komodrone
Apr 26, 02:39 PM
"...in total penetration"
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.
yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
THAT'S WHAT SHE SAID.
yeah I signed up for an account just to post this.
deepledee
Jul 30, 11:51 PM
No one is better than apple at keeping announcements of their products under wraps and other than one thing i might believe that this rumor is true. For any phone to be released in the US, it must apply and receive approval by the FCC. This information is always available to the public and that is why no phone can be released "secretly." The press would have wind of its approval by now if they do intend to announce the launch at the August conference...
sorry guys, i like the rest of you eagerly await an apple iphone
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Contrary to recent reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml), Engadget says that Apple's rumored "iPhone" may appear as early as August (http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/29/wild-speculation-iphone-to-launch-in-august/).
It has been well-established that Apple has been working on an Apple-branded phone for some time, however the release date has been difficult to pinpoint. Recently, various patents (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060505202447.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060614074411.shtml)) have been uncovered regarding Apple's cell phone technology and Peter Oppenheimer made comments (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/20/merrill.upgrades.aapl/) during Apple's Q3 2006 conference call virtually acknowledging Apple's work on the product, stating "We're not sitting around doing nothing" with regard to cell phones.
sorry guys, i like the rest of you eagerly await an apple iphone
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com)
Contrary to recent reports (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/03/20060330174059.shtml), Engadget says that Apple's rumored "iPhone" may appear as early as August (http://www.engadget.com/2006/07/29/wild-speculation-iphone-to-launch-in-august/).
It has been well-established that Apple has been working on an Apple-branded phone for some time, however the release date has been difficult to pinpoint. Recently, various patents (1 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/05/20060505202447.shtml), 2 (http://www.macrumors.com/pages/2006/06/20060614074411.shtml)) have been uncovered regarding Apple's cell phone technology and Peter Oppenheimer made comments (http://www.macnn.com/articles/06/07/20/merrill.upgrades.aapl/) during Apple's Q3 2006 conference call virtually acknowledging Apple's work on the product, stating "We're not sitting around doing nothing" with regard to cell phones.
_Matt
Aug 4, 10:58 AM
You are the perfect consumer. "Must ... have ... bright ... shiny ... new .... thing", whether you need it or not. So what if apple comes out with a new computer every 6 months? If the one you have does what you need it to - why do you care? If your self-worth is tied up in having the latest computer, you just need therapy. And please don't blame Apple for your debt situation.
Haha. Well said. I guess Apple added in something to the last revision of PowerBook G4s which makes us PowerBook users more down to earth. I would never get rid of my PowerBook. :D
Haha. Well said. I guess Apple added in something to the last revision of PowerBook G4s which makes us PowerBook users more down to earth. I would never get rid of my PowerBook. :D
-aggie-
May 3, 05:32 PM
I would rather that you started leading us since you seem to be much more versed in the rules guiding us :).
We�re doomed.:D
We�re doomed.:D
Phil A.
Apr 18, 03:02 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be copied for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
I sort of understand where you are coming from, but with a mobile device (or other computer), a major part of the design is the user interface and manufacturers should be able to protect that design. HTC have managed to make an interface that is in many ways better than iOS, but instead of any innovation at all, Samsung have just copied it.
BTW, Early car design innovations were patented and the designers licensed them to other manufacturers.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be copied for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
I sort of understand where you are coming from, but with a mobile device (or other computer), a major part of the design is the user interface and manufacturers should be able to protect that design. HTC have managed to make an interface that is in many ways better than iOS, but instead of any innovation at all, Samsung have just copied it.
BTW, Early car design innovations were patented and the designers licensed them to other manufacturers.
Stella
Aug 4, 02:24 PM
The 17" has a larger enclosure space than the 15.4" of course, so, better heat control and more space to put components. Perhaps the 15.4" would just get too hot / consume too much power with the 17" D/L SD inside it.
Doesn't the 17" use a different battery - higher capacity - than the 15.4"?
3. The 17" MBP is as thin as 15.4". Why does it have faster D/L SD ??
Doesn't the 17" use a different battery - higher capacity - than the 15.4"?
