MShock
May 2, 05:40 PM
Interesting� after the new GNOME 3.0 release, I'm convinced we will move farther way from the typical menu layout to a more minimalist, more web interactive interface. iOS is probably the closest to that, but I see windows looking more like FireFox 4 for Windows with the Firefox pop down menu and elimination of File, Edit, View etc. at the top. Mac OS 10.8 or 11 will probably follow suit, except have more webOS like functionality, and will converge several apps into 1�
guzhogi
Sep 1, 01:14 PM
I hope the resolution is higher on the 23" iMac than it is on the 23" Apple display. I'm sure the current Apple displays (of all sizes) don't go up as high as they could.
Anyways, weren't there also rumors of 42" Apple displays or something? Or are they waiting for HDMI to come more standard an video cards since doesn't HDMI handle higher resolutions than DVI? Just think of how high the resolution on a 42" screen would be like. 4800 x 3000? At least a dozen megapixels!
Anyways, weren't there also rumors of 42" Apple displays or something? Or are they waiting for HDMI to come more standard an video cards since doesn't HDMI handle higher resolutions than DVI? Just think of how high the resolution on a 42" screen would be like. 4800 x 3000? At least a dozen megapixels!
Multimedia
Sep 6, 10:32 AM
I am a little bit disappointed that it still does not have any built-in TV tuner.No problem. Just add an EyeTV hybrid (http://www.elgato.com/index.php?file=products_eyetvhybridna) for $150 to one ofthe 4 USB ports and you are good to go. Hang a FW400 external 400GB HD for about $150 total - case and HD - and you have your TV server. Why would Apple do it when Elgato already has the perfect ultimate solution? :confused:
JDMFSeanP
Jan 2, 05:10 PM
http://i.min.us/idSwVK.png
Hybrid hunting in the 240 on the mountain roads :]
Hybrid hunting in the 240 on the mountain roads :]
reticulate
Apr 19, 11:42 PM
The new CPU ships February 20 and it takes two months for supplies to become constrained. Knowing Apple they'll deliberately hold off another month just to make sure they're a full quarter behind everyone else. After all desktop computers are so last century. Except that "we" need something to plug our iDevices into.
I don't though. My only iDevice is a touch that's now too old to accept the latest OS and there's zero chance that I'll ever buy another one of those. I can't justify the monthly charges for an iPhone and the iPad is pointless if you don't live in coffee shops and carry your life around in a messenger bag.
Part of me is glad Apple is doing well, but I don't see any indications that Apple will ever again make products for me. Guess I need to start learning about "distros".
Well Sandy Bridge has had its fair share of issues, so a delayed launch for the revised chipset is actually a good move. Especially on a machine like the iMac where they have more than a couple of SATA ports available for stuff.
The iMac is still an excellent consumer machine. Pricey, but eminently capable of just about anything that's not native resolution gaming for the latest titles. In fact, given how good the Core i7's are, they represent a very capable Mac Pro replacement with the added goodness of a 27" IPS screen.
I think you might be selling the Mac offerings a little short, to be honest.
I don't though. My only iDevice is a touch that's now too old to accept the latest OS and there's zero chance that I'll ever buy another one of those. I can't justify the monthly charges for an iPhone and the iPad is pointless if you don't live in coffee shops and carry your life around in a messenger bag.
Part of me is glad Apple is doing well, but I don't see any indications that Apple will ever again make products for me. Guess I need to start learning about "distros".
Well Sandy Bridge has had its fair share of issues, so a delayed launch for the revised chipset is actually a good move. Especially on a machine like the iMac where they have more than a couple of SATA ports available for stuff.
The iMac is still an excellent consumer machine. Pricey, but eminently capable of just about anything that's not native resolution gaming for the latest titles. In fact, given how good the Core i7's are, they represent a very capable Mac Pro replacement with the added goodness of a 27" IPS screen.
I think you might be selling the Mac offerings a little short, to be honest.
tny
Aug 7, 08:11 AM
Let me steer this off topic real quick. I have read before that Apple has two OS teams so "in theory" Leopard would, in fact, be Panther 2.0 and 10.7 would be Tiger 2.0. Again, in theory� Can someone clear that up?
