OneMike
Mar 29, 02:51 PM
craigslist.org? :p
craigslist takes 1st - 1000th place for all the state/city sub categories.
craigslist takes 1st - 1000th place for all the state/city sub categories.
DakotaGuy
May 6, 12:10 AM
Moving away from Intel in their notebooks and desktops would be a HUGE mistake in my opinion. Intel is the big dog and they have the resources to keep innovating. I guess if they plan on making everything iOS then it makes a little more sense, but for true blue OSX machines Intel has the muscle.
mikeapple
Mar 26, 10:32 PM
Releasing iPhone 5 with iOS4 would be a total fail... If this is true, iPhone 5 could possibly be launched in the fall as well.
In my Opinion iOS5 is the most important upgrade over the hardware of the iPhone and the iPad... The software is in MUCH need for an upgrade. Nomatter how good the iPhone 5 hardware is, giving it iOS4 will make it seem outdated
In my Opinion iOS5 is the most important upgrade over the hardware of the iPhone and the iPad... The software is in MUCH need for an upgrade. Nomatter how good the iPhone 5 hardware is, giving it iOS4 will make it seem outdated
MacFly123
May 7, 07:15 PM
Mobileme is certainly worth more than free. Apple doesn't scrape your emails and other data to target adds at you a la Google.
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
I could see Apple making some features of Mobileme free. I don't think they're just going kill a revenue stream but they could offer a basic free Mobileme account which gives you.
A me.com email address with 5 aliases.
Sync features
"Find my damn iDevice"
Calendar, Contacts, Bookmark sync
Web page
Gallery
iWork.com
Then roll out Mobileme Pro
Make iDisk more like Drop Box.
Enhance the sync
Online Backup
Cloud Music (Lala style)
iWork.com Pro (adds collaborative editing)
Whatever other cool stuff they can deliver
Good thinking! I think that is very possible. Imagine though if MobileMe & iWork.com were free with non-intrusive iAds built in and cool new functionality with HTML5 and Gianduia (Apple's Flash killer). Throw into that the Lala iTunes cloud features and WOW we are talking lots of value here!
It may sound a little crazy, but if you think of the competition (Google & Microsoft) and what they are up to, it really starts to make sense moving these things to the cloud and getting iAd in there!
Interesting.........VERY INTERESTING! :eek::D
Multimedia
Jul 23, 01:48 AM
I don't know, I'm kinda expecting it. As seen in the past, I'm sure they'll drop to ~$1000. Maybe even cheaper once they get some of their R&D back and chip prices start to fall. Eventually I see a sub $800 laptop even. Maybe.I seriously doubt it. It's not part of Apple's style to appeal to the masses by offering something CHEAP. :eek:
"Profits" on those sub $1k notebooks are next to nothing. Apple wouldn't want to make so little per unit. Plus they don't need to do that. You can buy old Macs for under $1k all the time. Since the refurbished 1.83 GHz Combo MacBook is already only $949, what's the problem? :confused:
You think that isn't low enough? You want Apple to be a welfare agency for those who can't afford $949? Because given the slim margins that would be involved in such a product, that is what they would be doing. Plus they would be canibalizing their above $1k sales. Makes no sense to me. :rolleyes:
"Profits" on those sub $1k notebooks are next to nothing. Apple wouldn't want to make so little per unit. Plus they don't need to do that. You can buy old Macs for under $1k all the time. Since the refurbished 1.83 GHz Combo MacBook is already only $949, what's the problem? :confused:
You think that isn't low enough? You want Apple to be a welfare agency for those who can't afford $949? Because given the slim margins that would be involved in such a product, that is what they would be doing. Plus they would be canibalizing their above $1k sales. Makes no sense to me. :rolleyes:
Hastings101
Apr 20, 01:37 AM
I hope they call it the iPhone 4S or something like that instead of iPhone 5
bense27
Aug 5, 09:24 AM
I am really interested to see what this iPhone is all about. And of course Leopard.
