phlavor
Apr 21, 06:14 PM
I would hazard a guess that the thinner facade suggests a lack of optical media drives, or if it does have one, a vertical slot-loader. But I think what with flash drive or Internet distribution, optical media drives aren't really needed any more, even on a Pro machine.
If they made the MacBook Air External Superdrive bootable and compatible with any computer I would welcome the elimination of internal optical drives.
If they made the MacBook Air External Superdrive bootable and compatible with any computer I would welcome the elimination of internal optical drives.
bigraz
Jul 30, 09:38 PM
The apple phone should be similar to the Sony P900 series, in that they are unlocked and work with any GSM phone. I don't think any store, Cingular, T-Mobile, etc. do not sell through the stores. You have to buy from Sony or elsewhere.
I had a P900 phone before the Treo 650 and it worked fine with Cingular.
Bring on a phone that can sync with ease and feel of Apple OS, so I don't have to rely on Palm, not that is that bad.
Apple for life!:D
I had a P900 phone before the Treo 650 and it worked fine with Cingular.
Bring on a phone that can sync with ease and feel of Apple OS, so I don't have to rely on Palm, not that is that bad.
Apple for life!:D
Daveoc64
May 4, 03:04 PM
Because it has a payment system and delivery system in place.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
So why sell it in the App Store?
Apple isn't a poor company, the Apple Store (the website) has been able to sell digital software for years. They could set up a very sophisticated method for selling Mac OS X to people without using the App Store.
If I was Apple, I'd sell (through their website) a licence for Mac OS X. You'd download a small App, which would give you the option to either install it to the computer you were on right then or to create a DVD or USB key which could also be used to install the OS. This App would then download the appropriate files and continue the install/make the DVD.
But it isn't an app. It's an OS upgrade.
So why sell it in the App Store?
Apple isn't a poor company, the Apple Store (the website) has been able to sell digital software for years. They could set up a very sophisticated method for selling Mac OS X to people without using the App Store.
If I was Apple, I'd sell (through their website) a licence for Mac OS X. You'd download a small App, which would give you the option to either install it to the computer you were on right then or to create a DVD or USB key which could also be used to install the OS. This App would then download the appropriate files and continue the install/make the DVD.
callme
Nov 2, 07:48 PM
There is no reason to put anti-virus software on your Mac!
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
How wrong you are.
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
How wrong you are.
This software actually protects for more than just viruses, it also removes trojans which HAVE been written for Mac. It also removes Windows viruses that you as a user can still pass on to other people. It removed 3 trojans from my machine, yes they were Windows trojans, BUT I will now not pass them on in emails, etc.
Be ignorant if you like, but one day soon we will all be caught out.
suwandy
Sep 16, 12:07 AM
just remember everyone...
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
One from me too! :D
Although, I kinda thought, the longer they took to release the MBP, means more time they spent on improving any design flaws, internal flaws, any other flaws, or even adding more goodies, so here's to more than just C2D update!
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
One from me too! :D
Although, I kinda thought, the longer they took to release the MBP, means more time they spent on improving any design flaws, internal flaws, any other flaws, or even adding more goodies, so here's to more than just C2D update!
LarryC
Apr 21, 09:22 PM
It's not going to happen. If Apple was still interested in offering a rack mountable system they would have redesigned the X-Serve instead of the Mac Pro.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
He makes a very good point. I do not understand why so many people want to make everything so small. I saw a post recently where a guy wanted Apple to drop the optical drive and use nothing but SSD in the iMac! Maybe I'm getting old and senile, but it makes no sense to me. And SSD's are still too expensive to be practical.
Where is the logic in dropping a perfectly fine rack-mountable system, because apparently it wasn't sold enough, and then convert the Mac Pro workstation to... a rack-mountable system?! They could've dropped the Mac Pro and rebrand X-Serve to Mac Pro instead. Same result.
He makes a very good point. I do not understand why so many people want to make everything so small. I saw a post recently where a guy wanted Apple to drop the optical drive and use nothing but SSD in the iMac! Maybe I'm getting old and senile, but it makes no sense to me. And SSD's are still too expensive to be practical.
Chundles
Sep 11, 06:52 AM
To recap:
No MBP, no MB....
iPod video device, maybe movie service and maybe streaming device.
That's it. :)
Yep, I've said it before and I'll say it again.
The first rule of an Apple Event: You never get all the marbles.
No MBP, no MB....
iPod video device, maybe movie service and maybe streaming device.
