wordoflife
May 2, 09:41 AM
I kinda liked the fact i could look at where I've been with my phone.
I can see how this update will have "battery life improvements" now that the phone is not going to be tracking our movements 24/7 even when all location services are shut off.
The phone tracked movements through cell towers, not GPS. And your phone is always connected to cell towers anyways so nothing is changing in terms of battery life. Also, nothing is really changing in this update except the fact that you won't be able to access the location file.
I can see how this update will have "battery life improvements" now that the phone is not going to be tracking our movements 24/7 even when all location services are shut off.
The phone tracked movements through cell towers, not GPS. And your phone is always connected to cell towers anyways so nothing is changing in terms of battery life. Also, nothing is really changing in this update except the fact that you won't be able to access the location file.
bluewire
Mar 29, 10:16 AM
BUMP!!!
Can someone get David Caruso on this case?
::Cue music for CSI: Goldfish::
Good luck, hope we hear word TODAY! :cool:
Can someone get David Caruso on this case?
::Cue music for CSI: Goldfish::
Good luck, hope we hear word TODAY! :cool:
mdntcallr
Sep 25, 01:27 PM
can anyone link to the page that says tuesday is possibly macbook pro day?
i can't find it. And no i dont look as good aperture news as a bad thing, i am buying it.
i can't find it. And no i dont look as good aperture news as a bad thing, i am buying it.
leekohler
May 6, 10:46 AM
Me too. I've shot guns and was once shot at, and live with someone who's shot guns and is disfigured by being shot pointblank. Both of us are for gun control.
Again- I am all for regulation, but not bans. What we have in Chicago is an outright ban. It's ridiculous.
Again- I am all for regulation, but not bans. What we have in Chicago is an outright ban. It's ridiculous.
Ommid
Apr 25, 01:30 PM
I don't see it. Holding my iPhone at nearly the same angle and about the same distance they look identical.
iCon police.
iCon police.
0010101
Oct 29, 11:57 AM
No, you have it backwards. Software companies don't release products because the hardware is out there. They release because they've added new features and want user to upgrade and new consumers to come. Consumers buy the hardware because the software is available for it. A computer without software is just a really expensive paper weight. It's Adobe's lack of a native Creative Suite than keeps professionals from picking up MacPros - and Apple said just that during their last financial results call.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
You think graphic designers aren't interested in getting an Intel Mac and the performance gains that come with it? They get higher performance running Photoshop on the G5's they have now than running it on the Intel Macs under Rosetta. So why spend the money to degrade your production apps?
Adobe has nothing to gain from not releasing a native Creative Suite. I mean, it's not like Apple is going to hold a press conference tomorrow and announce they are going back to IBM chips. This is the future and if Adobe doesn't ship a new Creative Suite they will be no different than the companies that never ported their apps to PPC native versions and stayed with 68k - giving up.
The graphics professionals I know don't scurry out to buy a new Mac everytime apple lifts it's cheek and plops one out.
Software companies make their money by writing their software to the largest audience, and the Intel Mac is currently a very small portion of an already small segment of the general 'computer user' population.
If your argument is that if Adobe were to write a universal version of their software that graphics professionals would run out instantly to buy new hardware, that's just not reality.. not when they're still paying off the G5's they just bought a year or two ago.
The vast majority of people I know who use an Apple computer for a living in the visual arts sector have not made the switch to an Intel Mac, and don't plan to anytime soon, regardless of what Adobe does.
In fact, talk around the campfire seems to revolve around wether Intel Mac native apps will run any better or faster than the new crop of Winblows apps.. with some 'jumping ship' to join the thousands of others who have moved to the Windows platform in recent years.
ArchaicRevival
Apr 29, 07:38 PM
What are you talking about? The screenshots shown here are from the latest developer release of the software, meaning that anything you see is already implemented in code and being used by registered Mac OS developers the world over.
Sarcasm dude...
Sarcasm dude...
incongruity
Mar 17, 02:07 PM
When does apple charge your credit card for a purchase? ... The total was $829 but I still have yet to be charged the remaining balance. Have they forgotten to charge me or does it not charge until the iPad actually ships?
thanks
Don't worry, you're cool. Just walk out of the store and you'll be fine.
(they charge when it ships)
thanks
Don't worry, you're cool. Just walk out of the store and you'll be fine.
(they charge when it ships)
Earendil
Sep 25, 06:36 PM
Why would Apple logically develop a piece of software that uses the graphics card when I have four processors - many others have two - begging to be worked. I guess I never understood the logic of using Core Image to power this thing.