-aggie-
May 5, 07:37 AM
BTW, searching a room disarms traps, so we should get to a point where our last move is search instead of move, if I understand the rules.
kreatre2011
Apr 25, 10:00 AM
Am I the only one who sees the threat of moving to Android as a petty attempt to get Steve to reply? The writer of this email obviously didn't do any research, and he obviously doesn't understand that Steve would see right through a threat like that. This whole thing is a non-issue. I don't care if someone knows where my iPhone has been. I'm worried about far more important things such as protecting my financial information, which I keep in an encrypted disk image in case my laptop gets stolen.
Clive At Five
Nov 22, 12:31 PM
Okay, I've heard here a lot, that people want simple integration/syncronization with iTunes, iPhoto, iCal, & Address Book. These are all, (minus iTunes) 100% Mac-Centric. PC users would only get integration/syncronization with iTunes. What good is that to them? At that point you only have iPod + Phone.
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
So Apple has a choice: Mac-Centric or not.
Knowing Apple, their first choice is "not" (which doesn't mean it will start out that way, but we'll just have to wait to find out). Apple would then have to either write iCal et al. for Windows or build in support for Outlook, ...uh... photo viewer... whatever PCs use for photos.
Both are daunting tasks.
Conclusion: In order for Apple to make a phone as good and as universal as the iPod, it will have to accomplish one of the aforementioned daunting tasks.
Making a phone for Mac users would be a walk in the park, because 1) it's such a small microcosm, 2) It's an environment that they are familiar with.
Making a phone for everyone will not be as easy. HOWEVER, Apple is great at building OSes (the iPod OS is simple & intuitive and I have no doubt that they will do the same with a phone) and Apple is great at integration with software, so even though there will be hurdles to overcome, Apple will eventually churn out a phone that is simple and is loved by everyone.
I also think there won't be a single serious Mac-User who won't have one. It'll just be too handy to have a device that will sync easily with the awesome Mac software.
-Clive
kdarling
Apr 25, 11:28 AM
iOS uses services from a company called Skyhook to help with location tracking. they use GPS and wifi access points to pinpoint locations faster than GPS.
Apple stopped using Skyhook a while back, I think around v3.2 or something. Let me check. Yes, that was when Apple changed (http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/apple-location/) to using their own WiFi and cell databases.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes.
See above. Apple does something very similar. Whenever an app requests a location using GPS, the phone also scans for nearby cell towers and WiFi hotspots. That info is sent up to Apple to build their database.
Why does Google need to know this?
Same reason as Apple. While on this topic, let's hit the wayback machine:
Before the iPhone came out, Google was secretly collecting cell location info via any phone with GPS and Google Maps. Mostly Windows Mobile phones, I would think.
Good thing, too, because the iPhone debuted without GPS and was pretty much useless in that respect. Then Google unveiled a version of Google Maps using their cell location database, and suddenly the iPhone and other phones without GPS reception were useful after all.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
Yet you didn't know Apple was. Ignorance is bliss.
Except that neither cares about watching YOU. They're watching for cells and hotspots. Sorry, they're more important :)
Ok, here's the information that's actually known about the consolidated.db file:
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
That's almost all correct (*). It's just a receive-only cache to speed up locating and use less battery and network resources.
(*) WiFi and cell are not part of A-GPS. The A in A-GPS on the iPhone is about receiving satellite information from an assistance server on the 'net.
Apple stopped using Skyhook a while back, I think around v3.2 or something. Let me check. Yes, that was when Apple changed (http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/29/apple-location/) to using their own WiFi and cell databases.
Agreed. Google's darling Android doesn't just track cell towers. They've found it recording wi-fi networks near the user as well and transmitting that data... like every couple of minutes.
See above. Apple does something very similar. Whenever an app requests a location using GPS, the phone also scans for nearby cell towers and WiFi hotspots. That info is sent up to Apple to build their database.
Why does Google need to know this?
Same reason as Apple. While on this topic, let's hit the wayback machine:
Before the iPhone came out, Google was secretly collecting cell location info via any phone with GPS and Google Maps. Mostly Windows Mobile phones, I would think.
Good thing, too, because the iPhone debuted without GPS and was pretty much useless in that respect. Then Google unveiled a version of Google Maps using their cell location database, and suddenly the iPhone and other phones without GPS reception were useful after all.
Yet I use Google every day, but I at least know they're watching me.
Yet you didn't know Apple was. Ignorance is bliss.
