think I've checked software update more in the last 3 days than I have in the last year.
I wonder if 10.4.8 is required? There was a separate thread about 10.4.8 being close to done. As I understand it, the RAW conversion stuff is built into the OS, so I wonder if there's a co-dependency between the two updates.
Anyway, I'm hoping "this week" means tomorrow, not Sunday.
EE
http://www.essersinchina.com/
vendettabass
Sep 12, 02:58 AM
I assume the true video ipod will have the same price points as the current ones? if so, its a buy!
Ygn
Nov 6, 06:51 PM
Getting it for PS3, I haven't pre ordered it but I'll probably get it at midnight from BlockBusters.
I always preferred W@W to MW2 so I'm hoping it's gonna be more like that. If it's more like MW2 I'll probably be like this within a day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v_dFtizv7I
LOL oh dear!
I pre-ordered the hardened edition mainly for the map packs which come with it.
I always preferred W@W to MW2 so I'm hoping it's gonna be more like that. If it's more like MW2 I'll probably be like this within a day.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5v_dFtizv7I
LOL oh dear!
I pre-ordered the hardened edition mainly for the map packs which come with it.
*LTD*
Mar 6, 11:59 AM
Why is Apple the only tech company that makes unique products? All the other big ones seem to just drop in behind Apple after they invent something... Examples:
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
�Phones that are designed to simply compete with the iPhone.
�
This is proven. Others react to Apple, change (or attempt to) in response to Apple, sometimes even to the point of having to admit it (i.e., Nokia and Samsung.) Some even design their entire strategy around competing against Apple. That's really saying something. And it is also puts paid the notion that Apple's leadership in this industry is without equal and that there's a good reason their value will surpass that of Exxon Mobil's faster than we think.
Adamo
Oct 4, 08:06 AM
I imagine they should be banned from MacWorld, but I also think it's the funniest thing I've seen today and absolutely hilarious. :)
dr Dunkel
May 2, 11:17 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; sv-se) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
Location tracking "bug"... haha... well, I'm glad Apple got caught.
Location tracking "bug"... haha... well, I'm glad Apple got caught.
iaymnu
Apr 7, 08:07 PM
http://i880.photobucket.com/albums/ac5/iaymnu/IMG_1003-1.jpg
jav6454
Mar 24, 03:04 PM
10 years already? Time to touch land. It's been great 10 years at sea.
ipodtoucher
Apr 6, 11:09 PM
I'm gonna have to try this.
AGREED!
....i knew i should have stopped at harris teeter after the bank.....
AGREED!
....i knew i should have stopped at harris teeter after the bank.....
0010101
Oct 29, 11:57 AM
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
WestonHarvey1
Jul 21, 12:40 PM
But Apple admitted that it DOES drop more calls than 3GS.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.[/I]
That total number is meaningless to the end user. The Average user will make 100 calls on a 4 and 100 on a 3GS and not see a difference.
It's also a number that could change from week to week depending on all sorts of nebulous factors. This week the stats might favor the 4 by 1 call for all you know.
They spun it as "less than 1 per 100", but assuming all 3,000,000 iPhone 4 users make about 5 calls per day, that's over ONE MILLION dropped calls per week MORE than iPhone 3GS.[/I]
That total number is meaningless to the end user. The Average user will make 100 calls on a 4 and 100 on a 3GS and not see a difference.
It's also a number that could change from week to week depending on all sorts of nebulous factors. This week the stats might favor the 4 by 1 call for all you know.
SeaFox
Oct 29, 01:00 AM
Why hasn't there been a 'universal' version of Photoshop yet? Because the hard core digital imaging people are hanging on to their G5's.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
NAG
Jan 12, 04:34 PM
Obviously.:rolleyes: I was responding to the idea that is was somehow ironic (and funny) that such a low-tech device could disrupt such a high-tech show. There are many other low-tech ways to cause problems for exhibitors. You can't have an open, accessible show floor and protect against everyone's idea of a "prank." Exhibitors have to be able to trust that attendees, especially press credentialed attendees, won't make them look foolish in order to drive traffic to their blogs.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
Yes, and disagreeing with President Bush means you support the Terrorists. Yes, I just went there.
Seriously, that is such a slippery slope argument it isn't funny. Blaming some pranksters for the end of big expos is silly.
Anyway, I hope you took notice of the real point of my comment:
That's nothing to laugh about.
Yes, and disagreeing with President Bush means you support the Terrorists. Yes, I just went there.
Seriously, that is such a slippery slope argument it isn't funny. Blaming some pranksters for the end of big expos is silly.
dontmatter
Oct 22, 01:19 PM
Of course the point is, they aren't doing these or any or things with the money. It's been accumulating steadily for nearly ten years, and is really building up quickly now. I don't think any of us "grumpy" stockholders would be complaining if Apple was doing something worthwhile with it. Dividends, BTW, are a message from a company to stockholders that they don't have to sell to realize a benefit from owning shares. They are good for improving the long term stability of the stock.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
I would love for apple to use 10 billion to innovate fantastically, enter new markets, go green, and more. I don't think it's going to happen- the purpose of 10 billion in the bank for apple is having 10 billion in the bank. Apple's expertise is in taking big risks (at least large for a compnay of their size), a good number of which pay off very, very well. But people- investors, CEOs, are risk adverse, and a huge pile of cash to operate on, so big they can operate and continue to invest in risky and exciting products, mitigates their risks. For apple, a pile of money might actually be worth more than investing that money at a high rate of return.
SkyStudios
May 2, 12:44 PM
Well I'm sure Steve Jobs could trot out the explanations given here and point out it is nothing right?
Email him the argument that this is nothing and blown all out of proportion. He might have a news conference.
I hate this because it feels like I am ridiculing Steve Jobs like the trolls that come on here. I am not. The world simply isn't black and white. And that is more the case with corporations than individuals.
you want users to wste time emailing him when its a public concern world wide and he already answered with BS
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/04/25/where-steve-jobs-stood-on-location-privacy-in-2010/
portion of this story
Since Apple is mum at the moment, it’s worth looking back on Apple’s views in the summer of 2010 when the company first started storing this file on people’s phones. The video is above. Here’s a transcript of Jobs’ response: Jobs points out that Apple doesn’t allow apps to get users’ location data without their express permission. Then he says:
arteries veins Diagram
Email him the argument that this is nothing and blown all out of proportion. He might have a news conference.
I hate this because it feels like I am ridiculing Steve Jobs like the trolls that come on here. I am not. The world simply isn't black and white. And that is more the case with corporations than individuals.
you want users to wste time emailing him when its a public concern world wide and he already answered with BS
http://blogs.forbes.com/kashmirhill/2011/04/25/where-steve-jobs-stood-on-location-privacy-in-2010/
portion of this story
Since Apple is mum at the moment, it’s worth looking back on Apple’s views in the summer of 2010 when the company first started storing this file on people’s phones. The video is above. Here’s a transcript of Jobs’ response: Jobs points out that Apple doesn’t allow apps to get users’ location data without their express permission. Then he says:
Mitthrawnuruodo
Aug 1, 11:03 AM
On a more serious note, I wonder how all this drama surrounding Apples DRM will impact the ODF argument? I mean, if you have the right to open a recording you PURCHASED on whatever type of player you wish, shouldn't you also have the right to open a document YOU CREATE, on any type of app that handles that type of data, without losing any functionality? I mean, shouldn't a Pages doc open on word without losing the formatting? Shouldn't an excel file open on Lotus? Did Steve Jobs forsee this? Is it all part of some masterplot???:eek:dsnort, meet OpenDocument (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opendocument)... ;)
elhungarian
Dec 13, 10:27 AM
Wirelessly posted (Opera/9.80 (BlackBerry; Opera Mini/5.1.21052/22.401; U; en) Presto/2.5.25 Version/10.54)
And why in the world would they launch after Christmas. Either do it before or wait until people recover financially :)
And why in the world would they launch after Christmas. Either do it before or wait until people recover financially :)
Vidder
Dec 8, 04:09 PM
Treyarch seemed to make a decision to nerf the whole snipe/camp thing, making sniping more difficult, and camping a risky & questionable proposition. Running & gunning is the way Black Ops seems to go, if you want to camp, stack killstreaks, modern warfare is the way to go. The amount of times I have seen someone going XX kills & 0 deaths I can count on one hand, while in MW2 I had done it quite a few times.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.
The multiple games give you choices...but this game alone gives you no choice but to run and gun. If i wanted to Run and Gun and waste my life i'd go join the taliban and pray to Allah.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
I think Black Ops has become a nice alternative, and not just a continuation of modern warfare. It gives players choices.
The multiple games give you choices...but this game alone gives you no choice but to run and gun. If i wanted to Run and Gun and waste my life i'd go join the taliban and pray to Allah.
This game gives you very little choice and in that makes the game terrible.
And you said it yourself. Treyarch ruined the game for all the snipers. Great job!
Treyarch = morons and dip*****. Bring back Infinity War. Black Ops Blows.
whoooaaahhhh
Oct 2, 03:01 PM
So when will Real be dead? I have a feeling that after our inevitable nuclear war, it'll just be cockroaches, twinkies and them. At least they'll be in good company.
MattyMac
Sep 12, 07:36 AM
Oh man Oh man Oh man
bartelby
Apr 21, 11:12 AM
All you'll do is make people paranoid. Who were those two bastards who voted down rdowns' post?
I've no idea...
:o
I've no idea...
:o
No comments:
Post a Comment