3. The 17" MBP is as thin as 15.4". Why does it have faster D/L SD ??
ABernardoJr
Apr 18, 04:46 PM
What's the difference? Number of icons?
lol I take it you DO think they look very similar. I see that they both use icons in a grid format. So tell me, what exactly are you suggesting would give LG the grounds for any kind of lawsuit? Or is it just the icons and grid (the rest of which has been done with phone interfaces before)?
And if you still think LG would theoretically have a case, refer to babbit's post:
The iPhone 1 was announced before the Prada phone. Patent dates showed iPhone implementation of a capacitive touchscreen phone at least a year before LG showed their Prada phone in 2006. The Prada shipped in small shipments before the iPhone, so that is their only claim that it was technically released before the iPhone even though real shipments occurred months later. Technically, if Apple wanted to, they could have sued LG.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
lol I take it you DO think they look very similar. I see that they both use icons in a grid format. So tell me, what exactly are you suggesting would give LG the grounds for any kind of lawsuit? Or is it just the icons and grid (the rest of which has been done with phone interfaces before)?
And if you still think LG would theoretically have a case, refer to babbit's post:
The iPhone 1 was announced before the Prada phone. Patent dates showed iPhone implementation of a capacitive touchscreen phone at least a year before LG showed their Prada phone in 2006. The Prada shipped in small shipments before the iPhone, so that is their only claim that it was technically released before the iPhone even though real shipments occurred months later. Technically, if Apple wanted to, they could have sued LG.
Also, the Prada isn't a smartphone. It can't load apps. It doesn't even have a qwerty keyboard. You input text through the phone dialer like old school SMS.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 18, 04:15 PM
Just because I stick a Ford logo on the hood doesn't mean I can make my new Mustang look like a Porsche Carrera clone.
On that subject, auto companies do this within their own brands. Ford will make a Lincoln and a Mercury that is the same as a Ford model but with a different name on it.
I never understood that about the auto industry. If you buy up competition and keep the name around instead of folding the acquisition into the one brand, then do something unique with each brand. Ford/Lincoln/Mercury for instance should divide up product lines between brands. Ford could be brand name of the truck line while the other two are brand names for luxury and compact cars for instance. But the experts will say this is silly. LOL
On that subject, auto companies do this within their own brands. Ford will make a Lincoln and a Mercury that is the same as a Ford model but with a different name on it.
I never understood that about the auto industry. If you buy up competition and keep the name around instead of folding the acquisition into the one brand, then do something unique with each brand. Ford/Lincoln/Mercury for instance should divide up product lines between brands. Ford could be brand name of the truck line while the other two are brand names for luxury and compact cars for instance. But the experts will say this is silly. LOL
toddybody
Apr 7, 10:52 AM
Apple makes products that people want. RIM makes products that cause people to point and laugh. Google makes products that they can only sell two for one or give away for free. Microsoft makes products that sit on the shelves until they are sent of to be recycled.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google. Gmail is great and Google is the only search I use. Unfortunately, they don't know how to make mobile devices.
Totally right. Apple is perfect and everyone else should just close up shop...:rolleyes: Please get a grip on reality before posting nonsense.
Don't get me wrong, I like Google. Gmail is great and Google is the only search I use. Unfortunately, they don't know how to make mobile devices.
Totally right. Apple is perfect and everyone else should just close up shop...:rolleyes: Please get a grip on reality before posting nonsense.
dnedved
Sep 11, 01:53 AM
If they come out with a video-capable Airport, I'll buy two of them. We don't have a TV and watch everything on our 17" and 12" PBs right now. I want a projector but don't want to have the mess of cables everywhere. This would be exactly what I need. I certainly don't need a new iPod, but if they came out with a true video iPod that could stream video wirelessly to the Airport, I'd probably have to pick up one or two of those as well.
iStudentUK
Apr 10, 11:21 AM
In my opinion-
48/2(9+3) = 288
48/(2(9+3)) = 2
To make it clear you could write it with ( ... )^-1 like a real man! :D
48/2(9+3) = 288
48/(2(9+3)) = 2
To make it clear you could write it with ( ... )^-1 like a real man! :D
DeaconGraves
May 4, 03:24 PM
My opposition to this isn't because I think Digital Distribution is bad (the copy of Windows 7 I'm writing this on was downloaded, legally I might add, from Microsoft), it's because of how Apple is offering it.
