wizard
Apr 14, 04:11 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)
"iX" = "Ix", which is the nickname for the character Ford Prefect in the book "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy".
Obviously, the new Apple device is either a digital watch or a towel.
You do realize that because of that series of books I always have a towel with me when traveling.
As to this device I'm thinking the mythical video iPad/iPod, that is a wide aspect ratio sub seven inch device. Or maybe it isn't adevice at all but a planned disinformation leak. That being said Apple would be crazy to not get more iOS devices on the market. That includes more Phones.
So it is anybodies guess.
"iX" = "Ix", which is the nickname for the character Ford Prefect in the book "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy".
Obviously, the new Apple device is either a digital watch or a towel.
You do realize that because of that series of books I always have a towel with me when traveling.
As to this device I'm thinking the mythical video iPad/iPod, that is a wide aspect ratio sub seven inch device. Or maybe it isn't adevice at all but a planned disinformation leak. That being said Apple would be crazy to not get more iOS devices on the market. That includes more Phones.
So it is anybodies guess.
rxse7en
Jul 28, 08:37 AM
News Flash. The 360 does NOT play any HD. They are working on an add on HD DVD, but it is not out. Therefore no HD. So the sole thing that the HD DVD is helped by doesn't exist.
That's not entirely true. The Xbox 360 doesn't play HD-DVDs, but it does upscale standard dvds to 720p. http://www.avforums.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-256882.html
Better link:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/xbox360/physics.htm
That's not entirely true. The Xbox 360 doesn't play HD-DVDs, but it does upscale standard dvds to 720p. http://www.avforums.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-256882.html
Better link:
http://www.xbox.com/en-US/hardware/xbox360/physics.htm
cmm
Aug 18, 03:29 PM
Still... meh.
Agreed. Where's the selling point?
Agreed. Where's the selling point?
akac
Jul 10, 08:30 PM
Get used to more Inspectors with Tab Views and less Toolbars. Cocoa apps are designed with Inspector Views.
Inspectors are good for certain things. Like a window for working with all the graphic editing that iPhoto provides for an image. It is NOT so good for what Pages uses it for. And inspectors are not a Cocoa thing. I use tons of Cocoa apps and many don't use inspectors. Its a general UI thing - the programming API should have nothing to do with what UI comes out of it.
Inspectors are good for certain things. Like a window for working with all the graphic editing that iPhoto provides for an image. It is NOT so good for what Pages uses it for. And inspectors are not a Cocoa thing. I use tons of Cocoa apps and many don't use inspectors. Its a general UI thing - the programming API should have nothing to do with what UI comes out of it.
daio
Apr 14, 03:14 AM
The same is seen for the app SSH Term Pro
http://freiburg-home.com/images/sshtermpro.png
edit: and VNC Viewer, Desktop Connect and other apps in this category
http://freiburg-home.com/images/sshtermpro.png
edit: and VNC Viewer, Desktop Connect and other apps in this category
OhioSandy
Oct 16, 10:18 AM
HORSE *****!
I HAD NOT ONE DROPPED CALL WITH VERIZON IN 5 YEARS.
True, but you also had no options when it comes in the handset... except BB, they are all old school garbage....
I HAD NOT ONE DROPPED CALL WITH VERIZON IN 5 YEARS.
True, but you also had no options when it comes in the handset... except BB, they are all old school garbage....
plarusa
Nov 7, 02:21 PM
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant"
bb
Really ? I find that very hard to believe. I have been using a Macbook Pro for a year and I have yet to see what a kernel crash looks like. These types of crashes are regular occurances on all of my Windows machines. And don't get me started on the Virus subject.
bb
Really ? I find that very hard to believe. I have been using a Macbook Pro for a year and I have yet to see what a kernel crash looks like. These types of crashes are regular occurances on all of my Windows machines. And don't get me started on the Virus subject.
clientsiman
May 3, 08:20 AM
Nice upgrade this time.
digitalbiker
Jul 12, 07:09 PM
Apple labels iWork as a "consumer level" app. not me.
My definition of a "Pro level" app is one that has industry maturity, is excepted as standard industry wide, has many many features which allow it to be versatile and is useful in a variety of professional industries. It probably isn't the easiest app to use because it isn't focused to just one industry.
I would bet you that not .1% of printshops, publishers, lawyers, engineers, etc. even know what a .pages file is let alone are they working with it daily.
Very well put. I agree with you 100%. I bought pages thinking it could replace MS Word after seeing Jobs demo at MacWorld a couple of years ago.
When I tried to use it to build a Messier Catlog viewers guide it was the worst software experience I have ever had. It crashed constantly, it corrupted files. It was difficult to manipulate the graphics and get them where I wanted them. Text flow was clumsy. It was painfully slow.
I have a G4 1.67 GHz, 1 GB, PB and it took 7 minutes (I timed it) to open the document. The document contained 100 tiffs and 100 jpgs in tables on only 50 pages. It would open, then it would take another 3 minutes to scroll.
