TonyC28
Apr 13, 07:58 PM
Ha...who cares anymore??
cleanup
Sep 13, 02:22 PM
Yes..... gotta love the Hoeegarden.
A BevMo just opened up down the street from me, and they have beer tastings on Fridays from 4-7. So good.....
Mmmm WHO-GAR-TEN. So deelish. I remember when I first read the label, "coriander" scared me (I absolutely abhor the stuff), but whatever they put in there is fine with me as long as it keeps tasting the way it does. I love white beers. My cheap alternative is Rickards white, but you've got to throw lotsa orange peel in there to imitate the light poppiness of Hoegarden.
Sometime soon I've gotta visit the Bier Garden down at the Esplanade and sample, well, everything.
A BevMo just opened up down the street from me, and they have beer tastings on Fridays from 4-7. So good.....
Mmmm WHO-GAR-TEN. So deelish. I remember when I first read the label, "coriander" scared me (I absolutely abhor the stuff), but whatever they put in there is fine with me as long as it keeps tasting the way it does. I love white beers. My cheap alternative is Rickards white, but you've got to throw lotsa orange peel in there to imitate the light poppiness of Hoegarden.
Sometime soon I've gotta visit the Bier Garden down at the Esplanade and sample, well, everything.
network23
Jul 25, 11:16 AM
What you're describing is far less revolutionary, and wouldn't really constitute a none-touch interface. The current displays all have a durable, transparent cover over them, and they still get scratches and finger prints from handling. I think the reason that this interface idea is so exciting is that it offers the possibility of having a full screen for viewing without needing to worry about the act of touching the screen for controls making the screen dirty so you can't watch.
Snowy,
I do think hayesk is on the right track. While the idea of a touchless experience is neat, try it right now. pick up your iPod and make movements over the surface as if it would be touchless. If you don't have an iPod, pick up something else approximately that size. Assume that the "field" where it senses your fingers is going to be less than a centimeter above the surface.
What happened?
If you were like me, you still occasionally brushed or accidentally touched the surface anyway, especially making circular scrollwheel movements. You didn't? I applaud your superior fine motor skills. Now try that same excersise while driving. Or jogging. Bet it was harder.
Heck, even just holding the thing in your hand or pulling it out of your pocket will get fingerprints on it and be touched. Touching the surface will be unavoidable. But what Apple can do with this technology is give it a thicker, more substantial, more scratch-resistant, possibly more smudge resistant surface on which the user can touch and interact with the UI.
Snowy,
I do think hayesk is on the right track. While the idea of a touchless experience is neat, try it right now. pick up your iPod and make movements over the surface as if it would be touchless. If you don't have an iPod, pick up something else approximately that size. Assume that the "field" where it senses your fingers is going to be less than a centimeter above the surface.
What happened?
If you were like me, you still occasionally brushed or accidentally touched the surface anyway, especially making circular scrollwheel movements. You didn't? I applaud your superior fine motor skills. Now try that same excersise while driving. Or jogging. Bet it was harder.
Heck, even just holding the thing in your hand or pulling it out of your pocket will get fingerprints on it and be touched. Touching the surface will be unavoidable. But what Apple can do with this technology is give it a thicker, more substantial, more scratch-resistant, possibly more smudge resistant surface on which the user can touch and interact with the UI.
craigatkinson
Jul 24, 05:27 PM
That may be the problem. You didn't use it enough to become comfortable with it. It was a little weird when I first began to use mine as well, but after a day of using it I was in love.
I dont know what people see in the Mighty Mouse, I tried one out in a local computer shop and found it VERY frustrating to use.
I dont know what people see in the Mighty Mouse, I tried one out in a local computer shop and found it VERY frustrating to use.
more...
superfula
Apr 22, 04:37 PM
Why is this schmuck on the front page? The guy has a history of trolling for page hits. Now that he's trying to get his new site up and running, it's quite obvious what his intent is. He has as much inside information as my grandmother.
macfly4
Apr 15, 08:54 AM
Forgot to mention mine is a 3gs also. This battery drain is worse than it was on the first 4.3 update. What is going on with this?
more...
shervieux
Apr 1, 08:38 AM
So how about a to-do list, hey Apple?
Oh you are so right!! :eek: This loses the to-do list in iCal, thus why I had to buy a to-do list app just to sync my to-do's on iphone/iPad. Hope this does not mean a separate to-do list in OS X. Now instead of having 3 apps always open (ical, mail, address book) - it will be 4. What a resource hog.
Even MS's new office (although with it's problems) on the windows side incorporates collaboration through chat, email, etc within apps. Time to unify iCal, mail, address book, to-do, ichat, and facetime into one nice integrated app to provide easier workflow and collaboration. Or maybe keep facetime / ichat separate for the new unified app - but allow for clicking and auto-launching to communicate with someone right from your unified (ical,address book, mail, to-do app).
I think that would be a boon for apple and even easier to get into businesses.
C'Mon Apple - look to how the user operates. Everything needs to be right in front of us to same time and improve workflows...
Oh you are so right!! :eek: This loses the to-do list in iCal, thus why I had to buy a to-do list app just to sync my to-do's on iphone/iPad. Hope this does not mean a separate to-do list in OS X. Now instead of having 3 apps always open (ical, mail, address book) - it will be 4. What a resource hog.
Even MS's new office (although with it's problems) on the windows side incorporates collaboration through chat, email, etc within apps. Time to unify iCal, mail, address book, to-do, ichat, and facetime into one nice integrated app to provide easier workflow and collaboration. Or maybe keep facetime / ichat separate for the new unified app - but allow for clicking and auto-launching to communicate with someone right from your unified (ical,address book, mail, to-do app).
I think that would be a boon for apple and even easier to get into businesses.
C'Mon Apple - look to how the user operates. Everything needs to be right in front of us to same time and improve workflows...
simX
Oct 18, 07:51 PM
Why, my friend, do you think that a "cash cow" has to be the thing that gains the most revenue/profit? Not sure what dictionary you're using; please let me know.
Why, my friend, by "the iPod is Apple's cash cow", you imply that there is only one cash cow. But if you want to use the traditional definition (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=cash+cow) of "cash cow", "a project that generates a continuous flow of money," then the Mac would be more of a cash cow than the iPod, because it has always represented a larger proportion of Apple's profits and revenues. Not once has the iPod represented more of Apple's revenues. So the Mac generates a larger continuous flow of money.
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
Why, my friend, by "the iPod is Apple's cash cow", you imply that there is only one cash cow. But if you want to use the traditional definition (http://www.dict.org/bin/Dict?Form=Dict2&Database=*&Query=cash+cow) of "cash cow", "a project that generates a continuous flow of money," then the Mac would be more of a cash cow than the iPod, because it has always represented a larger proportion of Apple's profits and revenues. Not once has the iPod represented more of Apple's revenues. So the Mac generates a larger continuous flow of money.
Not sure what set of rules of logic you are using, but either way you are wrong. The Mac is still more important to Apple's bottom line than the iPod. Apple is also innovating more on the Mac than with the iPod.
By the way, you might want to look up the definition of the word "emotional" as well. I'm using facts, you're making things up.
more...
Chupa Chupa
Apr 12, 05:37 AM
Usually, when a new technology comes out from Apple like Thunderbolt, (mini display port in look a like), I usually think "Why would other "non" Apple manufactures like WD, Promise etc... adopt Thunderbolt? as USB 3.0 or eSATA is their bracket... where as Apple likes to keep to themselves only tailoring to their own devices (eg. using WDS (or extenting wireless via Airport Express), for example. is not possible unless you have Time Capsule (Apple) )
I guess I was wrong when I saw this one on MacRumors.
The major difference between TB and FW adoption is that FW was 100% Apple whereas TB was envisioned by Apple and then handed off to Intel for development and implementation.
Since Intel is a major supplier of MBs to PC box manufacturers it can more easily push TB than Apple could FW. Moreover USB 3 is an Intel creation too so it has even greater power to play puppet master.
I guess I was wrong when I saw this one on MacRumors.
The major difference between TB and FW adoption is that FW was 100% Apple whereas TB was envisioned by Apple and then handed off to Intel for development and implementation.
Since Intel is a major supplier of MBs to PC box manufacturers it can more easily push TB than Apple could FW. Moreover USB 3 is an Intel creation too so it has even greater power to play puppet master.
twoodcc
Sep 19, 12:10 PM
http://foldingforum.org/viewforum.php?f=54
Everything we need is there. Just way over my head.
i see a lot of thread titles with the word "problem" in there
Everything we need is there. Just way over my head.
i see a lot of thread titles with the word "problem" in there
more...
roland.g
Apr 12, 10:08 AM
THIS! :rolleyes:
Remember Back to the Mac. Let's gear up some Lion, iMac revision and other Maccentric rumors. Page 2 it or get a new 'iOS Nothing new to see here folks' tab.
Maybe I'll start a blog and call it Risky SuperNova. Then I can predict nonsense and get quoted every other week on MR.
Remember Back to the Mac. Let's gear up some Lion, iMac revision and other Maccentric rumors. Page 2 it or get a new 'iOS Nothing new to see here folks' tab.
Maybe I'll start a blog and call it Risky SuperNova. Then I can predict nonsense and get quoted every other week on MR.
NathanMuir
Apr 25, 04:45 PM
Eldiablojoe, just because.
more...
mhuk01
Jul 24, 04:28 PM
i ordered a custom build macbook and apple bluetooth mouse last friday. should i cancel the order for the mouse and wait? or because of all the mighty mouse problems should i be happy with a completely sleek standard apple bluetooth mouse?
gkarris
Mar 1, 10:12 AM
If this guy can generate that much viewership and money, it show you the state of television progamming... :eek:
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.
bigmc6000
Jul 28, 07:40 AM
Don't discount microsoft - they have money to lose for years in trying to get #1 for MP3 - slowly they creep up and overturn Apple - apple doesn't ahve the same stamina.
A long term commitment, not a short term thing.
$9,500,000,000 - that's just sitting around in cash with no long term debt. I think Apple's got plenty of "stamina"...
A long term commitment, not a short term thing.
$9,500,000,000 - that's just sitting around in cash with no long term debt. I think Apple's got plenty of "stamina"...
more...
maclaptop
May 4, 12:18 AM
OR another reason: Apple decided to go verizon exclusive and ATT is shunned.
If I wasn't a shareholder, I'd enjoy watching what would happen if this far fetched idea occurred. I know that it would certainly prove interesting.
If I wasn't a shareholder, I'd enjoy watching what would happen if this far fetched idea occurred. I know that it would certainly prove interesting.
snebes
Apr 15, 02:44 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?
Stay positive!! iMacs should get an update soon with a free Lion upgrade. At least I hope.
I think iMac overhaul is in the fall right after the back to school deals are over......
Basically all systems besides MBA and MBP are overdue for an update. iMac and Mac Pro especially.
Stay positive!! iMacs should get an update soon with a free Lion upgrade. At least I hope.
I think iMac overhaul is in the fall right after the back to school deals are over......
Basically all systems besides MBA and MBP are overdue for an update. iMac and Mac Pro especially.
whooleytoo
Apr 14, 07:53 AM
It is nothing.
I mean that literally.
There is no fourth product line.
This is simply a bug where the store is trying to look up a product name by key and the product doesn't exist.
Someone set the product list size one greater than it should be, causing the list to include an extra item. But since there is no device category, looking up the MarketingName for that device category fails.
But the question remains - why is "Mac" in the variable name? On an App Store that doesn't support any Macs.
It could be nothing, a naming convention carried over, but it is odd.
I mean that literally.
There is no fourth product line.
This is simply a bug where the store is trying to look up a product name by key and the product doesn't exist.
Someone set the product list size one greater than it should be, causing the list to include an extra item. But since there is no device category, looking up the MarketingName for that device category fails.
But the question remains - why is "Mac" in the variable name? On an App Store that doesn't support any Macs.
It could be nothing, a naming convention carried over, but it is odd.
Brien
Mar 11, 07:40 PM
Brea Mall is out of all 16 wifi models as of 10 mins ago.
RollTide
Apr 25, 05:33 PM
Glad to see another PC Gamer + Mac User on the forums. One day my friend, we could perhaps game on our Macs...one day:( *soft weeping
Some of the guys I play with online literally joke on me because I'm running flight sims on my Mac. Yet my specs suck and the game/computer works way better than theirs. Go figure.
Constant teamspeak chatter: I gotta restart be right back ;)
Some of the guys I play with online literally joke on me because I'm running flight sims on my Mac. Yet my specs suck and the game/computer works way better than theirs. Go figure.
Constant teamspeak chatter: I gotta restart be right back ;)
Eidorian
May 3, 08:12 AM
The way they've been able to keep the price low while using quad-cores in EVERY iMac has been by downgrading the GPUs. The Graphics Cards in EVERY model are now mobile. In the last line of iMacs they were full powered desktop GPUs.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
So, you see, while there's an upside (the processors), it doesn't come without a down (the GPUs). At first glance I was really annoyed as the �999 one (which is what I got before the refresh) had an i5 quad core, then I saw the graphics memory and got even more annoyed, but THEN I noticed the large shiny M at the end of the GPU name. THAT's how they've been able to bring us them processors and still keep the price down. They've downgraded the GPUs. As my i3 processor practically acts like a quad core anyway and is virtually never pushed to it's limits I think I'm more than happy with what I have. The GPU may only have 256MB dedicated memory but at least it's not mobile.They have been mobile since the switch to Intel. Though the 24" with 7300/7600GT does stand out.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_i5_microprocessors#.22Sandy_Bridge.22_.2832_nm.29_2
The 2.5GHz and 2.7GHz models look to be Low-Voltage 65W Core i5, which is why Apple is able to fit quad cores in the 21.5" enclosure. But does that actually mean the 3.1GHz Core i5 in the 27" is actually cheaper than the slower 2.7GHz Core i5 in the 27"? Intel doesn't sell a 2.7GHz standard voltage Core i5 unless its a custom model or Apple is underclocking the 2.8GHz Core i5, which seems like an unnecessary waste of free clock speed room.Underclock and relabel is not anything new.
n00bst3r
Oct 18, 05:00 PM
Maybe if they weren't making a grand on each MBP..
oootle
Aug 18, 04:07 AM
the way finder has been left with no changes kind or less indicates that there is a bit of a UI refresh in the bag for Leopard.