Eduardo1971
Apr 13, 09:58 PM
My 3g s died seven days ago, so I grudgingly upgraded to the iPhone 4. If the new white version comes out I might just sidegrade to it. The silver gray and white combination looks very cool.
lyngo
May 3, 07:35 AM
Wow... Those are looking hot!
kepardue
Apr 26, 01:05 PM
I'd pay the full MobileMe $99/year price if I could sync all of the DVD movies I ripped (which currently fill up the 2TB hard drive on my iMac) to use in this fashion.
I'm suuuuuure Apple would allow that! :eek:
EDITED to add: Yes, these are MY movies. Ripped them to stream to my AppleTV.
I'm suuuuuure Apple would allow that! :eek:
EDITED to add: Yes, these are MY movies. Ripped them to stream to my AppleTV.
RMo
Jun 6, 12:34 PM
I had the same thing happen to me for a $5 app I didn't even want. They told me to turn on the shopping cart...I was on iPad and there is no shopping cart...but there should be one.
With an iPad they told you to turn in the shopping cart? The shopping cart hasn't existed (http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1915?viewlocale=en_US) since iTunes 9: "Note: With iTunes 9.0 or later, only 1-click purchasing is available." They recommend the wish list instead, but that's much less convenient--and you have to do add things yourself rather than having them automatically go there instead of purchasing them.
With an iPad they told you to turn in the shopping cart? The shopping cart hasn't existed (http://support.apple.com/kb/HT1915?viewlocale=en_US) since iTunes 9: "Note: With iTunes 9.0 or later, only 1-click purchasing is available." They recommend the wish list instead, but that's much less convenient--and you have to do add things yourself rather than having them automatically go there instead of purchasing them.
more...
archer75
Apr 26, 01:44 PM
Love the 27". I'd love a 30" more. And I really like the glossy screen.
L I G H T I N G
Apr 23, 10:07 PM
Its unsure if the deal will go through and what type of stipulations will happen. As a proud T-mo customer. I do not want this deal from hell. I love my low prices I don't need an iPhone I am happy with my current phone.
There are many things that stand in the way of this deal. It may make the market a lot less competitive. It would also almost remove sprint and make it a two horse race with AT&T and Verizon having over 60% of the American Market.
It is also quite possible that if AT&T does purchase T-Mobile, T-mobile will exist solely as a subsidiary of AT&T similar to Sprint and Virgin Mobile. Its clear that AT&T is purchasing towers not customer base.
Many of the Android users are going to migrate over to Sprint and Verizon due to the of the inability to side load on AT&Ts network and the restriction of upload download speeds.
Agreed, I'd rather keep AT&T separate and just jailbreak/unlock iPhone to use on T-mobile.
That way -low prices with T-Mobile plus the functionality of iPhone
There are many things that stand in the way of this deal. It may make the market a lot less competitive. It would also almost remove sprint and make it a two horse race with AT&T and Verizon having over 60% of the American Market.
It is also quite possible that if AT&T does purchase T-Mobile, T-mobile will exist solely as a subsidiary of AT&T similar to Sprint and Virgin Mobile. Its clear that AT&T is purchasing towers not customer base.
Many of the Android users are going to migrate over to Sprint and Verizon due to the of the inability to side load on AT&Ts network and the restriction of upload download speeds.
Agreed, I'd rather keep AT&T separate and just jailbreak/unlock iPhone to use on T-mobile.
That way -low prices with T-Mobile plus the functionality of iPhone
more...
daio
Apr 14, 03:20 AM
^^^ You should install those updates ;)
Ha ha ha, I was actually installing them as I took the screenshot. No updates to do now ;)
Actually I reckon this product name is a code name for a virtual iOS machine for Mac devices enabling iOS apps on Macs.
Saying that, its also likely a 'split off for iPad 2', the reason I think that? Well, iBooks also has that product name. AppleTV would be lousy for book reading IMO. Perhaps some apps will only work on iPad2 and not on iPad(1), due to processor requirements or camera, for example, hence split the compatible apps into two categories. If so, why are games like Angry Birds HD not showing up, which are compatible for both?
Thats why I thought the Virtual iOS software for Mac is more likely, book publishers might want to see how their book looks like in iBooks
Ha ha ha, I was actually installing them as I took the screenshot. No updates to do now ;)
Actually I reckon this product name is a code name for a virtual iOS machine for Mac devices enabling iOS apps on Macs.
Saying that, its also likely a 'split off for iPad 2', the reason I think that? Well, iBooks also has that product name. AppleTV would be lousy for book reading IMO. Perhaps some apps will only work on iPad2 and not on iPad(1), due to processor requirements or camera, for example, hence split the compatible apps into two categories. If so, why are games like Angry Birds HD not showing up, which are compatible for both?
Thats why I thought the Virtual iOS software for Mac is more likely, book publishers might want to see how their book looks like in iBooks
Psilocybin
Apr 19, 07:47 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Welcome!
CPU and GPU are both important. There is one critical difference between CPU and GPU though and thats this:
A user can usually wait on on the CPU with no impact other than the fact that they had to wait. Using your example. You waited 40 minutes. A CPU that that was twice as fast might have reduced your wait to 25 minutes. A CPU that was half a fast would have increased your wait time to maybe 75 minutes. The only consequence of CPU speed is time in general. There is rarely a difference in the final product.
GPU is different, GPU is often used to perform realtime calculations (Game or movie frames). Because the frames are related to a specific point in time, a difference is GPU performance can make the difference between usable and unusable. For that reason, people that like, want or need GPU performance tend to be focal.
In my experience, poor GPU performance bugs me more than poor CPU performance. You can't just wait for the GPU to get done, like you can with a CPU. There does have to be a balance though.
Well said
I had to finally register to comment on the hypocrisy in this and many other threads like it. Because some people want frame rates for gaming on an MBA, then your needs for GPU performance are valid, and others who don't game but could use CPU performance have invalid needs? Rubbish.
A perfect example is the above. So the C2D rates as a 100/100 for CPU performance and thus any improvement is useless? Really?! Nice to see that you framed the argument such that any improvement you don't see as needed is useless.
On Sunday I combined 6 or 8 short 720p video clips into a 7 minute video for YouTube with a simple title screen and transitions. It took the C2D ~40 minutes to process the video and save in a new format. So you're really going to argue that there is nothing to be gained from a significant bump in processor speed?
For me and many other potential MBA purchasers, a CPU bump from the media processing abilities of the Core i processors would be welcome, and GPU performance over and above the ability to play real-time HD video is useless. We shouldn't be saddled with an out-of-date processor or forced to subsidize "unnecessary" frame rate performance just to appease game-players. And that perspective is as valid as yours.
Welcome!
CPU and GPU are both important. There is one critical difference between CPU and GPU though and thats this:
A user can usually wait on on the CPU with no impact other than the fact that they had to wait. Using your example. You waited 40 minutes. A CPU that that was twice as fast might have reduced your wait to 25 minutes. A CPU that was half a fast would have increased your wait time to maybe 75 minutes. The only consequence of CPU speed is time in general. There is rarely a difference in the final product.
GPU is different, GPU is often used to perform realtime calculations (Game or movie frames). Because the frames are related to a specific point in time, a difference is GPU performance can make the difference between usable and unusable. For that reason, people that like, want or need GPU performance tend to be focal.
In my experience, poor GPU performance bugs me more than poor CPU performance. You can't just wait for the GPU to get done, like you can with a CPU. There does have to be a balance though.
Well said
more...
leekohler
Mar 8, 09:40 AM
I can't believe people watch this show. I tried watching it to see what the fuss is all about.....it seems like such a formulaic cheesy sitcom.
I love Bill Maher's take on the whole thing:
http://punchlinemagazine.com/blog/2011/03/video-from-bill-maher-to-charlie-sheen-you-are-on-the-lamest-sitcom-ever
I watched it once and was also amazed it was so popular. It's so run-of-the-mill.
I love Bill Maher's take on the whole thing:
http://punchlinemagazine.com/blog/2011/03/video-from-bill-maher-to-charlie-sheen-you-are-on-the-lamest-sitcom-ever
I watched it once and was also amazed it was so popular. It's so run-of-the-mill.
Chaszmyr
Jul 25, 08:12 AM
Hey, Bluetooth MM can operate on 1 or 2 AA batteries. :eek:
Does this mean we will get a longer battery live than the previous one?