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
I was able to download a .iso of Windows and install it how I wanted to. I was able to back up the .iso to an external hard drive and also to burn a copy of it.
The App Store (unless they change things) wouldn't allow that. I would have no problem with this if Apple included a way to create a DVD or USB installer from the download.
You seem really hung up on the fact that if Lion is sold on the app store it has to act exactly like every thing else on the app store, when that doesn't necessarily have to be the case.
Apple has always strived for simplicity, and creating one application where every other application can be downloaded makes things really simple for people who are not power users like you and me. Want the newest version of OS X? App store. Want iWork '11? App Store. Need a keyboard firmware update (hypothetically)? App Store.
I don't disagree with you that downloads from the Apple website itself aren't a bad thing, but it hasn't been the simplest thing either. And again, no one has said what other options will be available. There might be .iso downloads elsewhere on the website. The OS installer might have an option to burn a recovery disc.
Honestly, I'm with you for the most part. If there's no easy options to create a physical version of Lion for me to have as backup, I'm buying retail. But that doesn't mean the App Store version is a bad thing. It's a good thing for 95% of the people out there who aren't on these forums. :)
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.
robertgenito
Nov 3, 02:23 PM
The next phases of Sopho's agenda:
1) create more "viruses" and get as much media hype as possible. This will ensure a larger demand of their free product.
2) once a significant number of users are registered and using their free product, force them to update their application--for new virus protection. this new update will lock them into a 30-day trial mode :) users will have to pay $60 per year in order to stay protected.
I'm not worried at all honestly. I'm just even happier to be running a unix-based operating system :)
1) create more "viruses" and get as much media hype as possible. This will ensure a larger demand of their free product.
2) once a significant number of users are registered and using their free product, force them to update their application--for new virus protection. this new update will lock them into a 30-day trial mode :) users will have to pay $60 per year in order to stay protected.
I'm not worried at all honestly. I'm just even happier to be running a unix-based operating system :)
hyperpasta
Aug 2, 11:42 AM
If you 'can't have cameras' dont use them. It doesnt matter if they are built in. And for people with dual monitors they will have... er... oh yeh two cameras :D
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
Well, I disagree with the first part of your post. However, I'm sure Apple won't care and go ahead anyway! :D
As for the two-camera thing... wasn't there a rumor sometime back about how Leopard could handle dual-camera chatting? It would use the monitor/camera that the chat window was on... move the chat window to the other display, and the other camera picks up the chat!
RalfTheDog
Apr 23, 05:18 PM
Wish Apple did something towards resolution independence and not make images bigger and bigger. :confused:
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
Resolution independence will not stop images from getting bigger. Unless you are dealing with vector art, scaling an image up will decrease quality. Resolution independence will be a function of taking the biggest image that might be used and scaling it down.
Even with vector art, you lose some image quality with scaling. You can't create new detail.
mambodancer
Jul 30, 09:45 PM
[QUOTE=mackiwi]umm....that magazine add looks rather real to me. WTF?:eek:
iCreate magazine buts together a fake ad each issue. The ad shown is a kind of "What if" or "Wishful Thinking" feature of their magazine. Had the poster posted the full page graphic, you would have seen this.
iCreate magazine buts together a fake ad each issue. The ad shown is a kind of "What if" or "Wishful Thinking" feature of their magazine. Had the poster posted the full page graphic, you would have seen this.
marvel2
Jan 11, 10:28 PM
Little problem with my TT car kit. My iPhone no longer automatically pairs with the car kit when I plug it in. I use to be able to turn BT on and plug it in the TT kit and it would pair in a few seconds. Now I have to manually pair the two by going into the BT settings on the iPhone.
Anyone else with this problem?
Anyone else with this problem?
coder12
Mar 26, 09:56 PM
Lion this summer, iOS 5 this fall. Makes sense to me :)
OttawaGuy
Apr 9, 08:24 PM
We use/say bedmas in Canada.
Brackets, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction
Brackets, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition, Subtraction
Rodimus Prime
Mar 28, 11:22 AM
You're missing something here.... The iPhone actually gets updates over its lifespan rather than promises of updates followed up by the requirement to buy a new phone in order to install the latest version of an open Android operating system on a closed manufacturer's phone. All-to-frequent updates make buyers feel like they have been tricked, especially when they cannot upgrade their phone to do the same things the new phones are doing because the manufacturer prevents it.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
Might like to point out that part of the problem with Android updates is not the manufactures but the Carriers.