Except that neither cares about watching YOU. They're watching for cells and hotspots. Sorry, they're more important :)
Ok, here's the information that's actually known about the consolidated.db file:
1) It records the locations of nearby wi-fi access points and cell towers.
2) When location services were originally added to the iPhone, the file had a different name and was stored in a different location. (It was moved as part of the multi-tasking updates.)
3) The purpose of the file has been explicitly spelled out by Apple *from the beginning*. It is used *by* location services to calculate your current position in order to be able to display your position faster than would be possible solely using GPS. (It's part of the Assisted GPS process.)
4) There is absolutely no evidence that the file's contents are ever transmitted to anyone. It exists on the iPhone, and in the backup(s) of said iPhone.
That's almost all correct (*). It's just a receive-only cache to speed up locating and use less battery and network resources.
(*) WiFi and cell are not part of A-GPS. The A in A-GPS on the iPhone is about receiving satellite information from an assistance server on the 'net.
ravenvii
May 4, 09:20 PM
Can we get an explanation from the gods, since this is the first game in this format?
Explanation of what?
EDIT: The villain is done. ROUND THREE BEGINS NOW!
Explanation of what?
EDIT: The villain is done. ROUND THREE BEGINS NOW!
wildmac
Sep 15, 05:43 PM
Powerbook G5 on tuesday ?
GeekLaw: A) That phrase above shall be banned for a period of at least 2 years, at whence time it shall be deemed cool and retro when used in reference to overdue product announcements. B) The phrase shall only refer to products which have not been refreshed for over 1 year. (Servers excluded).
GeekLaw: A) That phrase above shall be banned for a period of at least 2 years, at whence time it shall be deemed cool and retro when used in reference to overdue product announcements. B) The phrase shall only refer to products which have not been refreshed for over 1 year. (Servers excluded).
baleensavage
Aug 7, 01:56 PM
All I can say is Apple better be coming out with a mid-range tower. Upping the baseline of the MacPro to $2500, what is that. Sure it looks like a sweet computer, but what about small businesses or starving artists who cant afford that. Now we're stuck with the all-in-ones.
jlseattle
Apr 5, 04:09 PM
The "i" overlords have spoken! "Take it down" (in an classic star trek superior being voice).
milo
Aug 11, 02:34 PM
Cheaper per chip price. Factor in all the design changes that would have to be made, and it might not be in the long run.
And those design changes still have to be made in the future if you want to run kentsfield. Since those changes are inevitable, why not make them sooner and take advantage of cheaper chips earlier?
No, my point is that I think Apple will continue to do what it's always done, and that those arguing that they'll suddenly treat product announcements differently just because their chips are now supplied by Intel are only speculating.
Since the intel switch, apple has ALREADY broken away from "what they've always done". We saw a speed bump in MPB before it even shipped, and another bump not long after that.
Correction, your both wrong...they both went intel at the same time, January 12, 2006
No, they were *announced* at the same time. iMac shipped immediately, MBP shipped weeks later. So the intel iMacs did arrive first.
And those design changes still have to be made in the future if you want to run kentsfield. Since those changes are inevitable, why not make them sooner and take advantage of cheaper chips earlier?
No, my point is that I think Apple will continue to do what it's always done, and that those arguing that they'll suddenly treat product announcements differently just because their chips are now supplied by Intel are only speculating.
Since the intel switch, apple has ALREADY broken away from "what they've always done". We saw a speed bump in MPB before it even shipped, and another bump not long after that.
Correction, your both wrong...they both went intel at the same time, January 12, 2006
No, they were *announced* at the same time. iMac shipped immediately, MBP shipped weeks later. So the intel iMacs did arrive first.
Unspeaked
Aug 11, 11:11 AM
Everyone waiting on the Core 2 Duo MacBook needs to get a clue.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
It's the same folks who were falling over waiting to WWDC to come so they could order their Core 2 Duo MacBooks after the keynote!
Apple IS NOT going to move the MacBook to a Core 2 Duo until they've updated:
1) MacBook Pro
2) iMac
3) Maybe even Mac Mini, since it's been out forever!
The MacBook is barely three months old. It may get a speed bump and/or price cut soon, but won't get a new chip.