By "previous one" I'm assuming you mean the Wireless one button mouse and not the wired Mighty Mouse, seeing as wired mice don't use batteries. Simple answer, it's possible, but I wouldn't bet on getting better battery life.
I think it's a kind of weird feature, personally. If they did it because they thought maybe sometimes you'd have just one battery lying around, that would be fine... but they say it's to make it lighter... Batteries are heavy in bulk, but a single AA battery has no significant weight, imo.
Does this mean we will get a longer battery live than the previous one?
By "previous one" I'm assuming you mean the Wireless one button mouse and not the wired Mighty Mouse, seeing as wired mice don't use batteries. Simple answer, it's possible, but I wouldn't bet on getting better battery life.
I think it's a kind of weird feature, personally. If they did it because they thought maybe sometimes you'd have just one battery lying around, that would be fine... but they say it's to make it lighter... Batteries are heavy in bulk, but a single AA battery has no significant weight, imo.
more...
Waybo
Apr 3, 09:41 PM
While I am happy with it for myself, I know it is rather (ok, very) cliche to post a duck shot
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
Sorry, but what's wrong with duck posts??? Especially one that's as good as this? Nice "head room." I like it!
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5133/5564642341_20e57c806e.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/)
IMG_3102 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/48874590@N02/5564642341/) by Rusty2192 (http://www.flickr.com/people/48874590@N02/), on Flickr
Sorry, but what's wrong with duck posts??? Especially one that's as good as this? Nice "head room." I like it!
Abstract
Apr 18, 06:12 AM
I don't play games, and even I don't want integrated graphics. :confused: You can say that an MBA isn't really purpose-built for games (obviously), but I don't know how some people can fervently defend a graphics downgrade.
I owned a rev B white MacBook, and it had some sort of crappy integrated graphics (the first type Apple used). It could easily play videos.......until HD movies and larger format videos became more common. After a year, it couldn't keep up with Youtube. I don't know what changed, but the fans ran like crazy, especially when watching movie trailers at any size above "SMALL". I realize that laptops are never going to be able to keep up with the future, but with the Intel IG being rumoured, you'd be at the cusp of being obsolete. It's already at the bottom-rung of the ladder, so there's no leeway when graphics demands move half a step forward.
I owned a rev B white MacBook, and it had some sort of crappy integrated graphics (the first type Apple used). It could easily play videos.......until HD movies and larger format videos became more common. After a year, it couldn't keep up with Youtube. I don't know what changed, but the fans ran like crazy, especially when watching movie trailers at any size above "SMALL". I realize that laptops are never going to be able to keep up with the future, but with the Intel IG being rumoured, you'd be at the cusp of being obsolete. It's already at the bottom-rung of the ladder, so there's no leeway when graphics demands move half a step forward.
more...
KingCrimson
Apr 30, 04:47 PM
Can you name a few more? I have only seen Sony support AAC on their PMP devices.
Samsung has supported AAC for 4 years now.
Samsung has supported AAC for 4 years now.
URFloorMatt
Apr 22, 12:43 PM
Then you have never streamed video onto your phone from home or Netflix or Slingbox. It's not pleasant over 3G onto the iPhone - looks and responds even worse on the iPad.
We need 4G NOW!
TonyAgreed. Anyone who tried to watch MMOD knows that 3G for streaming video is worthless, particularly for high motion. The quality is too poor to see anything.
The only thing I don't like about these iPhone 5 rumors is that they're proving everyone who said the iPhone 5 would be a half-step upgrade right. No NFC, no LTE, no larger screen size, nothing. Better chip, slightly better camera, maybe higher storage, and that's it on the hardware front, apparently. World phone capability is hardly anything to get excited about.
I would seriously consider hanging onto my 3GS until next year if I thought it would survive another year, so I wouldn't get locked into a two-year contract on the iPhone 4.5 when the iPhone 2012 will have all the features I've been waiting for.
We need 4G NOW!
TonyAgreed. Anyone who tried to watch MMOD knows that 3G for streaming video is worthless, particularly for high motion. The quality is too poor to see anything.
The only thing I don't like about these iPhone 5 rumors is that they're proving everyone who said the iPhone 5 would be a half-step upgrade right. No NFC, no LTE, no larger screen size, nothing. Better chip, slightly better camera, maybe higher storage, and that's it on the hardware front, apparently. World phone capability is hardly anything to get excited about.