That's it. :)
Yep, I've said it before and I'll say it again.
The first rule of an Apple Event: You never get all the marbles.
Al Coholic
Mar 29, 01:09 PM
Hilarious that companies are copying Apple rumors now.Right. Like Apple invented everything.
lol.
You fanboys crack me up.
lol.
You fanboys crack me up.
Meandmunch
Apr 25, 09:48 AM
Jut like Antennagate, Apple needs to make this an industry issue not just an Apple issue. Because the truth is all mobile devices are being tracked in some form or another otherwise they simply could not function as desired by the consumer. Everywhere they go your devices leaves a footprint. Get over it this is the new more transparent world we live in.
wclyffe
Dec 26, 02:33 PM
Just confirmed it with BLT, there hasn't been a shipment come in.
Seems like they're offline until Monday....
Seems like they're offline until Monday....
MikeTheC
Nov 25, 08:34 PM
i am sure apple is finding the world of phone carriers complex and difficult.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
The biggest hangup of theirs is probably the sale of media and ringtones. They simply probably do NOT want Apple to provide the solution. Even if Apple's storefront is better, they will not want money going elsewhere.
that said, Apple's best option here is to simply launch the product themselves. Offer a GSM phone that is unlocked. The phone companies will get a clue later on when people want the product
I 150% agree! Cell communications need to open up. Contracts and locked phones will keep the phone industry from growing and maturing in the same way computers did.
What Apple has to rely on is the eventual tendency of companies' adversarial and predatory tendencies to overcome their collective complacency. This could take quite a while.
Consider this. Let's say Apple does something along the lines we're predicting, and sells their phones. Before we plunk down our money, we go around to the various cell carriers and inquire if they'll let us bring our phone to their network. They say either "NO!" or "Not at this time."
Do you still spend your money on Apple's product? I mean, what good's a cell phone (especially if it's more than just a few dollars) if you can't even talk to anybody on it? So, the cell phone companies basically keep Apple from going anywhere, and since they would do this from the start, they could ultimately report back to their bosses (and then onto their shareholders) that, "Oh no, we didn't really screw ourselves out of a lucrative market." on the premise that it isn't lucrative until tons of people are in that market (none of whom would be, since this is basically a giant "chicken-n-egg" scenario with the onus and the expense all stuck squarely on the shoulders of the general public.)
What would make absolutely more sense is for Apple to simply start up their own network. They've already acquired some assets in this area, haven't they? So why not bide their time until they can really roll the thing out? And since it is relatively common practice for cell towers to have more than one (sometimes several) carriers' equipment mounted on them, Apple could buy into who's-ever network they needed to get one of the "lesser third party" broadcast equipment sets that's already out there among the masses.
It could operate something like how Claris used to work, being a division (but a spun-off one) of Apple. It would be an interesting back-door type of approach to the whole equation.
adbe
Mar 29, 02:48 PM
Or perhaps the entire debacle at Foxconn has fallen on deaf ears?
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
;)
Foxconn is Taiwanese.
EricNau
Nov 26, 10:37 AM
Looks like that 8 pound, 10" iPod might be true after all. :D
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
Seriously though, I'm sure Apple has a tablet prototype, but I'm doubtful that they'll release one in 2007.
iStudentUK
Apr 11, 06:32 AM
That statement means that 2(12) should be done before the division.
So then the answer is 2.
That's not what his comment said.
So then the answer is 2.
That's not what his comment said.
fivetoadsloth
Apr 10, 02:38 AM
Oh really? Wow I didn't know that... Sarcasm.
I'm talking about on a calculator. Enter it EXACTLY how it was in the OP and you'll get 288.
Again, I'd like to warn people: this is not always true. Even if you enter it exactly as above, your calculator will not always give you 288. Some will give you two. Some settings may give you two. Don't trust a calculator blindly.
I'm talking about on a calculator. Enter it EXACTLY how it was in the OP and you'll get 288.
Again, I'd like to warn people: this is not always true. Even if you enter it exactly as above, your calculator will not always give you 288. Some will give you two. Some settings may give you two. Don't trust a calculator blindly.
milo
Aug 11, 02:58 PM
Remember, we're almost at 6 months with the Mac Mini, and it's seen neither a chip upgrade nor a speed bump.
So it's definitely due for one. You don't really think they'll go a year before it's upgraded, do you?
So it's definitely due for one. You don't really think they'll go a year before it's upgraded, do you?
