ajohnson253
Apr 14, 12:23 AM
I wonder if anyone has been waiting on getting a iPhone 4 because white hasn't been released yet. Well 10 months later here you go.
ChazUK
Apr 22, 05:23 AM
- Grid of icons: Check
- A bottom line of icons (or dock): Check
- One button: Check
- Round corners on bezel: Check
If this is inaccurate, then Apple's claim is inaccurate as well. Because, sure, there are all sorts of details that make this phone different from the iPhone.
I'm not saying that the iPhone is ripped off from the F700. I'm saying that there are a lot of similarities, just as there are a lot of similarities pointed out in Apple's claim.
I predict they will not stick.
The dates are wrong as the F700 was unveiled after Apple announced the iPhone at MacWorld in 2007
- A bottom line of icons (or dock): Check
- One button: Check
- Round corners on bezel: Check
If this is inaccurate, then Apple's claim is inaccurate as well. Because, sure, there are all sorts of details that make this phone different from the iPhone.
I'm not saying that the iPhone is ripped off from the F700. I'm saying that there are a lot of similarities, just as there are a lot of similarities pointed out in Apple's claim.
I predict they will not stick.
The dates are wrong as the F700 was unveiled after Apple announced the iPhone at MacWorld in 2007
jeffereyj
Apr 25, 11:48 AM
matte screen option or fail.
FelixDerKater
Jul 24, 03:16 PM
This is long overdue. Hopefully it does not have the same connectivity issues as other products on the market such as those from Microsoft.
more...
lifeofart
Jul 12, 05:20 PM
That's more or less what I've done. The issue is this. If you envision a twenty page booklet, it will consist of five pieces of paper. On the front of the first piece of paper, the left panel will be page 20 and the right panel will be page 1. On the back, the left panel will be page 2 and the right panel will be page 19. And so on. It is this non-sequential printing of the pages that I'm struggling with. How do you tell it to print pages 20 and 1 on the first piece of paper, other than having it print page 1, then putting the paper back into the printer and having it print page 20.
(A big reason that I'm trying to get away from the manual solution is that I want to save this as a PDF so I can hand it to a copy shop to print out multiple copies for me. But, unfortunately, you can't print to a PDF page twice. :) Oh, and I've tried using the Layout option in the print dialog, but it reduces that page image dramatically, so 10pt font becomes 6pt font. So that wasn't a good solution...)
Too bad you don't have a professional app such as the latest MS Word!:eek:
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard. Set it up for four quadrants per page, front and back printing. Place your images & text in the proper quadrant in the proper orientation. Autopage number the quadrants, and email the doc file to your printshop.
Almost all professional printshops except word doc files and can print your brochure out on their professional quality printers on your paper of choice.
But I guess you are stuck with a worthless .pages file and if you fart around with it long enough you might just be able to get something out that a print / copy shop could use.
(A big reason that I'm trying to get away from the manual solution is that I want to save this as a PDF so I can hand it to a copy shop to print out multiple copies for me. But, unfortunately, you can't print to a PDF page twice. :) Oh, and I've tried using the Layout option in the print dialog, but it reduces that page image dramatically, so 10pt font becomes 6pt font. So that wasn't a good solution...)
Too bad you don't have a professional app such as the latest MS Word!:eek:
Then you could just open the new brochure wizard. Set it up for four quadrants per page, front and back printing. Place your images & text in the proper quadrant in the proper orientation. Autopage number the quadrants, and email the doc file to your printshop.
Almost all professional printshops except word doc files and can print your brochure out on their professional quality printers on your paper of choice.
But I guess you are stuck with a worthless .pages file and if you fart around with it long enough you might just be able to get something out that a print / copy shop could use.
Whistleway
Oct 24, 07:52 AM
Solid upgrade. Kudos Apple.
more...
woocintosh
Apr 22, 06:26 AM
No chance for samsung. Their products are obviously copies. The icons even are crappy...
jessica.
Sep 14, 09:19 PM
Jigsaw?? Is that you?! :eek:
LOL! I thought the same thing!