I would seriously consider hanging onto my 3GS until next year if I thought it would survive another year, so I wouldn't get locked into a two-year contract on the iPhone 4.5 when the iPhone 2012 will have all the features I've been waiting for.
more...
iNev
Aug 16, 04:12 AM
Around here AIM is all anyone uses...
Well around here most people use MSN with a smattering of Google's Jabber messenger thing. As pointed out elsewhere, it's very geographical dependant (i.e. AIM in the US, MSN everywhere else).
I have just switched to Mac, and it's annoying I cant Video Conference with any MSN Messenger users (MSN Messenger on Mac doesnt support it). iChat is awesome but I have no contacts, lol. Anyone know of any other way, I have tried AdiumX and looked into Jabber.
I've tried aMSN/Mercury and plain didn't like it. Ugly, slow and couldn't get my iSight to even look like it was going to work. Now playing around with the Yahoo messenger for video chats since the Y!/MSN protocol partnership.
Well around here most people use MSN with a smattering of Google's Jabber messenger thing. As pointed out elsewhere, it's very geographical dependant (i.e. AIM in the US, MSN everywhere else).
I have just switched to Mac, and it's annoying I cant Video Conference with any MSN Messenger users (MSN Messenger on Mac doesnt support it). iChat is awesome but I have no contacts, lol. Anyone know of any other way, I have tried AdiumX and looked into Jabber.
I've tried aMSN/Mercury and plain didn't like it. Ugly, slow and couldn't get my iSight to even look like it was going to work. Now playing around with the Yahoo messenger for video chats since the Y!/MSN protocol partnership.
MacRumoron
Aug 15, 01:44 PM
i like the new Preview look :)
more...
AaronEdwards
Apr 28, 01:36 PM
Not surprising...because it sells for $49?
If I were in the market for a smartphone and could choose a $49 iPhone 3GS vs. a $199+ iPhone 4 vs. a $199+ Android...I would very very seriously consider the 3GS since it is AT LEAST 4x cheaper...and in reality, does 99% of the iPhone 4 (I have the 3GS and as far as I can tell the 4 simply added Facetime and a front camera for facetime use).
That's pretty faulty math there. In reality, it's not 4x cheaper.
Pick AT&T:s cheapest plan, and you would pay $1369 for the 3GS and plan, for a 4 you would pay $1520 for the phone and plan. So you pay 90% of the cost of a 4 with plan and you'll only get an 3GS, a phone that's already passed by the 4, and will shortly be passed by 4S or 5.
I can't understand anyone who would consider buying a 3GS instead of a 4.
If you're unable to pay another $150 to get a 4, then you probably should wait until 5 or 4S arrives, or just start saving money.
If I were in the market for a smartphone and could choose a $49 iPhone 3GS vs. a $199+ iPhone 4 vs. a $199+ Android...I would very very seriously consider the 3GS since it is AT LEAST 4x cheaper...and in reality, does 99% of the iPhone 4 (I have the 3GS and as far as I can tell the 4 simply added Facetime and a front camera for facetime use).
That's pretty faulty math there. In reality, it's not 4x cheaper.
Pick AT&T:s cheapest plan, and you would pay $1369 for the 3GS and plan, for a 4 you would pay $1520 for the phone and plan. So you pay 90% of the cost of a 4 with plan and you'll only get an 3GS, a phone that's already passed by the 4, and will shortly be passed by 4S or 5.
I can't understand anyone who would consider buying a 3GS instead of a 4.
If you're unable to pay another $150 to get a 4, then you probably should wait until 5 or 4S arrives, or just start saving money.
bobber205
Jul 24, 03:14 PM
Now that it's Bluetooth, I'll have to seriously consider buying one...
alhedges
Apr 28, 11:49 AM
The market share data needs to be looked at in a more nuanced way than "Apple Wins!" or "Android Wins!".
The iPhone's market share *right now* is okay - enviable even - because, when combined with the interests of people who are buying iPhones *right now*, it means that developers have more incentive to make apps for iPhones than for Android...and the better app availability for iPhones makes the platform even better. (And to some extent the Touch and the iPad play a role here)
The *trend* of the iPhone's market share is more concerning, though, and anyone interested in the future of the iPhone should pay attention to these numbers. (I'm sure Apple is). If the iPhone's marketshare drops too far, or stays too low for too long, there is a risk that developers may shift their resources to developing for Android first. Which will further undercut the iPhone's advantages.