Amazing Iceman
Apr 25, 10:03 AM
Yeah, you're right. We should all be geo-tagged from birth and have cameras implanted in our eyes so that the Government can catch bad people. We have nothing to hide, afterall.
They already do that without our knowledge, so why keep worrying about it?
As long as they know where we are when we need help, who cares?
All those street cameras, Toll transponders, Tolls with license plate recognition, cellular tower triangulation, Telephone tapping, Stake outs, curious neighbors watching you (potential witnesses), etc.; that's a lot of tracking going on there... that's without counting on Satellite surveillance available to the government to use whenever they need it.
So the fact is that:
:eek: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE PRIVACY!!! :eek:
They already do that without our knowledge, so why keep worrying about it?
As long as they know where we are when we need help, who cares?
All those street cameras, Toll transponders, Tolls with license plate recognition, cellular tower triangulation, Telephone tapping, Stake outs, curious neighbors watching you (potential witnesses), etc.; that's a lot of tracking going on there... that's without counting on Satellite surveillance available to the government to use whenever they need it.
So the fact is that:
:eek: THERE'S NO SUCH THING AS ABSOLUTE PRIVACY!!! :eek:
Eddyisgreat
Apr 26, 02:15 PM
If the iPhone were buy one get two free as well then I bet those numbers would be different :D
0815
May 4, 03:06 PM
So I guess we'll all just send you our AT&T Internet Bills when we go over their newly implemented data usage caps? :eek:
:rolleyes:
You don't have to use the 'preferred' way to get it - you can also use the not preferred way to get it (Assuming that the preferred implies that there is a choice of how to get it)
:rolleyes:
You don't have to use the 'preferred' way to get it - you can also use the not preferred way to get it (Assuming that the preferred implies that there is a choice of how to get it)
Skoal
Apr 18, 03:25 PM
Good God Apple, whatever!
Chupa Chupa
Aug 4, 11:59 AM
So when Apple does ugrade the iMac is it going to use the desktop processer or the mobile one?
You are overlooking heat dissipation. The iMac has the guts of a mobile machine. I doubt the desktop chip (Conroe) could handle being inside an iMac for very long. Also the mobile chip (Merom) is hardly a slouch. It sure beats the Celeron and some of the other weaker chips you see in $1000 PCs.
You are overlooking heat dissipation. The iMac has the guts of a mobile machine. I doubt the desktop chip (Conroe) could handle being inside an iMac for very long. Also the mobile chip (Merom) is hardly a slouch. It sure beats the Celeron and some of the other weaker chips you see in $1000 PCs.
Dunepilot
Nov 23, 04:43 AM
I personally don't see why Palm would actually be concerned about an iPhone anyway. It'll be a product targeted towards the consumer market, not the business market.
Palm's main market these days looks to be corporate, and their main competitor must surely be RIM. If you look at how many corporations (and public bodies, like local councils) are providing their employees with Blackberries, not Treos, that must be concerning for Palm.
I've never been in the sort of job where my employer would provide me with a Crackberry, but push-email seems to have taken off at a corporate level in a big way.
Incidentally, I just bought a Treo for my personal organisation and I love it (my last PalmOS device was an IBM C3). I'm sure Apple isn't interested in this though. The first iPhone will integrate the iTunes/phone experience, and also give slightly extended functionality to accessing Address Book. I also predict it'll have some sort of 'menu' button like the Apple Remote
Palm's main market these days looks to be corporate, and their main competitor must surely be RIM. If you look at how many corporations (and public bodies, like local councils) are providing their employees with Blackberries, not Treos, that must be concerning for Palm.
I've never been in the sort of job where my employer would provide me with a Crackberry, but push-email seems to have taken off at a corporate level in a big way.
Incidentally, I just bought a Treo for my personal organisation and I love it (my last PalmOS device was an IBM C3). I'm sure Apple isn't interested in this though. The first iPhone will integrate the iTunes/phone experience, and also give slightly extended functionality to accessing Address Book. I also predict it'll have some sort of 'menu' button like the Apple Remote
Hastings101
Apr 8, 02:36 AM
no, but I sometimes think that Andy Rubin believes he's the next Jobs ... at least he dresses similar to Jobs:
He kind of looks like him, lose a little more hair, the glasses, change his face a little...
He kind of looks like him, lose a little more hair, the glasses, change his face a little...
siderealxxx
May 6, 05:11 AM
Any chance of a PPC to ARM bridge for OS9?!
:D
:D