ChrisTX
Mar 27, 12:16 AM
If true...sounds like iPhone 3GS and iPad 1 owners are going to be shown the door.
We'll see, but I plan to upgrade from my iPad 1 to an iPad 3 when available anyways.
We'll see, but I plan to upgrade from my iPad 1 to an iPad 3 when available anyways.
regandarcy
Mar 27, 06:52 AM
I'm all for cloud computing as an added feature....but not as a replacement for traditional storage of media and data.
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
I mean, I hope Apple doesn't force people to be connected to the cloud. I think that would be a mistake. Mainly because it would force you to either have access to a wifi signal, or pay for an expensive data plan just to gain access to your media.
As it is, all the telecom companies are dropping their unlimited plans and switching to tiered pricing. I think this creates a problem for the user to freely use their content without constant fear of exceeding their data plans.
And what of people with iPod touches or wifi only ipads...who are not within range of a wifi signal....and cannot access their content as a result. That would be very frustrating and limiting. It would make their devices nothing more than expensive paper weights.
It also creates a problem for those with 3G ipads or iPhones trying to access large video or media files in their cloud I think. I mean have you ever tried to watch a YouTube video over 3G? It SUCKS! So you'd be using up tons of bandwidth on a tiered data plan for crappy quality. How is that good?
And if the iPhone 5 is the first apple device to use 4G speeds....won't that eat up even more bandwidth? Running an even greater risk of you going over your limit and being charged outrageous fees by your service provider? Be it ATT or Verizon?
I understand that the concept of the cloud is freedom at it's core....the ability to have access to your media across multiple devices without having to store it on just one...but then you become a slave to the telecom companies and their tiered data plans...thus defeating that freedom.
Plus it forces you to chose a 3G iPad or put 3G into iPod touches to make it useful.
So I get it, and I don't get it.
The original concept of the iPod was to be able to carry all your music with you. Total freedom. And that's what helped make it such a huge success. Then came the iPhone and iPad. Both equally cool for music and video. You could store all your data on them and listen or watch them at your leisure on the go.
But if you then force people to store their data on a cloud...and pay for an expensive tiered data plan to access that data...to me it becomes not so free anymore. In fact, it becomes downright restrictive and suffocating IMHO.
As long as Apple doesn't abandon the ability to store your media ON your device, I'm cool with this move. The cloud would just become an added bonus which you could use or not use at your discretion.
I just think having to be connected to the cloud via wifi or 3G to access your data is kind of annoying....not to mention potentially EXPENSIVE!
Once in awhile...ok. But not as ones main means of access. I much rather have the bulk of my music and data actually stored ON my device. Much more convenient if you ask me.
Flash drives are big enough to carry most if not all the music and video you need. Why store it all on apple servers on some big farm in North Carolina that you need to be connected to wifi or an expensive tiered data plan just to access it? Don't see the point.
Is it just me? :-)
balamw
Apr 9, 06:34 PM
Official Google answer.
280546
Wolfram Alpha concurs.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
B
280546
Wolfram Alpha concurs.
http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=48%2F2%289%2B3%29
B
CKtoph
Nov 13, 07:54 AM
The key for making this purchase for me is to have at least the option to allow the calls to come in through the car's speakers while using the built-in mic on the dock.
Also, the youtube video shows the guy had it stuck on his dash with the adhesive? Anyone have driver's point of view, pictures with it mounted with suction on the windshield? There's no way I'm sticking this thing to my dash.
Also, the youtube video shows the guy had it stuck on his dash with the adhesive? Anyone have driver's point of view, pictures with it mounted with suction on the windshield? There's no way I'm sticking this thing to my dash.
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 09:49 PM
To illustrate your point, PalmOne (if that's what the PalmOS Group is called this month...) is doing the aforemnetioned ground-up rewrite of PalmOS now (it should be available to devs soon if they're on schedule) and it's based on Linux. Stable, massively featureful, full PalmOS 5 backward-compatibility, and futureproof.
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.
I hate to keep dragging my personal employment history into the discussion here, but this is *hardly* the first time this kind of factor has been in play.
I worked for what was, until (talk about timing!) April 1st of this year, a fully-Sony-staffed technical support facility. We provided tech support for Sony computers, monitors, CLIÉ PDAs, WebTV, Satellite tv, TVs, DVD players, VCRs, phones, all the Business and Professional stuff, etc. Yet (with the exception of B&P), our facility competed for tech-supporting our products with other tech support agencies out there, including our own out-sourced tech support partners.
Sony frequently would not include their own subsystems (CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, writers, etc.) in their own products because they wouldn't (some say "couldn't" but I don't buy that) let themselves have their own inventory cheap enough in a lot of cases. Heck, for that matter, it wasn't until sometime in early 2004 (basically 1 year and change before we all got kicked out) that they switched from 500MHz P3-based Hewlett-Packard desktop computers as our actual "agent workstations" to 3.2GHz P4-based VAIOs. For that matter (and yes this is a rant, but it's also pertinent to this aspect of the discussion) it wasn't until like the last year-and-a-half, maybe not-quite-two-years of our operations that they managed to get more than a handful of current-model Sony computer products into the building AND into the hands of those of us doing the tech support. (The reason for this largely relates to the fact that we as the "tech support" division were the red-headed step-child, and basically a money pit, and we had to actually *buy* our own products at regular retail prices from our manufacturing divisions, instead of them sending them to us.) Now, make of that what you will.
I go into this to basically say that it doesn't surprise me to see any company playing the "house divided" strategy. The only problem is that it is a losing strategy. Whether religious or not, people should at least look *this* up in the Bible as a basic, common sense 101 lesson on how not to run your personal life or your business. Ah, but I digress...
Yet the hardware arm of Palm has said it might not buy the new sytem from the software arm. I have to imagine this has to do with posturing/playing the good little beoch to Microsoft. We know what happens to companies which partner with Microsoft... that they have proves prima facia that they're unequipped to run a company.
I hate to keep dragging my personal employment history into the discussion here, but this is *hardly* the first time this kind of factor has been in play.
I worked for what was, until (talk about timing!) April 1st of this year, a fully-Sony-staffed technical support facility. We provided tech support for Sony computers, monitors, CLIÉ PDAs, WebTV, Satellite tv, TVs, DVD players, VCRs, phones, all the Business and Professional stuff, etc. Yet (with the exception of B&P), our facility competed for tech-supporting our products with other tech support agencies out there, including our own out-sourced tech support partners.
Sony frequently would not include their own subsystems (CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, writers, etc.) in their own products because they wouldn't (some say "couldn't" but I don't buy that) let themselves have their own inventory cheap enough in a lot of cases. Heck, for that matter, it wasn't until sometime in early 2004 (basically 1 year and change before we all got kicked out) that they switched from 500MHz P3-based Hewlett-Packard desktop computers as our actual "agent workstations" to 3.2GHz P4-based VAIOs. For that matter (and yes this is a rant, but it's also pertinent to this aspect of the discussion) it wasn't until like the last year-and-a-half, maybe not-quite-two-years of our operations that they managed to get more than a handful of current-model Sony computer products into the building AND into the hands of those of us doing the tech support. (The reason for this largely relates to the fact that we as the "tech support" division were the red-headed step-child, and basically a money pit, and we had to actually *buy* our own products at regular retail prices from our manufacturing divisions, instead of them sending them to us.) Now, make of that what you will.
I go into this to basically say that it doesn't surprise me to see any company playing the "house divided" strategy. The only problem is that it is a losing strategy. Whether religious or not, people should at least look *this* up in the Bible as a basic, common sense 101 lesson on how not to run your personal life or your business. Ah, but I digress...
Stella
Nov 23, 10:49 AM
Did the cat also happen to take any photos of unreleased products in elevators?
Wow. How did you guess? :p
The pictures were taken using the camera on the actual Apple device.
Wow. How did you guess? :p
The pictures were taken using the camera on the actual Apple device.
PCMacUser
Aug 7, 06:40 PM
Well it's certainly good to see new computers, but they really are aimed at high level tasks. These machines use server technology, rather than technology developed for the retail sector.
Interesting points I see are the use of ECC RAM (this is not at all unusual for servers, but very expensive because it's usually paid for by a company's server budget), and I didn't see any mention of onboard hardware RAID, which is a bit disappointing when you've got all of this other fancy stuff going on.
I'd also be interested to see, from an environmental perspective, how its power consumption levels compare with an equivalent consumer PC.
Interesting points I see are the use of ECC RAM (this is not at all unusual for servers, but very expensive because it's usually paid for by a company's server budget), and I didn't see any mention of onboard hardware RAID, which is a bit disappointing when you've got all of this other fancy stuff going on.
I'd also be interested to see, from an environmental perspective, how its power consumption levels compare with an equivalent consumer PC.
Tonsko
Jan 5, 09:16 AM
With full respect for your decisions, if you'll pardon me, I think that's a little bit crackers. :D
How do you know if your machine isn't part of a botnet? Have you eschewed only AV and simply subsist on your router f/wall and software firewall? Only run as user not admin? None of the above? Something else?
How do you know if your machine isn't part of a botnet? Have you eschewed only AV and simply subsist on your router f/wall and software firewall? Only run as user not admin? None of the above? Something else?
Northgrove
Mar 30, 03:48 AM
Too bad to hear, but I also have to think about the victims in Japan when hearing these kind of news, or unemployed workers due to the extensive damages. Those who want to build those batteries for us, but can't, and have to look after their family members instead. A situation an order of a magnitude worse than this... :(
gnasher729
May 6, 01:37 AM
There's no way that Apple is gonna switch to ARM for their Mac lines when it already took them a decade to make the transition from IBM to Intel processors.
You know how long it takes me to create an ARM version of my code on the Mac App Store?
Two minutes.
Now, OSX Lion is coming, and it appears to contain the beginnings of a convergence and consolidation between iOS and OSX. If we try to imagine where those OS's will be, say, 3 years out (and the hardware as well), by THAT time, it may be as simple as flipping a switch and hey-presto, you're on an ARM device without missing a beat...
What makes you think that ARM implies iOS? Apple had a version of MacOS X running on x86 processors four years before Intel processors were released. I'd bet that Apple has a version of Snow Leopard and Lion running on PowerPC (which they don't sell, just to make sure all code stays portable) and a version running on ARM (which is actually a lot easier than PowerPC).
This is the biggest load of ************ I have ever seen on this site. Why would Apple redesign everything in their notebooks to make this switch? What is gained by switching?
Cost - ARM chips are really cheap. Battery life - they don't take any power at all. Want an MBA with 20 hours battery life?
You know how long it takes me to create an ARM version of my code on the Mac App Store?
Two minutes.
Now, OSX Lion is coming, and it appears to contain the beginnings of a convergence and consolidation between iOS and OSX. If we try to imagine where those OS's will be, say, 3 years out (and the hardware as well), by THAT time, it may be as simple as flipping a switch and hey-presto, you're on an ARM device without missing a beat...
What makes you think that ARM implies iOS? Apple had a version of MacOS X running on x86 processors four years before Intel processors were released. I'd bet that Apple has a version of Snow Leopard and Lion running on PowerPC (which they don't sell, just to make sure all code stays portable) and a version running on ARM (which is actually a lot easier than PowerPC).
This is the biggest load of ************ I have ever seen on this site. Why would Apple redesign everything in their notebooks to make this switch? What is gained by switching?
Cost - ARM chips are really cheap. Battery life - they don't take any power at all. Want an MBA with 20 hours battery life?
toddybody
Apr 25, 10:05 AM
Hes not acting like a dick, he's just worried because of what hes heard.
I know your email to Steve would begin with "Your Royal Appleness" and end with "Your faithful Man-Servant"
The man has heard his phone is tracking his location, and is naturally, entitled to be worried.
Sorry *LTD* (Since I actually like you alot)...
But that comment is hilarious. :D
I know your email to Steve would begin with "Your Royal Appleness" and end with "Your faithful Man-Servant"
The man has heard his phone is tracking his location, and is naturally, entitled to be worried.
Sorry *LTD* (Since I actually like you alot)...
But that comment is hilarious. :D
Biscuit411
Apr 6, 05:52 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
xpipe - Nice honest, straight-forward review of your two different tablets and experiences. Thanks. Prepare to be attacked... :-)
xpipe - Nice honest, straight-forward review of your two different tablets and experiences. Thanks. Prepare to be attacked... :-)
wclyffe
Dec 12, 06:35 AM
Just got a notice from BLT that their expected ETA on the TomTom Car Kit is now 12/16. We'll see, but I wouldn't count on it.
Multimedia
Aug 11, 09:44 PM
Oblivious to this thread all day long, I restate my previous predictions:
September 12 Paris Apple Expo Keynote Introduction Merom MacBooks - same speeds, MacBook Pros 2.33GHz top speed.:D
Dual Clovertown 8 Core Mac Pro January 9, 2007 San Francisco MacWorld Expo SteveNote :pI'm sure many people have asked this throughout the thread already, but is it worth it for me, if I've been waiting all summer, to continue waiting possibly into the start of school (I'm a freshman entering college) for the release of Merom in MB/MBP? My classes start Sept. 11th, but I don't know how long I'd survive without a computer.
Do you guys foresee the release of Merom before that date?:confused:No, a few hours later. You must wait for it because that Merom MacBook or MacBook Pro will take you all the way through your college years way better than the current Yonah models will. When Leopard ships next Spring, the 64-bit capabilities of Merom will blossom way more than than the 32-bit limit on the Yonah platforms will. So hang in there and know they are coming real soon after September 11 - like the next day. :)
When I was in college we used spiral notebooks and typewriters. Can you not take notes by hand for a few days? Spiral notebooks are very inexpensive - like 50�. Will that be ok for a few days?
September 12 Paris Apple Expo Keynote Introduction Merom MacBooks - same speeds, MacBook Pros 2.33GHz top speed.:D
Dual Clovertown 8 Core Mac Pro January 9, 2007 San Francisco MacWorld Expo SteveNote :pI'm sure many people have asked this throughout the thread already, but is it worth it for me, if I've been waiting all summer, to continue waiting possibly into the start of school (I'm a freshman entering college) for the release of Merom in MB/MBP? My classes start Sept. 11th, but I don't know how long I'd survive without a computer.
Do you guys foresee the release of Merom before that date?:confused:No, a few hours later. You must wait for it because that Merom MacBook or MacBook Pro will take you all the way through your college years way better than the current Yonah models will. When Leopard ships next Spring, the 64-bit capabilities of Merom will blossom way more than than the 32-bit limit on the Yonah platforms will. So hang in there and know they are coming real soon after September 11 - like the next day. :)
When I was in college we used spiral notebooks and typewriters. Can you not take notes by hand for a few days? Spiral notebooks are very inexpensive - like 50�. Will that be ok for a few days?
Don't panic
May 4, 12:13 PM
so now we have to wait until mscriv tells you his foul intentions?
this could take a while. he's probably busy torturing counseling flies or sommthing ;)
this could take a while. he's probably busy torturing counseling flies or sommthing ;)
nuckinfutz
May 7, 11:04 AM
Google, Dropbox, Teamviewer. Good enough for me and free.
Eric Schmidt on privacy (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/48975)
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."
What Eric like posting my pics of my son up on a page yet not wanting the freakin' world to see? Or how about my list of friends exposed to the world with the automatic opt in of Google Buzz (http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-google-buzz-has-a-huge-privacy-flaw-2010-2)
Google and Facebook are nothing but data mining scavengers. Try this...if the shat hits the fan on either site tell me how quickly you can call and talk to a human? I'll wait.
Eric Schmidt on privacy (http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/48975)
"If you have something that you don't want anyone to know, maybe you shouldn't be doing it in the first place."
What Eric like posting my pics of my son up on a page yet not wanting the freakin' world to see? Or how about my list of friends exposed to the world with the automatic opt in of Google Buzz (http://www.businessinsider.com/warning-google-buzz-has-a-huge-privacy-flaw-2010-2)
Google and Facebook are nothing but data mining scavengers. Try this...if the shat hits the fan on either site tell me how quickly you can call and talk to a human? I'll wait.
scibry
Jul 30, 05:57 PM
I stated this exactly in a previous thread but I could change my stance if I could be convinced of one or more of the following were possible.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
All I have to say is that Apple will ideally solve the voice chat market's needs, connecting us to any person with a phone or computer cheaply or for free and offering a beginner wireless to wireless service perhaps through an iPod accessory. I use Skype from my Mac to talk unlimited and free to a friend in Nederlands (also on Skype) unlimited and free because not everyone uses AIM (or has a Mac with iChat). He for example uses MSN. Adium is an example of software that unifies the IM experience and iChat is not. iChat's best features are not usable by my foreign PC using friends with other IM services like Yahoo! and MSN (which are now apparently merging). If Apple can support Microsoft Office they can surely support MSN and they already do in Address Book. So not only do they need to offer voice chat to homes but they also need to offer voice chat to EVERY modern computer/PC.
Will there be a cell phone? I was thinking maybe a walkie talkie built into an iPod.
1. Could Apple improve their iChat to compete with the likes of skype, etc?
2. Could Apple provide such a service?
3. Could Apple create an iPod tele without removing what is already available in an iPod?
4. Could there be a iTel AV to connect to iChat AV.
Even if the photographer's visit was legit from the sound of it, it is an entirely new product so I'd have to assume that it was just another phone. Whomever they jump into bed with (service provider) would have to be big, really big. Another thing detracting from the story is that the telephone companies are notoriously slow getting product into their stores whereas when Apple releases something it is in store (Apple store that is) rather quickly. AND I don't see Apple selling another company's cell phone service in-store.
All I have to say is that Apple will ideally solve the voice chat market's needs, connecting us to any person with a phone or computer cheaply or for free and offering a beginner wireless to wireless service perhaps through an iPod accessory. I use Skype from my Mac to talk unlimited and free to a friend in Nederlands (also on Skype) unlimited and free because not everyone uses AIM (or has a Mac with iChat). He for example uses MSN. Adium is an example of software that unifies the IM experience and iChat is not. iChat's best features are not usable by my foreign PC using friends with other IM services like Yahoo! and MSN (which are now apparently merging). If Apple can support Microsoft Office they can surely support MSN and they already do in Address Book. So not only do they need to offer voice chat to homes but they also need to offer voice chat to EVERY modern computer/PC.
Will there be a cell phone? I was thinking maybe a walkie talkie built into an iPod.
081440
Aug 11, 06:35 PM
And please, for the love of all things holy, retire the Powerbook G5 "joke". It never was funny and it certainly isn't funny now.
THANK YOU!! I COMPLETELY AGREE!!!! :D
THANK YOU!! I COMPLETELY AGREE!!!! :D
tstreete
Nov 9, 07:21 AM
Phone calls are routed exclusively through the Car Kit's speakers, whether or not music etc. is routed through the output jack to speakers. A lot of smartphones are like the iPhone in that they won't run phone calls through the base/charger port, but will run the "computer" output, i.e., music and other programs. Has to do with the separate computer/phone circuits, I suppose.
Thanks for that info. I was wondering if I plug an fm transmitter into the car kit and play my music through my car speakers, will incoming phone calls also be sent through the car speakers or the Tomtom speaker? I prefer the phone calls just come through the car kit's speaker alone.
Thanks for that info. I was wondering if I plug an fm transmitter into the car kit and play my music through my car speakers, will incoming phone calls also be sent through the car speakers or the Tomtom speaker? I prefer the phone calls just come through the car kit's speaker alone.
darrens
Aug 5, 03:04 AM
First, Apple's apps were easier to port because they were already XCode. So it was fairly easy for Apple to just recompile with the new compiler.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Are you sure that's true for all of them? They haven't owned Logic very long, and some of the others started life outside of Apple. I'm sure they had a few issues there.
Second, Adobe was using a lot of CodeWarrior code and it would be far more difficult to convert. Also having X86 code compiled using MS VStudio doesn't help Adobe to be ahead in generating X86 code under XCode because they run under a completely different GUI and access different libraries.
They have the MacOS X GUI code - that doesn't change for Intel - the OS is the same. The core logic endianness doesn't depend on the compiler - the code would be cross-platform and compile on GCC and Visual Studio anyway. Sure they have to deal with a few Codewarrior issues - but they have to do that for the new version anyway. It's not like they'd have to do it twice.
Third, even Apple released the UB code with a new updated version of their pro apps. Adobe's CS3 was not due for a year and a half.
True - but not all Apple's pro apps had a significant level of new features - they were just an interim release.
Fourth, Adobe announced their plans early on so that everyone would know what to expect.
Yes - don't expect us to be as pro-active as we've been in the past. I can remember when Apple went PPC - Adobe had an accelerator out for Photoshop close to the release date of the PPC Macs, and the fully PPC version followed shortly after.
My point about intuit is that Apple announced the transition before Intuit even began work on Quicken 2007. Quicken hardly relies on any graphics code, is mostly text, and number based. Yet they chose to ignore converting to UB code even though now would be perfect timing to do so. In addition they have not announced any plans to create UB's in the future.
This is also the sort of app that gets the least advantage from conversion. It's still a fair amount of work to change development environments when there's no real advantage to it. Especially when Intuit is really given token support to the Mac anyway.
Sure quicken will run with Rosetta, but is that what we want from developers. Forget about modernizing their code because they can make it run in an artificial emulated environment.
With that logic Intuit should have stuck with OS9 versions of quicken as it could always be run fine in classic.
It's hardly the same - you have to boot a second copy of MacOS to run a classic app (which is really slow) and it doesn't integrate seamlessly. You can hardly tell an app is running in Rosetta - there's no visual difference.
Caliber26
Mar 29, 02:46 PM
I'm really neutral toward all this, but I really just have one very valid question.......... Why, WHY does EVERYTHING Amazon does have to be sooooooooooooo DISGUSTINGLY HIDEOUS!!!??? :rolleyes:
I challenge anyone in here to show me a website uglier than amazon.com! Seriously!!!
craigslist.org? :p
I challenge anyone in here to show me a website uglier than amazon.com! Seriously!!!
craigslist.org? :p
wclyffe
Nov 18, 04:28 PM
yes very true, I think i might stick with BLT as well, hard to beat 85 dollars...lol, especially since i just learned that the new Magellan Car Kit will cost 129.99 :eek: and here we all were complaining about tomtom's pricing...lol. I will say, just as i have stated before though, that it is still enticing to go to my local apple store and pick up a unit. I guess it all depends on if I go on some spur of the moment trip..lol
Yeah, I hear you. I hate waiting for orders to ship...I guess we get so use to items being in stock, and on their way the next day.
Thought I'd post the Magellan car kit info for all to see:
Magellan car kit detailed at FCC filing
That was fast. We just learned Magellan was going to offer a car kit for the iPhone and it has already hit the FCC. GPSTracklog.com has a detailed drawing of the new device, and it looks to be quite complete. Magellan has said the kit will be on sale before the end of the year, and even give the iPod touch full nav capabilities.
The car kit is supposed to allow any iPhone GPS app to work with it, so you're not limited to the Magellan app. It works in portrait or landscape mode, and has a speaker for hearing directions and also link to your iPhone for Bluetooth based calls.
The Magellan Roadmate app itself [iTunes link] has a boatload of good features, and we're anxious to get our hands on the app for a full test. Holiday travelers will have a lot of good choices for navigating to your destinations. Remember when we thought the plain old Google Maps app was cool?
Yeah, I hear you. I hate waiting for orders to ship...I guess we get so use to items being in stock, and on their way the next day.
Thought I'd post the Magellan car kit info for all to see:
Magellan car kit detailed at FCC filing
That was fast. We just learned Magellan was going to offer a car kit for the iPhone and it has already hit the FCC. GPSTracklog.com has a detailed drawing of the new device, and it looks to be quite complete. Magellan has said the kit will be on sale before the end of the year, and even give the iPod touch full nav capabilities.
The car kit is supposed to allow any iPhone GPS app to work with it, so you're not limited to the Magellan app. It works in portrait or landscape mode, and has a speaker for hearing directions and also link to your iPhone for Bluetooth based calls.
The Magellan Roadmate app itself [iTunes link] has a boatload of good features, and we're anxious to get our hands on the app for a full test. Holiday travelers will have a lot of good choices for navigating to your destinations. Remember when we thought the plain old Google Maps app was cool?
Don't panic
May 5, 07:42 AM
I'd like to make sure of some things.
The villain started with 0 points. He then earned 2 points by taking two turns.
We did our thing
He took two more turns earning 2 more points for 4 total. He obviously used at least one point to make a goblin. So he had 3 or less points, depending on whether he bought more traps. They could be anywhere, even far from where we currently are (e.g., he could be putting defenses around his lair. )
Do I have that straight?
You got all that correct.
ravenvii, correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn't the points remaining be 2, and not 3, since in the turn he summoned and placed the goblin he would not be collecting any point?
vR1T1:collect 1 point, TP=1
vR1T2:use point for goblin, TP=0
vR2T1: collect point?. TP=1?
vR2T2: collect point?, TP=2?
The villain started with 0 points. He then earned 2 points by taking two turns.
We did our thing
He took two more turns earning 2 more points for 4 total. He obviously used at least one point to make a goblin. So he had 3 or less points, depending on whether he bought more traps. They could be anywhere, even far from where we currently are (e.g., he could be putting defenses around his lair. )
Do I have that straight?
You got all that correct.
ravenvii, correct me if i am wrong, but wouldn't the points remaining be 2, and not 3, since in the turn he summoned and placed the goblin he would not be collecting any point?
vR1T1:collect 1 point, TP=1
vR1T2:use point for goblin, TP=0
vR2T1: collect point?. TP=1?
vR2T2: collect point?, TP=2?
SandynJosh
Apr 26, 03:21 PM
But if Apple had gotten on board with Verizon a year earlier, those numbers would probably be reversed.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
That extra year that Apple sat on their ass with AT&T was the crucial year that allowed android to gain traction and mindshare.
Neither your or I know what contract details with AT&T prevented Apple from opening up Verizon earlier than they did, so claiming Apple "sat on their ass" is just your silly opinion.
Once the 'greatly anticipated' Verizon launch finally did come, it was met with a large chorus of "who cares?" from the crowd - the crowd that had gotten their droid phone 6 months earlier.
Again you make a wild-assed leap of logic. I, like many Verizon users, met the news that the iPhone was available on my favorite carrier with, "Oh dam, I'm locked into a two-year contract with a ****** Android Incredible."
Your basic point that Apple needed to open up the iPhone to more U.S. carriers to avoid market share loss is correct and generally regarded as such by most analysts. However, from the launch of the first iPhone, Apple has struggled to meet the accelerating demand for its products, so adding more U.S. carriers may have not been as smart as us outside the company might second-guess.