But these trends are certainly not fixed in stone...I know a lot of people (non-techies) who recently bought a 3GS...$49 for that phone is a steal. But $49 for the iP4 when the iP5 comes out will be even more of a steal...and, presumably, the old iP4 will be available on both AT&T and Verizon. And as more Verizon users come off of their contracts, there may be some additional iP uptake.
I really see no reason why - with $49 phones available from both Verizon and AT&T, the iPhone market share shouldn't go up to 50% or beyond.
The iPhone's market share *right now* is okay - enviable even - because, when combined with the interests of people who are buying iPhones *right now*, it means that developers have more incentive to make apps for iPhones than for Android...and the better app availability for iPhones makes the platform even better. (And to some extent the Touch and the iPad play a role here)
The *trend* of the iPhone's market share is more concerning, though, and anyone interested in the future of the iPhone should pay attention to these numbers. (I'm sure Apple is). If the iPhone's marketshare drops too far, or stays too low for too long, there is a risk that developers may shift their resources to developing for Android first. Which will further undercut the iPhone's advantages.
But these trends are certainly not fixed in stone...I know a lot of people (non-techies) who recently bought a 3GS...$49 for that phone is a steal. But $49 for the iP4 when the iP5 comes out will be even more of a steal...and, presumably, the old iP4 will be available on both AT&T and Verizon. And as more Verizon users come off of their contracts, there may be some additional iP uptake.
I really see no reason why - with $49 phones available from both Verizon and AT&T, the iPhone market share shouldn't go up to 50% or beyond.
aperry
Apr 26, 02:46 PM
I'm confused. Everyone is arguing whether $20/yr for "this" is too expensive.
Anyone care to explain what "this" actually is?
Is it for music purchased through iTunes, or is it for *all* of your music (ripped, downloaded, emailed, created, legal, illegal, whatever)?
Is it only for music that happens to be sold by the 4 major labels that Apple apparently made agreements with?
If it's anything less than "a music locker for everything, with no exceptions", then count me out. I have tons of ripped music and I have no idea which labels they are from. I don't have any interest in having "some fraction" of my library in the cloud either. Oh, and I've never purchased music from iTunes.
Anyone care to explain what "this" actually is?
Is it for music purchased through iTunes, or is it for *all* of your music (ripped, downloaded, emailed, created, legal, illegal, whatever)?
Is it only for music that happens to be sold by the 4 major labels that Apple apparently made agreements with?
If it's anything less than "a music locker for everything, with no exceptions", then count me out. I have tons of ripped music and I have no idea which labels they are from. I don't have any interest in having "some fraction" of my library in the cloud either. Oh, and I've never purchased music from iTunes.
Jason Beck
Apr 4, 04:05 AM
Crimple Viaduct, Harrogate
I am so jealous. Love some of the places people in the UK shoot at. This was well captured. The exposure looks really natural and the green is very vibrant.
I am so jealous. Love some of the places people in the UK shoot at. This was well captured. The exposure looks really natural and the green is very vibrant.
m-dogg
Aug 15, 03:02 PM
I like the safari updates like the warnings and ability to consolidate tabs into one window. Those are some little things I've wished for.
There are some add-on's available to accomodate some of these today, but I'm happy to see them finally being integrated into the app itself.
There are some add-on's available to accomodate some of these today, but I'm happy to see them finally being integrated into the app itself.
DCJ001
Apr 15, 01:52 PM
With the update notice officially stating When Lion ships this summer What are the chances the iMac refresh will happen at the same time? or will it be in the Fall instead?
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
http://buyersguide.macrumors.com/#iMac
kenypowa
Apr 21, 10:26 PM
"...to ensure our continued innovation..."
Ripping-off other companies' UI's is "innovation" now?
Samsung is such a pathetic company. They make nice TVs but still pathetic.
Right, it's like Apple researched every mobile technology by itslef without infringing anyone's patent. :rolleyes:
Ripping-off other companies' UI's is "innovation" now?
Samsung is such a pathetic company. They make nice TVs but still pathetic.
Right, it's like Apple researched every mobile technology by itslef without infringing anyone's patent. :rolleyes:
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий