Nuvi
Nov 6, 02:23 PM
Bought TomTom car kit and although I still think its too expensive its handy if you travel a lot by air, rent cars and try to keep everything compact. If you don't have a need to switch you GPS from car to car a stand alone unit would be better due to bigger screen and more features.
Regarding the software Navigon works perfectly with the car kit. The features are close to those you could find in high end stand alone unit meaning its light years a ahead of TomTom's iPhone app, which is just as basic as you can get. In some way its funny how TomTom has a "high end" car dock but their iPhone app is more basic then in their entry level stand alone unit.
Regarding the software Navigon works perfectly with the car kit. The features are close to those you could find in high end stand alone unit meaning its light years a ahead of TomTom's iPhone app, which is just as basic as you can get. In some way its funny how TomTom has a "high end" car dock but their iPhone app is more basic then in their entry level stand alone unit.
barkins
Sep 15, 11:43 PM
Hm, I just bought the macbook pro with the intel core duo (1) ... will it be able to run the new lepord or will the speed be hampered? :confused:
GregA
Nov 27, 06:59 PM
It will do everything Macs currently do (having the same power of a macbook); however it will really inspire people to use an iTV and the iTunes music store. It will just make it all so easy.
You will be able to show guests your iPhoto gallery directly on the pad or send it to your TV through your iTV at the touch of a button. Home movies or movie downloads will at your fingertips. No need to go cue them up in your den or office. Apple will try to make computer an integral part of your at home lifestyle whatever room you're in.
Out of interest - and since you already use a computer near your TV :). If a tablet can do everything you describe EXCEPT be a regular Mac too, would it still be of interest?
ie: If it allows you (as you say) to show guests your iPhoto gallery directly on the pad or on the TV, Home movies or downloads at your fingertips (no need to cue them in the office)... and if it costs less than half what a MacBook costs... is it still appealing?
What about if it can interface with MacMini to become a remote screen? (ie: do everything you say, but only when in the house)
You will be able to show guests your iPhoto gallery directly on the pad or send it to your TV through your iTV at the touch of a button. Home movies or movie downloads will at your fingertips. No need to go cue them up in your den or office. Apple will try to make computer an integral part of your at home lifestyle whatever room you're in.
Out of interest - and since you already use a computer near your TV :). If a tablet can do everything you describe EXCEPT be a regular Mac too, would it still be of interest?
ie: If it allows you (as you say) to show guests your iPhoto gallery directly on the pad or on the TV, Home movies or downloads at your fingertips (no need to cue them in the office)... and if it costs less than half what a MacBook costs... is it still appealing?
What about if it can interface with MacMini to become a remote screen? (ie: do everything you say, but only when in the house)
dernhelm
Nov 22, 05:38 AM
Not PC guys, but good industrial and interface designers will. Starting with a clean sheet with little or no knowledge on the subject is an advantage; you tend to have different perceptions on how things work/could work. This gives a far greater idea base with simpler implementations as a result.
Advantage Apple.
So Apple has an advantage here because they have no experience in a market where it traditionally takes to get a device right? No, Apple doesn't have an advantage, any more than they did with the iPod - but they didn't need that advantage then either.
Apple could change the way phones are made as well, but only if they rethink the device from the ground up. Most phones have too many features that it takes too long to figure out how to use, don't have enough battery life, and are too painful to get hooked up to your computer so you can transfer photos and songs back and forth. Apple has the synchronization stuff down. If you can sync it like an iPod - and charge it in the process, its already leaps above most phones out there. But they cannot miss the interface.
If they want a camera on it (optional in my opinion) they have to make it dirt simple to use (scroll wheel to zoom, middle button to snap) and to get the photos taken on it into iPhoto. Otherwise, skip it altogether. And please don't make me fumble around to find the right button to hit to answer a call. Open it to answer the call, close it to hang up. And if you aren't going to put the number buttons in a tranditional layout - don't put them on there at all. I don't have the time or energy to learn some idiotic circular arrangement. I'd rather you put the numbers up on a touch screen and let me smudge up my phone than deal with a non-standard button arrangement. It also has to be hearty - I don't have time for a phone that stops working if I drop it 3 feet onto a carpeted floor.
It goes on and on. And that is why the interviewee is saying it's so hard. Apple does a pretty good job of industrial design, but even they may need an iteration or two to get it right. And in the mean time the current players could play some catch up.
Advantage Apple.
So Apple has an advantage here because they have no experience in a market where it traditionally takes to get a device right? No, Apple doesn't have an advantage, any more than they did with the iPod - but they didn't need that advantage then either.