AT&T being by far the worse offenders. If AT&T had its way the iPhone would never get more than security updates. To upgrade your OS you would have to buy a new phone.
This is no were more apparent that looking no farther than the GalaxyS phones. AT&T GalaxyS phone (Captivate) still is waiting on its Android 2.2 update when over seas it is already getting its Android 2.3 updated. Clearly it is not the manufacture causing problems but the carrier.
I hope the manufactures start taking a cue from Apple and MS to say screw the carriers and start supply updates for their phones. No more blocking the updates from the carriers.
Apple is about the only company that can get away with the delay. Most others would be fried for it. iPhone is already starting to show its age and delaying it longer will only make it worse.
Not to mention that most folks have 2 year contracts and don't like to pay the penalty to upgrade early. The notion that 15 months between upgrades (not 18 months -- if you are counting June 2010 to September 2011) is not bad at all -- especially to the masses who are not early adopters. The iPhone 4 is still holding its own against the competition and its better than it was when it released because of software upgrades. It still does many things better than phones that have released since (like take better photos). Heck, I am still using my iPhone 3GS and I still love it because it gets new features every few months and has even improved on performance.
Do I think a dual-core 1Gz iPhone with 1GB of RAM would stack up better statistically against the competition? Yes. Do I think that phone will do more things and be faster? Yes. Do I think 3 months will matter all that much in the long run? No. If it means some vast improvements are coming (including LTE) -- then I am willing to wait 3 months.
Might like to point out that part of the problem with Android updates is not the manufactures but the Carriers.
AT&T being by far the worse offenders. If AT&T had its way the iPhone would never get more than security updates. To upgrade your OS you would have to buy a new phone.
This is no were more apparent that looking no farther than the GalaxyS phones. AT&T GalaxyS phone (Captivate) still is waiting on its Android 2.2 update when over seas it is already getting its Android 2.3 updated. Clearly it is not the manufacture causing problems but the carrier.
I hope the manufactures start taking a cue from Apple and MS to say screw the carriers and start supply updates for their phones. No more blocking the updates from the carriers.
Apple is about the only company that can get away with the delay. Most others would be fried for it. iPhone is already starting to show its age and delaying it longer will only make it worse.
nuckinfutz
May 7, 12:05 PM
I've been a long time .mac/mobileme user - I would say I've been using their service for about 7 years. Only recently, I started using iDisk. I started using it for text documents, and it seems to work great. But recently, I have been hearing a lot about dropbox and its speed. Is dropbox that much better and what is this speed people are referring to? I played around with it a bit and its nice. It gives you a few more features, but these feature I wouldn't use. Is there any point to switch?
!
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
!
Ok in a nutshell here's why iDisk and Drop Box have speed differences.
iDisk:
You are creating a WebDAV tunnel to the storage server that must remain open and in sync with your Mac. You drop a file on the iDisk icon and it transfers that file to the server.
Drop Box
Drop Box sits on top of Amazon's S3 storage. What they've done is built up the front end so that when you drop a file on your Drop Box it caches the file locally and then syncs to the cloud "behind the scene". So when you open a file sitting in your Drop Box it feels like working on a local file because you "are" working on the local file. Any changes made from you or anyone the file has shared with will be sync'd in the background.
Most people don't understand the fundamental differences between iDisk and Drop Box. If Apple was to build a front end to iDisk that stored the file locally and then sync'd over WebDAV in the background they'd be able to offer the same performance.
Hope this helps.
andiwm2003
Jul 21, 03:06 PM
.........................................3) The MacBook won't see an upgrade for a few months - maybe a speed bump in September, but otherwise, I wouldn't expect Core2Duo in it by maybe December or MWSF '07. Till then, your MB will be perfectly fine.
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
the macbook was released mid may 06. so i would expect some update in october given the fast processor updates.
certainly a good time for mac users.:)
JoshH
Aug 2, 02:23 PM
I wouldn't be surprised if all that happens is Leopard previews, Mac Pros and Steve rips his shirt off and crowd surfs.
No, I think this is the closest so far :)
No, I think this is the closest so far :)