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
Nope. Here's how it works, usually (not saying this is what Apple does, but nearly everyone else does this, so ...). You've got one master codebase, called the "trunk." Everyone works with that. When it's time to start working toward a release candidate, you copy off the code base and create what's called a "branch."
Changes to the trunk are rarely back-ported to the branch (it usually depends upon whether they are bug fixes or new features; bug fixes, often are back-ported if they aren't risky; new features almost never); any changes to the branch which are relevent to the trunk *are* ported to the trunk (since most of them are bug fixes, and the rest are probably new features whose loss might be noticed in the next release).
The branch keeps being used by one team that is working on, let's say, Tiger, right up through the release and during maintenance (10.4.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, etc. are all from the branch, not from the trunk), while another team keeps working on the trunk until the time they branch (10.5 Alpha) the next release (let's say Leopard). When the newer branch hits release, one of two things happen: either the team that did the development on the new branch continues doing maintenance (10.5.1, 10.5.2, 10.5.3), or the group that was doing maintenance on the earlier release does maintenance on the new branch and the folks who designed the new branch go back to work on the trunk until it's time to branch again (10.6, let's call it Lion). Both methods have their advantages and disadvantages.
I'm guess this it what is meant by "Apple has two teams working on OS X." Two teams, but only one code base trunk. And thus 10.4 is derived from 10.3, not 10.2.
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
takao
Mar 31, 02:46 PM
To say any one country defeated the nazis really isn't true. It's as unreasonable a claim as rasmasyean's wargasmic fantasy :p
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa ...
which brings us back to the original topic: guess what happened 70 years ago in March: the german Afrika Korps and Luftwaffe started their operations in Libya. .. and some people wonder why the germans didn't want to supply troops planes for fighting in Libya.
Dropping "Happy 70th Anniversary" bombs would have been too absurd
Yeah, you're right. The UK had their entire coast surrounded by radars because they wanted to predict incomming hurricanes in some historically massive secret weather program.
ironically the british thought that they were so far ahead in radar technology/knowledge that it did cost the RAF heavily when bombing germany at night: to counter german interceptors they put a tail radar device into their bombers and at one point losses icnreased ... because it never crossed their minds that the germans simply can put a device on their night interceptors to triangulated those radar signals... which made them even easier to find ... and it took the RAF months to realize that and take them off the planes
and after that they introduced radar jammers to counter german radar.. only to be countered again with the german nigth fighters deploying homeing devices for the RAF radar jammers
As it was, the nazi invasion of russia came very close to success. Would the soviets have defeated the nazis if germany hadn't also been engaged in northern africa ...
which brings us back to the original topic: guess what happened 70 years ago in March: the german Afrika Korps and Luftwaffe started their operations in Libya. .. and some people wonder why the germans didn't want to supply troops planes for fighting in Libya.
Dropping "Happy 70th Anniversary" bombs would have been too absurd
Yeah, you're right. The UK had their entire coast surrounded by radars because they wanted to predict incomming hurricanes in some historically massive secret weather program.
ironically the british thought that they were so far ahead in radar technology/knowledge that it did cost the RAF heavily when bombing germany at night: to counter german interceptors they put a tail radar device into their bombers and at one point losses icnreased ... because it never crossed their minds that the germans simply can put a device on their night interceptors to triangulated those radar signals... which made them even easier to find ... and it took the RAF months to realize that and take them off the planes
and after that they introduced radar jammers to counter german radar.. only to be countered again with the german nigth fighters deploying homeing devices for the RAF radar jammers
KevanDual2.5
Sep 6, 08:56 AM
Maybe i am alone on this one....
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
I think the 24" iMac G5 is the beginning of the end of the G5 iMac. We all watched as the outstanding G4 iMac grew from a 15" to a 17" and finally to 20". While the stunning design remained the same, the 20" just didn't look as good as the 2 previous models. The proportions were wrong and it looked top-heavy.
I am sitting in front of an original 23" Apple Display (plastic rather than aluminium). The new iMac cannot be much smaller than it. I firmly believe that the 24" will be, and should be, as big as it gets. I just hope that heat doesn't become a problem with the Core 2 Duo chips else the G5 iMac may have to evolve into a new enclosure.