Pages V2 was better but still sucked. I could never make compatible .doc files. Most of my co-workers were on Windows machines running Office 2003 and when I would email the .doc, I would always get an email back saying that something was wrong with my file or that their virus checker said it was bad. Whatever, I had to finally abandon Pages.
I don't even like pages for quick documents. AppleWorks is better or even BBedit, depending on the type of quick document I need.
Even Apple doesn't advertise this product as a competitor for Word. They simple sell it as a consumer level productivity tool.
My definition of a "Pro level" app is one that has industry maturity, is excepted as standard industry wide, has many many features which allow it to be versatile and is useful in a variety of professional industries. It probably isn't the easiest app to use because it isn't focused to just one industry.
I would bet you that not .1% of printshops, publishers, lawyers, engineers, etc. even know what a .pages file is let alone are they working with it daily.
Very well put. I agree with you 100%. I bought pages thinking it could replace MS Word after seeing Jobs demo at MacWorld a couple of years ago.
When I tried to use it to build a Messier Catlog viewers guide it was the worst software experience I have ever had. It crashed constantly, it corrupted files. It was difficult to manipulate the graphics and get them where I wanted them. Text flow was clumsy. It was painfully slow.
I have a G4 1.67 GHz, 1 GB, PB and it took 7 minutes (I timed it) to open the document. The document contained 100 tiffs and 100 jpgs in tables on only 50 pages. It would open, then it would take another 3 minutes to scroll.
Pages V2 was better but still sucked. I could never make compatible .doc files. Most of my co-workers were on Windows machines running Office 2003 and when I would email the .doc, I would always get an email back saying that something was wrong with my file or that their virus checker said it was bad. Whatever, I had to finally abandon Pages.
I don't even like pages for quick documents. AppleWorks is better or even BBedit, depending on the type of quick document I need.
Even Apple doesn't advertise this product as a competitor for Word. They simple sell it as a consumer level productivity tool.
Jason Beck
Apr 3, 04:52 AM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5028/5584180139_98845d2cb4_b.jpg
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
Okay first off I like the framing in this. That little building doesn't feel cut off really, with that dominating focal point above it. I seriously love the placement of it, and how the picture just spans to the left. The lighting is superb. I love it, is really all I can say. You can see the golden highlights on the trees and the glow everywhere on the foliage. The saturated colors are lifelike and real to the photograph. You also positioned the focal point well. It's slightly under the curve of the hillside. This lets you take in the object with color popping it out all around.
This photo is better than I can do outside with nature. I really love this. That golden hour you shot at shows well. That is quite the capable lens! Loving this pic.
It'sa me on-a Flickr! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/jeevesofrkdia/5584180139/)
1/400
f/11
250mm (55-250 IS)
Okay first off I like the framing in this. That little building doesn't feel cut off really, with that dominating focal point above it. I seriously love the placement of it, and how the picture just spans to the left. The lighting is superb. I love it, is really all I can say. You can see the golden highlights on the trees and the glow everywhere on the foliage. The saturated colors are lifelike and real to the photograph. You also positioned the focal point well. It's slightly under the curve of the hillside. This lets you take in the object with color popping it out all around.
This photo is better than I can do outside with nature. I really love this. That golden hour you shot at shows well. That is quite the capable lens! Loving this pic.
nobunaga209
Feb 1, 05:04 PM
More goodies for the CBR; HID kit, gear indicator, and black fuel cap.
http://www.d2moto.com/images/product/large/8803_1_.jpg
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CBl0hcg!Wk~$(KGrHqZ,!hQE0fktnbWbBNIT,DSNOg~~0_12.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CESUw8!EGk~$(KGrHqJ,!lgEz+2LF49pBNR,m,IWBw~~0_12.JPG
http://www.d2moto.com/images/product/large/8803_1_.jpg
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CBl0hcg!Wk~$(KGrHqZ,!hQE0fktnbWbBNIT,DSNOg~~0_12.JPG
http://i.ebayimg.com/06/!CESUw8!EGk~$(KGrHqJ,!lgEz+2LF49pBNR,m,IWBw~~0_12.JPG
Evoken
Apr 22, 07:20 PM
Heh, the mockup looks terrible...no way Apple will make something like that...specially after making a work of art like the iPhone 4.
ZRD
May 3, 09:01 AM
The 2010 i7 2.93 refurbs flew off the shelves once this hit...would have loved one of those at $1450 US
jameselson
May 3, 07:55 AM
It was possible to use the previous 27" as an external display for a MacBook. Can't see any mention of that after a brief scan, and it's a deal-breaker for me. Anyone spot such a feature?
Second Earthquake in Japan
Tags: 2011 Japan earthquake
stock photo : Japan Earthquake
Japan EQ Google Maps
Japan quake location map 001
MacProCpo
Nov 27, 03:44 AM
8 WUs down, working on 9, and one more to go before I can get into bigadv.......:D
Does anyone have experience working with GPU2 and ATI cards? I've been playing around with my 4870 GPUs in Windoze and they don't seem to be running any faster then SMP in OSX. I've followed the the ATI GPU install guide on the f@h website i just don't know what I'm supposed to be seeing with regards to productivity.
Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!
Does anyone have experience working with GPU2 and ATI cards? I've been playing around with my 4870 GPUs in Windoze and they don't seem to be running any faster then SMP in OSX. I've followed the the ATI GPU install guide on the f@h website i just don't know what I'm supposed to be seeing with regards to productivity.
Cheers and Happy Thanksgiving!
Collected
Apr 22, 05:41 PM
There is no way it could be that thin.
I'm sure people said the same before the air came out.
I'm sure people said the same before the air came out.
Cloudane
Jan 25, 06:39 PM
Not a stock expert, but I do know the tech industry on the whole is suffering a bit of a slump at the moment. Redundancy cometh where I work.
bedifferent
Apr 12, 08:06 PM
Because it uses mDP for the connection. It would be confusing to users to have a data only port that looks like their video port (of course this really only affect Macs since most PC's come with DVI/HDMI...)
So aesthetics is the issue. Interesting. Well, I suppose recognizing the label to differentiate between the mini-DisplayPort and ThunderBolt ports would be a good step (a lot of people often mis-guess the USB connection). I realize it's a in a format similar to the mini-DisplayPort, however could this change? Either way, if that's their excuse it seems fairly thin.
So aesthetics is the issue. Interesting. Well, I suppose recognizing the label to differentiate between the mini-DisplayPort and ThunderBolt ports would be a good step (a lot of people often mis-guess the USB connection). I realize it's a in a format similar to the mini-DisplayPort, however could this change? Either way, if that's their excuse it seems fairly thin.
jvmxtra
Apr 13, 10:26 PM
My wife will get iphone 5. I will stay w/ droid-X for little longer.
I just hate no 1 year deal.
I just hate no 1 year deal.
tristangage
Apr 13, 12:00 PM
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5262/5616177495_3fdf26e3ff.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616177495/)
recording dials 4 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616177495/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 800
recording dials 4 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/tristangage/5616177495/) by tristangage (http://www.flickr.com/people/tristangage/), on Flickr
Camera Canon EOS 500D
Exposure 0.017 sec (1/60)
Aperture f/5.6
Focal Length 55 mm
ISO Speed 800
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Bubba Satori
Mar 31, 12:44 PM
That will look great on the new iSteamPunkMac.
http://steampunkworkshop.com/images/ain30-desktop.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/31/111230-ichat_lion_dev_2.jpg
http://steampunkworkshop.com/images/ain30-desktop.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/03/31/111230-ichat_lion_dev_2.jpg
j-traxx
Apr 16, 03:40 AM
By that same vein, what has Apple ever developed that's anything close to a OS ? And no, Mac OS X, a bunch of components bought/taken from the open source community doesn't count... it's just a Unix distribution with a GUI layer on top. :rolleyes:
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
fail. google didnt make android. and the fact that you used a winking smiley to illustrate your victoryfail makes it all the more sad. :-(
It's easy to discount anything going with that mentality. The fact is, Chrome OS is as much an undertaking as OS X was. It's more than just a "Web browser" since web browsers cannot be booted and don't provide graphical sub-systems, input management and process scheduling obviously.
(yes, I do realise Mac OS Classic existed).
And to answer your question directly : Android. ;)
fail. google didnt make android. and the fact that you used a winking smiley to illustrate your victoryfail makes it all the more sad. :-(
matticus008
Aug 16, 01:11 AM
Hey, don't say that too loud.
From the ever changing Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGIcons/chapter_14_section_2.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000967-TPXREF102):
And that's how they read now� "Back" at the release of Tiger it was like this:(no explanation on why the changed was deemed more appropriate).
Hey, don't look at me. I did not write that!
It's still the same story. The icons are still distinctive and easily identified by their outline, as per interface guidelines. The fact that they're on a consistent and unified "button bar" or "bubble" is simply an aesthetic decision. Safari and the Finder have worked in this fashion since the beginning and no one threw the "HIG book" at Apple for that.
From the ever changing Macintosh Human Interface Guidelines (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/OSXHIGuidelines/XHIGIcons/chapter_14_section_2.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/20000967-TPXREF102):
And that's how they read now� "Back" at the release of Tiger it was like this:(no explanation on why the changed was deemed more appropriate).
Hey, don't look at me. I did not write that!
It's still the same story. The icons are still distinctive and easily identified by their outline, as per interface guidelines. The fact that they're on a consistent and unified "button bar" or "bubble" is simply an aesthetic decision. Safari and the Finder have worked in this fashion since the beginning and no one threw the "HIG book" at Apple for that.