Apple could change the way phones are made as well, but only if they rethink the device from the ground up. Most phones have too many features that it takes too long to figure out how to use, don't have enough battery life, and are too painful to get hooked up to your computer so you can transfer photos and songs back and forth. Apple has the synchronization stuff down. If you can sync it like an iPod - and charge it in the process, its already leaps above most phones out there. But they cannot miss the interface.
If they want a camera on it (optional in my opinion) they have to make it dirt simple to use (scroll wheel to zoom, middle button to snap) and to get the photos taken on it into iPhoto. Otherwise, skip it altogether. And please don't make me fumble around to find the right button to hit to answer a call. Open it to answer the call, close it to hang up. And if you aren't going to put the number buttons in a tranditional layout - don't put them on there at all. I don't have the time or energy to learn some idiotic circular arrangement. I'd rather you put the numbers up on a touch screen and let me smudge up my phone than deal with a non-standard button arrangement. It also has to be hearty - I don't have time for a phone that stops working if I drop it 3 feet onto a carpeted floor.
It goes on and on. And that is why the interviewee is saying it's so hard. Apple does a pretty good job of industrial design, but even they may need an iteration or two to get it right. And in the mean time the current players could play some catch up.
ActionableMango
Apr 28, 02:51 PM
EDIT: found a pic that illustrates this: http://images.anandtech.com/reviews/mac/MacPro2010/_DSC2953.jpg
Man, the MP is a beauty isn't it?
I can only hope they do half as well with the next case design.
Man, the MP is a beauty isn't it?
I can only hope they do half as well with the next case design.
wschutz
Mar 30, 05:55 PM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
Enjoy your brand new 129$ Mac OS X latest revision (the most advanced, the most unique, the most... bla bla bla bla...) carrying more than XXX features (aka... just making the Mac OS X experience more iOS-alike so you get used to AppStore since soon you'll have to go through this method of delivery as there won't be any other one, because Mr. Jobs wants more money...)
Yep... I think that 129$ sounds quite ok, for nothing :D
Though I'm not surprise... there's nothing shocking that they can implement. This "update" is aimed at training people into AppStore (aka money)... and they even charge for it :D
BlizzardBomb
Aug 7, 02:24 PM
Just checked the Intel July price list: Prices per Woodcrest processor are $851, $690 and $316 for one chip running at 3.0, 2.66 or 2.0 GHz, that is $1702, $1380 and $632 for two processors.
Somehow I suspect that Apple pays different prices, because you save $300 if you go down to 2 GHz and you pay $800 extra for 3.0 GHz. Should be the other way round according to the Intel price list. So the 2.66 GHz is a real bargain compared to the others.
If you subtract the processors from the price, then you pay $1597, $1119 and $1567 for the three models.
It's likely that Apple get a discount off all Intel products. The Dual-dual 2.66 GHz + X1900 XT seems like the sweet spot for me :)
As a sidenote, it appears the PM G5 and XServe G5 are still available on the Apple Store.
Somehow I suspect that Apple pays different prices, because you save $300 if you go down to 2 GHz and you pay $800 extra for 3.0 GHz. Should be the other way round according to the Intel price list. So the 2.66 GHz is a real bargain compared to the others.
If you subtract the processors from the price, then you pay $1597, $1119 and $1567 for the three models.
It's likely that Apple get a discount off all Intel products. The Dual-dual 2.66 GHz + X1900 XT seems like the sweet spot for me :)
As a sidenote, it appears the PM G5 and XServe G5 are still available on the Apple Store.
blevins321
May 4, 02:57 PM
They need to allow for updates via App Store that don't require full redownload of the software before they can make it exclusive. Especially in today's age of capping home internet usage (biggest croc ever conceived), smaller updates need to be possible. Perfect example: XCode.
mcarnes
Jul 21, 02:01 PM
Sheesh. This is a 180 from waiting for G5 updates.
Moyank24
May 3, 04:41 PM
This is going to be very, very interesting. Especially since apparently I'm married to Eldiablojoe. Now I understand why he killed me in the last game.
scoobydoo99
Apr 25, 11:31 AM
Besides if you encrypt your backup, nothing can happen. Thank you, have a good day.
Puhleeeeze. We are not concerned about your average criminal or private investigator. We are concerned about the us government, homeland security, cia, nsa, fbi, etc.
To say "nothing can happen" is absurdly naive.
Puhleeeeze. We are not concerned about your average criminal or private investigator. We are concerned about the us government, homeland security, cia, nsa, fbi, etc.
To say "nothing can happen" is absurdly naive.
scoobydoo99
Apr 25, 11:31 AM
Besides if you encrypt your backup, nothing can happen. Thank you, have a good day.
Puhleeeeze. We are not concerned about your average criminal or private investigator. We are concerned about the us government, homeland security, cia, nsa, fbi, etc.
To say "nothing can happen" is absurdly naive.
Puhleeeeze. We are not concerned about your average criminal or private investigator. We are concerned about the us government, homeland security, cia, nsa, fbi, etc.
To say "nothing can happen" is absurdly naive.
dashiel
Apr 7, 11:53 AM
I see people still don�t understand what a monopoly is. Apple would only be considered a monopoly if they used their power & influence to force the component supplier to cancel or move Apple�s orders ahead of RIM�s or any other.
Personally I bet RIM is breathing a huge sigh of relief, by all accounts the PlayBook is as unfinished and rough around the edges as Honeycomb on the Xoom.
Personally I bet RIM is breathing a huge sigh of relief, by all accounts the PlayBook is as unfinished and rough around the edges as Honeycomb on the Xoom.
commander.data
May 6, 12:35 AM
Perhaps in 2 years ARM will have architectures that will offer the performance levels expected of desktops and laptops, but at the same time Intel's designs are getting more efficient all the time. So by the time ARM is ready to negate Intel's performance advantage, Intel will be ready to negate ARM's power advantage. I don't really see any advantage in switching Macs to ARM.
What's more while ARM may be appropriate for laptops for efficiency reasons, what is Apple going to do about the Mac Pro? Accept reduced performance, discontinue it, keep it on Intel processors and support 2 architectures in parallel?
And the Intel transition was eased because PowerPC is a more strict and well defined standard so is easier to emulate. x86 however is pretty much a mess that's yielded better performance over time because of increasing numbers of features being tacked on, but won't be efficient to emulate. So an x86/x64>ARM transition won't be as smooth as PowerPC>x86/x64 was.
What's more while ARM may be appropriate for laptops for efficiency reasons, what is Apple going to do about the Mac Pro? Accept reduced performance, discontinue it, keep it on Intel processors and support 2 architectures in parallel?
And the Intel transition was eased because PowerPC is a more strict and well defined standard so is easier to emulate. x86 however is pretty much a mess that's yielded better performance over time because of increasing numbers of features being tacked on, but won't be efficient to emulate. So an x86/x64>ARM transition won't be as smooth as PowerPC>x86/x64 was.
IntelliUser
Nov 2, 01:07 PM
Agreed, nothing like this is ever "free".
There are several free antiviruses for Windows, so...
I think there just weren't enough people buying Mac-only commercial licenses.
Now you gotta pay for cross-platform licenses to get professional tech support and all the extra business and security features (Management console, encryption, antispam, firewall etc.).
There are several free antiviruses for Windows, so...
I think there just weren't enough people buying Mac-only commercial licenses.
Now you gotta pay for cross-platform licenses to get professional tech support and all the extra business and security features (Management console, encryption, antispam, firewall etc.).
AndroidfoLife
Apr 20, 05:08 AM
It will be the Iphone 5.
iPhone 1: Apple never gave the first gen a number because that is just weird given the first one a number. Its not called fast and the furious 1.
iPhone 2: Apple needed to make sure that its customer base knew that this phone was 3g so they adopted the name Iphone 3g. Imagine saying Iphone 2 with 3g. Most customers would have ignored the end and not known about the 3g's importance.
iPhone 3: Apple had could have named it the 3 but then many of its customers not being tech savy in the least way would scream bloody murder they took off the 3g.
iPhone 4: Apple had a good chance now to begin to use the naming system. It proved to be a good chance to name it the iPhone 4. With the Evo 4g being released at the same time naming it the 4 made customers believe it too was a 4g (cough) Phone. Believe it or not about 1/2 of iPhone 4 owners believe they have a 4g phone.
iPhone 5: ...
iPhone 1: Apple never gave the first gen a number because that is just weird given the first one a number. Its not called fast and the furious 1.
iPhone 2: Apple needed to make sure that its customer base knew that this phone was 3g so they adopted the name Iphone 3g. Imagine saying Iphone 2 with 3g. Most customers would have ignored the end and not known about the 3g's importance.
iPhone 3: Apple had could have named it the 3 but then many of its customers not being tech savy in the least way would scream bloody murder they took off the 3g.
iPhone 4: Apple had a good chance now to begin to use the naming system. It proved to be a good chance to name it the iPhone 4. With the Evo 4g being released at the same time naming it the 4 made customers believe it too was a 4g (cough) Phone. Believe it or not about 1/2 of iPhone 4 owners believe they have a 4g phone.
iPhone 5: ...