Anyone else have thoughts similar?
Stridder44
Sep 7, 04:17 AM
Holy eff. What if they changed iMovie's purpose? For managing content (music & movies): iTunes and iMovie. For creating/editing content: Garageband and "Showtime" (or whatever speculated new name that was).
It makes so much more sense, even if it would be confusing at first.
It makes so much more sense, even if it would be confusing at first.
SciFrog
Feb 9, 10:02 AM
million = mio
a456
Sep 1, 02:19 PM
At WWDC, Apple mentioned one of Leopard's features - 64 bit application support. Let's fast forward to Leopard's release day and look at Apple's line. I'm guessing that all all their machines will have 64-bit processors, but surely the difference in processors used in the Macbook, Macbook Pro, the iMac, and the mini, surely can't be just speed, and all using the Merom? The iMac will have Conroe, maybe an E6600.
If the iMac had the Conroe and this is more powerful than the Merom wouldn't this continue to place the processing power of the consumer desktop above the power of the 'pro' laptop, which has been one of the problems for some time now? If they both had Merom at least they would be equal. Don't know about the Macbook and the Mini though, I guess the distinction is that they don't have separate graphics cards.
If the iMac had the Conroe and this is more powerful than the Merom wouldn't this continue to place the processing power of the consumer desktop above the power of the 'pro' laptop, which has been one of the problems for some time now? If they both had Merom at least they would be equal. Don't know about the Macbook and the Mini though, I guess the distinction is that they don't have separate graphics cards.
lseven
Nov 27, 02:28 PM
Allright, for the 473rd time! They don't use the same panel!:eek:
See? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Sorry, that link doesn't say anything about the 20" monitors referenced in the original thread.
See? (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=252327)
Sorry, that link doesn't say anything about the 20" monitors referenced in the original thread.
Full of Win
Apr 19, 10:55 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)
One step closer to a MBA refresh.
One step closer to a MBA refresh.
shadowmoses
Aug 7, 02:55 AM
here's my assesment of the situation; a complete and reasonable roundup of what to expect at the show
http://www.sejus.com/earth2willi/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1184
Seems like a pretty good roundup of what will happen, I would like to see the iPhone with support for VOIP via wi-fi with iChat 4 that would be really sweet......
Can't wait WWDC is going to be great,
ShadoW
http://www.sejus.com/earth2willi/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1184
Seems like a pretty good roundup of what will happen, I would like to see the iPhone with support for VOIP via wi-fi with iChat 4 that would be really sweet......
Can't wait WWDC is going to be great,
ShadoW
backinblack875
Feb 21, 07:28 PM
need a new and bigger desk, workin on it
Joshuarocks
Mar 25, 12:15 AM
This sounds interesting. Now I'm anticipating the iMac/MP refresh even more....
The possibility of off-the-shelf options looks even better, though. Potential expansion of MP life span?
Imac refresh is more imminent than the MP refresh - for all we know, middle of 2012 the latest or even later, as Apple clearly sees no interest in Mac Pro as much as the Laptops, iMac, and others, esp the iphone 5 coming up. Mac Pro simply doesn't top the list, unfortionately, but sad to say the 6-core is going to be my LAST Mac Pro as I am not using it to its full potential due to lack of interest in multi-threaded apps and no use for such applications.. Only got the 6-core w3680 for prolonging the machine.
The possibility of off-the-shelf options looks even better, though. Potential expansion of MP life span?
Imac refresh is more imminent than the MP refresh - for all we know, middle of 2012 the latest or even later, as Apple clearly sees no interest in Mac Pro as much as the Laptops, iMac, and others, esp the iphone 5 coming up. Mac Pro simply doesn't top the list, unfortionately, but sad to say the 6-core is going to be my LAST Mac Pro as I am not using it to its full potential due to lack of interest in multi-threaded apps and no use for such applications.. Only got the 6-core w3680 for prolonging the machine.
.jpg "as little kids including")
bloogersnigen
Aug 16, 02:00 PM
That way, I can stream my music from iPod to Airport Express directly.
I would rather have it the other way around a cheap 512 mb iPod with a screen that can use my music on my mac via wifi. that would be sweet. I have over 100gb of music and want to have access to all of it from everywhere in my house. now a 30 gb or so iPod with wifi would be sweet. load all your favorite music for car rides and stuff and still listen to the rest at home.
Ben
I would rather have it the other way around a cheap 512 mb iPod with a screen that can use my music on my mac via wifi. that would be sweet. I have over 100gb of music and want to have access to all of it from everywhere in my house. now a 30 gb or so iPod with wifi would be sweet. load all your favorite music for car rides and stuff and still listen to the rest at home.
Ben
Bodypainter
May 3, 04:03 AM
oh guys, don't you understand what is going on here?
the iPhone and iPad is very sucessful therefore apple wants to bring all the user interface elements to the Mac too. and this actually makes sense. the only problem: we are used to the Mac os and don't want to give up our habits.
but there is no way around: it's time to melt iOS and Mac OS x. and apple is going to bring so many things to the os x that will confuse so many people. they have to solve so many problems like deletion of programs or the fullscreen dilemma.
I am very sure that they want the Mac os to behave like iOS. but iOS is based on the home screen and this terrible multitasking bar (double-click on home button) no trashcan (oho!) and no finder.
but there is also a good side to it. maybe the iOS is getting the "widget screen" too, because if apple is totally logical, the have to introduce this too (and mission control).
(written on an iPad)
the iPhone and iPad is very sucessful therefore apple wants to bring all the user interface elements to the Mac too. and this actually makes sense. the only problem: we are used to the Mac os and don't want to give up our habits.
but there is no way around: it's time to melt iOS and Mac OS x. and apple is going to bring so many things to the os x that will confuse so many people. they have to solve so many problems like deletion of programs or the fullscreen dilemma.
I am very sure that they want the Mac os to behave like iOS. but iOS is based on the home screen and this terrible multitasking bar (double-click on home button) no trashcan (oho!) and no finder.
but there is also a good side to it. maybe the iOS is getting the "widget screen" too, because if apple is totally logical, the have to introduce this too (and mission control).
(written on an iPad)
MarkMS
Mar 30, 09:17 PM
Don't know about you guys, but this new iCal is killing me. Just doesn't look right. :confused:
Don Kosak
May 2, 06:02 PM
So you're saying we should go back to Mac OS Classic cooperative multi-tasking ?
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Never said anything about cooperative multi-tasking.
iOS is not cooperative multi-tasking. It's fully pre-emptive.
I'm talking about intelligent pre-emptive multitasking with API's that allow the Apps to make intelligent decisions removing the burden from users to "clean up" after apps they have launched but aren't using.
I'm talking about Apps that are, to the user, ALWAYS instantly available in exactly the same state that they left them in.
That's what the big deal about this auto-save / resume / versioning stuff is about.
Hello ?
The 80s called, they want their computing paradigms back. Cooperative multi-tasking makes sense on ressource limited architectures. Even the iPhone/iPad like devices are far from "ressource limited". We had pre-emptive multi-tasking on much less capable devices (think 386s with 8 MB of RAM).
Never said anything about cooperative multi-tasking.
iOS is not cooperative multi-tasking. It's fully pre-emptive.
I'm talking about intelligent pre-emptive multitasking with API's that allow the Apps to make intelligent decisions removing the burden from users to "clean up" after apps they have launched but aren't using.
I'm talking about Apps that are, to the user, ALWAYS instantly available in exactly the same state that they left them in.
That's what the big deal about this auto-save / resume / versioning stuff is about.
tablo13
Sep 18, 01:17 PM
So, the ipod touch 4G is my first iOS device, and I had a bunch of problems putting on the screen protector when I bought the Dermashot. So much in fact, that I ruined the protector. Not seeing any others for sale on the site, I emailed their customer service to inquire when they'd be on sale. They said "soon," but in the meantime they sent me two FREE ones! Love their customer support and the case looks great on mine. :D
Does the protector reduce fingerprints or is it a fingerprint magnet?
Does the protector reduce fingerprints or is it a fingerprint magnet?
patseguin
Jun 23, 09:07 AM
Doesn't Snow Leopard already have multi touch capability built in?
sam10685
Aug 16, 07:19 AM
well... i might as well give Apple and Nintendo my credit card number.