In a perfect world it would figure out your specs and use what it can. However I'm betting that using a graphics card to do a lot of the heavy lifting enables it to run on far more computers than going proc only. Many of us don't have duel or quad cores, and our procs are also doing other things. Heaven forbid I use other apps at the same time as Apature to. However my graphics card is decent, and sits idle even when other apps are open.
Like I said, perfect world you'd have your cake and eat it too, however for the time being, I'm not so sure the path they chose was all that bad. I'm quite open for discussion on this though, as I'm no expert :)
In a perfect world it would figure out your specs and use what it can. However I'm betting that using a graphics card to do a lot of the heavy lifting enables it to run on far more computers than going proc only. Many of us don't have duel or quad cores, and our procs are also doing other things. Heaven forbid I use other apps at the same time as Apature to. However my graphics card is decent, and sits idle even when other apps are open.
Like I said, perfect world you'd have your cake and eat it too, however for the time being, I'm not so sure the path they chose was all that bad. I'm quite open for discussion on this though, as I'm no expert :)
quentoncassidy
Dec 10, 07:02 PM
As mentioned, the spawning is terrible. IMO worse than in MW2 (which seemed hard to believe at first)
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
They shouldn't spawn anywhere near me. I hate spawning near the enemies too and die within 5 seconds of spawning. Personally, I'd rather wait 5-10 seconds for a spawning point to open up instead of dying right away.
blahblah100
Mar 28, 02:40 PM
Of course, all the HATERS will cry foul.
Kanye? I didn't know Kanye West posted on this forum.
P.S. Your music sucks. Also, what you did to Taylor Swift was out of line.
Kanye? I didn't know Kanye West posted on this forum.
P.S. Your music sucks. Also, what you did to Taylor Swift was out of line.
sotorious
May 2, 09:44 AM
How is this going to work for Verizon users im on 4.3.7 if im not mistaken...
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
edit scratch that its 4.2.7 and i just went into settings and it says carrier settings update if i click not now or update now will it do it Over the Air?
Chris in SJ
Jan 9, 05:12 PM
Just wait, it will eventually play
Ummm.. just out of curiousity.. when you say 'eventually' do you mean 1 minute? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 90 minutes?
I have been waiting here for 15 minutes and it's still not playing..
You'd think they would just not make it available until they could meet demand..
- C
Ummm.. just out of curiousity.. when you say 'eventually' do you mean 1 minute? 5 minutes? 30 minutes? 90 minutes?
I have been waiting here for 15 minutes and it's still not playing..
You'd think they would just not make it available until they could meet demand..
- C
*LTD*
Mar 13, 08:07 AM
No. A new market has been opened by Apple. That is as far as it goes. An iPad is not for everyone. Tablets will never kill off Laptops or Desktops or Servers.
Wait a while.
Wait a while.
applemumba
Apr 15, 05:30 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)
They fake! The next iPhone will be the same as the 3gs just in all the colours apple knows best. Give choice people will upgrade and buy more. They proved it with the iPods time and time again why not the iPhone too.
They fake! The next iPhone will be the same as the 3gs just in all the colours apple knows best. Give choice people will upgrade and buy more. They proved it with the iPods time and time again why not the iPhone too.
JPTech
Apr 29, 06:43 PM
Well that's good. I wasn't liking the way the UI was going, and this is a step (admittedly backwards) in the right direction. Hey, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
ten-oak-druid
Apr 29, 09:38 PM
Calling it Windows 7 sort of makes no sense, technically it's the 10th version of Windows, if you dont count server editions.
It's only the 7th if you start counting from Windows 98.
And
major kernel version
1,2: 1.0 and 2.0
3: 3.0, WfW3.11, NT 3.51
4: 95, 98, NT4
5: 2000, XP
6: Vista
7: Windows 7 (but really 6.1):confused:
So the answer is, "marketing"
I see. It's a sequence of versions but they decided to start at a a certain level of windows development or possibly a grouping of versions by category. i always wondered about that.
OS X came naturally after OS 9. I wonder if the version after OS X.9 will be OS X.10 or OS XI? I guess OS X.10 would make sense if the OS doesn't change significantly as it did from 9 to X.
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
LOL - maybe 8 is their lucky number...
It's only the 7th if you start counting from Windows 98.
And
major kernel version
1,2: 1.0 and 2.0
3: 3.0, WfW3.11, NT 3.51
4: 95, 98, NT4
5: 2000, XP
6: Vista
7: Windows 7 (but really 6.1):confused:
So the answer is, "marketing"
I see. It's a sequence of versions but they decided to start at a a certain level of windows development or possibly a grouping of versions by category. i always wondered about that.
OS X came naturally after OS 9. I wonder if the version after OS X.9 will be OS X.10 or OS XI? I guess OS X.10 would make sense if the OS doesn't change significantly as it did from 9 to X.
Microsoft needed the good luck after Vista. :p
LOL - maybe 8 is their lucky number...
jive
Sep 12, 07:23 AM
http://static.flickr.com/90/241460253_3bb2758deb_m.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/corbtt/241460253/)
Click to see it...
Click to see it...
mw360
Apr 6, 08:03 AM
Agreed. Sadly, I was working on an App nearly IDENTICAL to what Apple just came out with. I am about 80% done but am wondering if it is even worth completing: http://computerharmonyinc.com/ibillboard.html
Been tried, been rejected.
Nice try though. An app where you make money every time someone taps the screen - you must have been wetting yourself with excitement.
Been tried, been rejected.
Nice try though. An app where you make money every time someone taps the screen - you must have been wetting yourself with excitement.
yellow
Apr 13, 10:51 AM
http://www.risikolebensversicherungvergleich.de/logos/asstel_full.jpg
Looks like it should be the name of a cellular company in the US.
"Asstel.. We screw you like no other." :)
Looks like it should be the name of a cellular company in the US.
"Asstel.. We screw you like no other." :)
aiqw9182
Mar 28, 03:37 PM
If I understand some of you on this thread correctly then it is my opinion that you've missed the point, slightly.
I don't think that the merits or demerits of the mac app store are the core point here. The store may be good, excellent, bad, poor, draconian, onerous or whatever but Apple is going to award programming and application awards to only those apps that are distributed through their application store.
Even if you think the store is great, hell even if the store IS GREAT, don't you also feel that it isn't the ONLY way to get quality, well made applications.
Apple is only promoting application which it profits from AND which conform to its Terms of Service.
The offensive part for me is just how unapologetic they seem to be showing bias for what makes them money, not with what may be driving the platform or solving user needs/wants.
I anticipate that some may remind me about Apple's responsibility to shareholders and about being a profitable business and therefore say that it is obvious that they support the apps from which they make a profit. I just think that is an oversimplification of situation and I think this does more to hurt the image of the platform, rather than improve it. It does more to hurt developer interest than it does improve developer interest in the mac platform. Long term, I'd rather see them building an enthusiasm for their products (including the mac app store) for their own merits.
Not even going to bother reading this because I was NEVER discussing or defending Apple for only picking apps in the App Store. Get your facts straight before you decide to write a book on an internet forum over a discussion that went on for two replies.
I don't think that the merits or demerits of the mac app store are the core point here. The store may be good, excellent, bad, poor, draconian, onerous or whatever but Apple is going to award programming and application awards to only those apps that are distributed through their application store.
Even if you think the store is great, hell even if the store IS GREAT, don't you also feel that it isn't the ONLY way to get quality, well made applications.
Apple is only promoting application which it profits from AND which conform to its Terms of Service.
The offensive part for me is just how unapologetic they seem to be showing bias for what makes them money, not with what may be driving the platform or solving user needs/wants.
I anticipate that some may remind me about Apple's responsibility to shareholders and about being a profitable business and therefore say that it is obvious that they support the apps from which they make a profit. I just think that is an oversimplification of situation and I think this does more to hurt the image of the platform, rather than improve it. It does more to hurt developer interest than it does improve developer interest in the mac platform. Long term, I'd rather see them building an enthusiasm for their products (including the mac app store) for their own merits.
Not even going to bother reading this because I was NEVER discussing or defending Apple for only picking apps in the App Store. Get your facts straight before you decide to write a book on an internet forum over a discussion that went on for two replies.
TheBobcat
Mar 29, 11:12 AM
This is really exciting!
Too bad we don't have caning here like they do in Singapore. I'll bet if we did little punks like this wouldn't pull this crap.
Too bad we don't have caning here like they do in Singapore. I'll bet if we did little punks like this wouldn't pull this crap.
FriarNurgle
Apr 8, 01:24 PM
Bet they are lowering the price and want to avoid refunding money to so many people.
Willis
Jan 8, 11:08 AM
I believe with QT Pro, you can save files such as those. Actually... might try it now lol