LOL! I thought the same thing!
more...
MacSA
Jul 25, 08:29 AM
Did the US Apple Store go offline?
smilechild
Apr 23, 08:46 PM
I've waited for this for so long, I hope the iPhone comes to T-mobile this year... it would be an answered prayer!!!
more...
RITZFit
Dec 1, 10:55 PM
Deez...by some miracle :(
mdriftmeyer
Apr 16, 10:31 PM
Apple bought OS X too. :D
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Clarifications:
XNU is post 1996 merger. Mach pre merger was 2.9. Post merger is a mix of Mach 3.x with XNU and FreeBSD, plus Apple's own advances.
Everyone who worked on OS X at Apple in Core Engineering was a merging of NeXT Engineering with some Apple Engineers and future talent. Apple bought NeXT for the IP, Code Bases, Tools, Engineering Talent and Leadership.
BSD is not GNU.
I'm arguing that both were massive undertakings by both parties. My OS X example was tainted with sarcasm if you didn't catch the little :rolleyes: there.
Both OS X and Chrome OS (and Android, and iOS) borrow heavily from others, either through acquisitions or from the open source community. To claim Google is any inferior here is just trying to stir the pot, especially calling the poster Troll, that is just insulting and uncalled for.
Both companies deserve props from providing the software they do, neither deserves scorn that some posters here like to dish out.
So what ? OS X is Mach/XNU, Apple didn't make that. It's also a GNU/Berkeley userland, Apple didn't make that either. Again guys, drop the non-sense competition, this thread is about a release of OS X, not some type of Google bashing contest.
Clarifications:
XNU is post 1996 merger. Mach pre merger was 2.9. Post merger is a mix of Mach 3.x with XNU and FreeBSD, plus Apple's own advances.
Everyone who worked on OS X at Apple in Core Engineering was a merging of NeXT Engineering with some Apple Engineers and future talent. Apple bought NeXT for the IP, Code Bases, Tools, Engineering Talent and Leadership.
BSD is not GNU.
more...
ezekielrage_99
Jul 30, 07:55 AM
MS Natural Keyboard is also good.
Apple mouse is beautiful and using one is not very stressful for your hand. Scroll ball in the Mighty Mouse is the best I've used and there's no comparison.
The only bad Apple mice were the hockey pucks.
Yeah the MS Natural Keyboard is good, but sorry the Mighty Mouse just plain is a mighty sucky product. The ergonomics sucks, the scroller thingy gets dirty and hardly work and ithe Mighty Mouse is by far too expensive compared with other better products on the market.
Apple mouse is beautiful and using one is not very stressful for your hand. Scroll ball in the Mighty Mouse is the best I've used and there's no comparison.
The only bad Apple mice were the hockey pucks.
Yeah the MS Natural Keyboard is good, but sorry the Mighty Mouse just plain is a mighty sucky product. The ergonomics sucks, the scroller thingy gets dirty and hardly work and ithe Mighty Mouse is by far too expensive compared with other better products on the market.
kalsta
Apr 25, 11:26 AM
Wake me when iMacs have matte screens again.
more...
daveschroeder
Oct 23, 08:35 AM
Dave,
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
I understand where you are coming from, but I still don't interpret the EULA as you do. Neither does Paul Thurrott http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/winvista_licensing.asp. Can you please provide links to others who think like you, preferably if they happen to work for MS. ;)
Coincidentally, I had just emailed Paul.
He already responded:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:23:04 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Microsoft told me that the retail EULA forbids the installation of Windows
Vista Home Basic or Home Premium in virtual machines. They said that if
developers wanted to do this, they should get an MSDN subscription, which
has a different license allowing such an install. All that said, there's
nothing technical from preventing users from installing any Vista version in
a virtual machine.
Paul
...to which I replied:
From: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Subject: Re: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:30:57 AM CDT
To: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Security: Signed
So Microsoft actually does intend the EULA to prohibit someone from, say, buying Vista Home as a retail box and then installing it in Parallels Desktop on a Mac? (I know there is nothing technical preventing that.)
This still seems curious, given that in that scenario, not only does Vista Ultimate allow VM use, but also includes an additional license specifically so that same copy can be installed in a VM on the same device. Why wouldn't Home's license allow a single instance of itself to be used in a VM as long as it's not already installed somewhere else? The language all revolves around "the software installed on the licensed device", and I take that to mean the software *already* installed on that device, but I suppose that could be argued to mean that it can't be installed on *any* device where it would be used in a virtualization environment...
Update: Paul's response:
From: thurrott [at] gmail.com
Subject: RE: Row over Vista virtualization much ado about nothing?
Date: October 23, 2006 8:34:07 AM CDT
To: das [at] doit.wisc.edu
Yeah, that's what they told me. My guess is that they don't want people
purchasing the low-cost versions, installing them on virtual machine
environments they don't understand (like Parallels) and then demanding
support.
You can understand why this is an issue, given that the Business and Ultimate EULAs not only explicitly allow VM use, but also include additional licenses to use that copy a second time in a VM, legally (on the same device). Also, all the language, as I said, revolves around using "the software installed on the licensed device" (implying that it's an installation that already exists on a licensed device) in a VM.
So I'll say that, if this is accurate, I stand corrected. After a few years of reading Microsoft (and other) EULAs, even I thought Microsoft wouldn't be that retarded. ;-)
Given the language, and given the additional-license situation with Business and Ultimate, I still have to say I'm surprised.
Fearless Leader
Oct 24, 08:04 AM
finally apple makes 1gig a standard basic option. 512mb just doesn't make the cut.
more...
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:26 AM
No thanks.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
Have you used a 4.3" phone. They don't seem that much physically bigger but the screen size is awesome! Apple keeps getting squeezed with adding new technology because of the size limitations of the phone. Giving us a slightly bigger size with the advantage of a bigger screen size AND more components seems like an excellent tradeoff.
Yeah - I know if will never happen because SJ is compulsive obsessive with never making things bigger.
Tony
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
Have you used a 4.3" phone. They don't seem that much physically bigger but the screen size is awesome! Apple keeps getting squeezed with adding new technology because of the size limitations of the phone. Giving us a slightly bigger size with the advantage of a bigger screen size AND more components seems like an excellent tradeoff.
Yeah - I know if will never happen because SJ is compulsive obsessive with never making things bigger.
Tony
BRLawyer
Dec 2, 05:48 AM
I agree with the few others that are concerned about this.
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
Our Mac OS innocence is coming to an end. Part of this is due to the growing market share, and popularity in the Operating system. The other issue I feel that is of concern, is the new challenge this OS provides for Script kiddies, and bored coders. If you have an ego, and want to get your name out, why not do what hasn't been done before, as opposed to doing what everyone else does ?
This is going to be a growing trend, and the amount of Mac Haters in the wild is quite high! Once code tricks and secrets start to get out, it is only a matter of time before OS X is targeted by thousands, much like XP!
Apple has time to take this very seriously, and work to keep this system tight and secure! Hopefully this is going to be a big part of the focus on Leopard, but only developers will really know this!
These current headlines aside
1. Pay attention to what warning messages pop up when browsing the web.
2. Only download and install software from sources that you trust, and if you do trust them, take an extra moment to think about why you trust them, and if you really need to install that piece of 3rd party software!
3. Keep your firewalls on if possible
4. Don't permanently unlock preferences, folders, or other security areas on your system using your keychain, unless you really need to do so!
There are others, however that is a good baseline to follow for some minimal security checks and balances!
And here we go again with the "security through obscurity" myth...please, don't spread such things again, because they are not true.
The mere fact that some kernel vulnerabilities were discovered in an event SPECIFICALLY devoted to finding such things does not mean our OS X is unsafe. It is by far the MOST secure system out there, with 40 million or 400 million users, and nobody has been able to prove the opposite so far.
Besides, some (or many) of the arguments posed by this "anonymous" LMH were already debunked by other security analysts. Just an example:
"Apple DMG flaw not so serious? SecurityFocus reports on the controversy surrounding a disk image denial of service potentiality in Mac OS X. "While the common wisdom in the security world is that crashes are exploitable, Mac programmer Alastair Houghton published his kernel-code analysis showing that this particular vulnerability is not. "In fact, all (the MoKB) has found here is a bug that causes a kernel panic," Houghton wrote in his analysis. "Not a security flaw. Not a memory corruption bug. Just a completely orderly kernel panic." Following the analysis, Secunia downgraded their severity rating of the vulnerability from "highly critical" to "not critical." Several other companies still have the vulnerability rated as critical. The actions follow a heated exchange between Houghton and the founder of the Month of Kernel Bugs (MoKB) Project, a person who identifies himself as only L.M.H. Because of the exchange, Houghton decided to spend three days analyzing the issue and had his final analysis checked by Thomas Ptacek, a security researcher and founder of Matasano Security."
http://www.macfixit.com/
So please...before spreading more FUD in this forum, check the facts and take some time before believing some strange guys pretending to be specialists...
arnop
Oct 31, 11:30 AM
Why the hell not ?! :)
mtnDewFTW
Apr 14, 02:45 AM
Maybe a sign of universal iOS+Mac apps?
That would be amazing.
That would be amazing.
cantthinkofone
Apr 24, 01:20 PM
By some other aspect of her character I guess.
It is a dumb question (sorry). Female toilets only have stalls, so the victim's surgical status is moot.
Well....Unless something along the lines of "I can't wait to have this thing removed" was said...Just sayin' :p
It is a dumb question (sorry). Female toilets only have stalls, so the victim's surgical status is moot.
Well....Unless something along the lines of "I can't wait to have this thing removed" was said...Just sayin' :p
Deefuzz
Nov 16, 11:34 AM
What kind of clothes are you buying?:confused:
I've got a bunch of Banana Republic and L.L. Bean.
A few Lacoste and Polo and Burberry items as well.
The only things for me that don't last are jeans/slacks. I do go through those a bit faster, probably around the 2 year mark.
IMO it's all in the quality of the clothing. Back in college I would buy Tommy Hilfiger, Old Navy, and Nautica and that stuff would barely last a year. Really cheap stuff.
I prefer stuff along the lines of my Banana Republic and L.L. Bean button down shirts. No logos or emblems on the outside of the shirt, and real good quality that holds up for years.
I've got a bunch of Banana Republic and L.L. Bean.
A few Lacoste and Polo and Burberry items as well.
The only things for me that don't last are jeans/slacks. I do go through those a bit faster, probably around the 2 year mark.
IMO it's all in the quality of the clothing. Back in college I would buy Tommy Hilfiger, Old Navy, and Nautica and that stuff would barely last a year. Really cheap stuff.
I prefer stuff along the lines of my Banana Republic and L.L. Bean button down shirts. No logos or emblems on the outside of the shirt, and real good quality that holds up for years.
Cougarcat
Aug 15, 03:28 PM
i like the new Preview look :)
Really? I can't stand it. The buttons break Apple's own Human Interface guidelines and make the interface even less inconsistent. One of the first things I did when I got tiger was to install Mail Stamps (http://www.andrewescobar.com/mailstamps/) to restore the old look.
Really? I can't stand it. The buttons break Apple's own Human Interface guidelines and make the interface even less inconsistent. One of the first things I did when I got tiger was to install Mail Stamps (http://www.andrewescobar.com/mailstamps/) to restore the old look.
gnasher729
Jul 24, 10:56 AM
By definition, having alternatives makes Apple NOT a monopoly.
It is not even necessary that there _are_ alternatives. It is enough if others _could_ enter the market if they wanted. In that situation, you cannot increase prices as you like, because at that point others _would_ enter the market.
It is not even necessary that there _are_ alternatives. It is enough if others _could_ enter the market if they wanted. In that situation, you cannot increase prices as you like, because at that point others _would_ enter the market.
Комментариев нет:
Отправить комментарий