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Northgrove
Mar 31, 05:13 AM
Dear Apple
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
PLEASE can we have a UI update, even if it's a minor one (for instance, iTunes 10 scrollbars rather than the blue aqua ones). Just some extra polish really.
Signed
iFanboy
If you're looking for minor UI updates, that's exactly what Lion is getting?
The scroll bars are changed to be more iOS-like, windows are resizable from any corner, the buttons (and checkboxes AFAIK) are changed to no longer be Aqua styled. Small changes, but the sum of them is pretty substantial: All remaining traces of Aqua should now be gone.
bigbossbmb
Jul 29, 08:47 PM
yeah, i just got a razor too...but luckily im with verizon, so by the time i upgrade my phone again, this will be verizon's new addition :rolleyes:
ReanimationLP
Aug 3, 01:37 AM
Play nice now boys and girls.
Does it really matter how much extra battery you'll get? Jeez. o.O
I'm sure you'll be able to crank out some more, but battery life all depends on real world usage more than anything else.
Now that I think about it, I'm willing to bet they will be upgraded shortly to Core 2, the mini and the iMac that is, since its socketable.
Maybe thats why the MBP Pro is not socketed, they wanted to design a new casing for the Core 2 Macbook Pros, and didnt want people
just opening they're Core 1 models and just dropping the new Core 2 into it.
Does it really matter how much extra battery you'll get? Jeez. o.O
I'm sure you'll be able to crank out some more, but battery life all depends on real world usage more than anything else.
Now that I think about it, I'm willing to bet they will be upgraded shortly to Core 2, the mini and the iMac that is, since its socketable.
Maybe thats why the MBP Pro is not socketed, they wanted to design a new casing for the Core 2 Macbook Pros, and didnt want people
just opening they're Core 1 models and just dropping the new Core 2 into it.
Westside guy
Mar 30, 07:20 PM
Why would people be rooting for the main features to be visual updates? Why would you even pay for that?
Now full-disk encryption - THAT is a nice (and useful) new feature!
Now full-disk encryption - THAT is a nice (and useful) new feature!
Tyrion
Apr 20, 09:19 AM
Apple is an American company and MacRumors is a U.S. based forum.
Oh, right, so that justifies arrogance, parochialism and chauvinism. Carry on then.
Oh, right, so that justifies arrogance, parochialism and chauvinism. Carry on then.
Juan007
Apr 7, 10:58 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_2_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8C148 Safari/6533.18.5)
Good for Apple. They knew years ago they would be selling millions of iPads so they secured the supply. It pays to be a tech LEADER not a follower. Too bad so sad for all the companies whose tablets weren't conceived until the day after iPad 1 launch.
"Oh you want some LCD, sorry we're out. Apple bought our entire production three years ago."
Good for Apple. They knew years ago they would be selling millions of iPads so they secured the supply. It pays to be a tech LEADER not a follower. Too bad so sad for all the companies whose tablets weren't conceived until the day after iPad 1 launch.
"Oh you want some LCD, sorry we're out. Apple bought our entire production three years ago."
joelypolly
Mar 28, 10:39 AM
It may be an iPhone 4[S] release this year and an iPhone 5 next year. Personally I think the iPhone 4 could be faster but what else can you do to the device in terms of hardware that would make it more attractive to other 95% of non geeks that use the phone? No much would be the answer.
However, improved software will go a long way to give users a better experience using the system. I hope things like notification, syncing and perhaps a general interface refresh is coming to iOS 5. Also wouldn't mind an updated camera app with white balance and shutter speed control.
In terms of the iOS API I think Apple will probably have quite a few surprises in store for us.
I think the Tick Tock release schedule that Intel setup really makes a lot of sense for Apple as well. One version to introduce an idea and one version to optimise the idea. (see 3G to 3G[S], iPad to iPad 2 and perhaps 4 to 4[S])
However, improved software will go a long way to give users a better experience using the system. I hope things like notification, syncing and perhaps a general interface refresh is coming to iOS 5. Also wouldn't mind an updated camera app with white balance and shutter speed control.
In terms of the iOS API I think Apple will probably have quite a few surprises in store for us.
I think the Tick Tock release schedule that Intel setup really makes a lot of sense for Apple as well. One version to introduce an idea and one version to optimise the idea. (see 3G to 3G[S], iPad to iPad 2 and perhaps 4 to 4[S])