All of you saying Apple has to upgrade it to a Core 2 Duo to complete with Dell, HP, etc - why? Why do they HAVE to? Will they explode if they don't? Will the sun stop shining? Will all the world's puppies die?
Of course they'll upgrade it eventually. That doesn't mean it needs to be upgraded as soon as the chips are available. If you look at other PC maker's sites, most of their machines don't even have the Core Duo chips yet; there's no rush.
You can't claim Apple will inevitable act a certain way now that they're on Intel chips; you don't know that. They have no history of using Intel chips. Just because your bright minds think it would be a good idea to move the MB line to the latest and greatest chip whenever a new one is released by Intel because "that's what the other guys are doing," it doesn't mean Apple agrees with you.
What we DO know for a fact is Apple like to differentiate between consumer and pro lines, and Apple has never been one to put the latest chips into the iMac or Mac Mini level machines - and I don't see either of that changing.
milo
Sep 11, 04:17 PM
At a compression value I would accecpt, files will still be to big for the internet of today / average power of a computer today / the HD's of today.
People keep saying things like this. But look at online movie piracy. It's probably as big now as napster was a few years ago. The pirates have proven that people are interested in getting movies online, and that the technological barriers can be overcome.
Unless you have a progressive scan TV, which propbably means an HDTV, DVD is only 480i, which can be argued to be equivalent to 240p. That way Apple can easily claim their movies to be DVD quality at 320x240.
But would that look as good as DVD on NTSC television? Sure doesn't seem like it with the current downloads.
People keep saying things like this. But look at online movie piracy. It's probably as big now as napster was a few years ago. The pirates have proven that people are interested in getting movies online, and that the technological barriers can be overcome.
Unless you have a progressive scan TV, which propbably means an HDTV, DVD is only 480i, which can be argued to be equivalent to 240p. That way Apple can easily claim their movies to be DVD quality at 320x240.
But would that look as good as DVD on NTSC television? Sure doesn't seem like it with the current downloads.
McGiord
Apr 10, 06:00 PM
balamw & dukebound85:
You guys are making too many assumptions.
Following your thought process, the original post is not properly written then?
You guys are making too many assumptions.
Following your thought process, the original post is not properly written then?
stuarty2003
Mar 31, 03:12 AM
I reckon Lion will be the last of cat names used for OS X.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
They can't really call the next one Ocelot, for example.
tmofee
Mar 30, 08:57 AM
US only? pity. i think it's a great idea to offer free bandwidth for the albums you buy on there, it's a shame there's no way of being able to check the previous albums you bought for and add them to the list as well.
personally I have rhapsody and anubis hooked up now. i can stream music to the sonos when i get home and download songs to the rhapsody app. do i OWN these tracks? blah blah, it does the job for me when i want to listen to new stuff I dont already own, or cant be bothered finding in the cupboards :P
personally I have rhapsody and anubis hooked up now. i can stream music to the sonos when i get home and download songs to the rhapsody app. do i OWN these tracks? blah blah, it does the job for me when i want to listen to new stuff I dont already own, or cant be bothered finding in the cupboards :P
aurichie
May 6, 04:27 AM
Apple licensing Mac OS X to Dell.
I'm off to start a new 'Dell in negotiations with Apple to license Mac OS X' rumor with a popular analyst. Story should be appearing on MR on Monday or Tuesday next week. Stay tuned.
I'm off to start a new 'Dell in negotiations with Apple to license Mac OS X' rumor with a popular analyst. Story should be appearing on MR on Monday or Tuesday next week. Stay tuned.
MacRumors
May 4, 02:41 PM
http://images.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/04/apple-targeting-mac-app-store-as-preferred-mac-os-x-lion-distribution-mechanism/)
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/04/154012-lion_mac_app_store.jpg
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/04/154012-lion_mac_app_store.jpg
inkswamp
Sep 11, 04:43 AM
Round wheels on those wheelbarrows? You were lucky!
We only 'ad square wheels on our wheelbarrows an' they were made out of lead...
Ooooh... how we used to dream of wheels made out of lead. Ours were made of depleted uranium. :eek:
We only 'ad square wheels on our wheelbarrows an' they were made out of lead...
Ooooh... how we used to dream of wheels made out of lead. Ours were made of depleted uranium. :eek:
