MacFly123
Mar 25, 05:03 PM
I recall some of the naysayers around here not even a year ago stating that such a device would never be suitable for gaming. And here we are. With HD output to your TV.
Vision, people. Vision.
Playing that game with the HDMI dongle thingy hanging off an iPad looks, um, not ideal. Now, if it could stream it using AirPlay.
The Future of video games? This looks awesome, and works great with a racing game that can show you the course on the iPad. Just wish I could run this on my Original Ipad :(
Will this work over Airplay with the Apple TV, obviously in 720p?
Once they enable the use of other iOS devices as wireless controllers then i'll be interested.
And just like that, Apple has snuck itself into the living room game console biz.
AMEN! :D Get this on all iOS devices with the A5 and integrated with the new Apple TV with the A5 and AirPlay and WOW!!! Not just games either, I think apps on the AppleTV will be some sort of hybrid between devices and you will be able to AirPlay the apps to your TV!
This is going to change everything, AGAIN! :cool:
Vision, people. Vision.
Playing that game with the HDMI dongle thingy hanging off an iPad looks, um, not ideal. Now, if it could stream it using AirPlay.
The Future of video games? This looks awesome, and works great with a racing game that can show you the course on the iPad. Just wish I could run this on my Original Ipad :(
Will this work over Airplay with the Apple TV, obviously in 720p?
Once they enable the use of other iOS devices as wireless controllers then i'll be interested.
And just like that, Apple has snuck itself into the living room game console biz.
AMEN! :D Get this on all iOS devices with the A5 and integrated with the new Apple TV with the A5 and AirPlay and WOW!!! Not just games either, I think apps on the AppleTV will be some sort of hybrid between devices and you will be able to AirPlay the apps to your TV!
This is going to change everything, AGAIN! :cool:
fr4c
Nov 23, 11:22 PM
Psht. I can get that up here for free.
No need to rub it in.
Sent from the neighbors down south.
;)
No need to rub it in.
Sent from the neighbors down south.
;)
SciFrog
Mar 23, 06:06 PM
Hopefully the bigadv will switch very soon to SMP2, they have much better restart rates. I also loose the unit almost everytime if I stop it or reboot...
decimortis
Apr 26, 01:23 PM
Amazon is not a generic term. It is, however, the name of a single river on planet Earth...among a few other names/uses ("the Amazon", "Amazon basin", "Amazon Women").
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
you forgot windows.....
Where else have you seen/heard the term Amazon in a generic sense? Some examples of a generic term are (at least have been generic over the past 75+ years):
light bulb
door
wood
lock
you forgot windows.....
sineplex
Sep 19, 01:57 AM
Nope, it's those 99 cents silicone case from HK!
ok sounds great. post a link I'll buy that for 99c until I find something I really like.
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
ok sounds great. post a link I'll buy that for 99c until I find something I really like.
BTW What camera did you use to take the shot ? Makes it look much more than 99c
roland.g
Sep 1, 01:39 PM
wouldn't swapping a conroe chip in be an option? just go to Fry's and buy the chip then.
No Yonah and Merom are pin-compatible. Conroe isn't. Need a whole new motherboard.
No Yonah and Merom are pin-compatible. Conroe isn't. Need a whole new motherboard.
ipedro
Jan 3, 07:57 PM
do u consider the september update an update?
The September update was clearly a small boost to carry the iPod through Christmas without revealing the whole enchilada.
Apple has a whole strategy involving multimedia and communication and it shows in all their latest moves. I have no doubt that the iPod and an iPhone (maybe they're the same thing) along with iTV will play a major part in all that.
Just a few days to go.
The September update was clearly a small boost to carry the iPod through Christmas without revealing the whole enchilada.
Apple has a whole strategy involving multimedia and communication and it shows in all their latest moves. I have no doubt that the iPod and an iPhone (maybe they're the same thing) along with iTV will play a major part in all that.
Just a few days to go.
lordonuthin
Dec 13, 04:22 PM
congrats to whiterabbit for 4 million points!
Thanks.
I was over at kakaostats and saw there is someone new this week "elena" (http://kakaostats.com/usum.php?u=1604130), up only since tuesday and they already have over 4M points! Must be an institution with a wicked fast cluster? Some serious players out there...
Thanks.
I was over at kakaostats and saw there is someone new this week "elena" (http://kakaostats.com/usum.php?u=1604130), up only since tuesday and they already have over 4M points! Must be an institution with a wicked fast cluster? Some serious players out there...
Macky-Mac
Mar 19, 04:59 PM
....What's so "unsucessful" about the "War on Terror" in Afghanistan?....
it's still going on with no end in sight and at great expense to the tax payer....that's what you consider a success?
You said;
justin bieber getting shot
justin bieber shot several
Justin Bieber has shot
it's still going on with no end in sight and at great expense to the tax payer....that's what you consider a success?
You said;
ComputersaysNo
Nov 27, 09:53 AM
I bought a friend a coffee, and he gave me his old 8Gb Iphone 3G :)
daneoni
Sep 1, 02:26 PM
I think it'll be a crime for Apple not to use Conroes in the iMac, they withstood the G5 processors so i dont see any reason as to why they cant do the same for Conroe. Using only merom or xeon processors is just to big a gap and is not ideal. Worse it may plumet the iMac sales unless there is a must have feature in the new revision.
Why would i want to upgrade from a current core duo imac to a merom imac when the performance difference is only 10-15% at best...for a desktop it makes no sense whatsoever and that means the iMac would purely be form over function. The again Apple fans tend to buy anything no matter how illogical
Why would i want to upgrade from a current core duo imac to a merom imac when the performance difference is only 10-15% at best...for a desktop it makes no sense whatsoever and that means the iMac would purely be form over function. The again Apple fans tend to buy anything no matter how illogical
kelving525
Oct 13, 09:24 PM
I just received the Belkin Grip Vue (Tint) from belkin.com. It's structurally exactly the same as the Grip Vue cases from Best Buy, without the extremely bright and obnoxious colors. The (Tint) is translucent, so you can see your iPod logo thru the back. But it's slightly frosted on the inside, so you get NO watermarking, and it makes the back look really nice. I got the black one, which is basically a really dark smoke color. Really subtle and nice case.
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
Justin-ieber-shot by samuel l
Probably theapr , ieber shot
ieber shot gif.
justin bieber shot on csi gif.
justin bieber getting shot
justin bieber getting shot
justin bieber getting shot
One very noticeable improvement over the Best Buy Grip Vues is that the volume buttons are way easier to press. I have been using my Best Buy Grip Vue for a week, and the buttons have broken in a little and have become easier. But the buttons on the Grip Vue (Tint) right out of the box are easier to press. Maybe the clearer material is just inherently a little bit softer.
Multimedia
Oct 23, 11:30 PM
And the E207WFP 20" monitor (which seems to be comparable to the 2007FP minus a few bells and whistles (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productcompare.aspx?c=us&category_id=6198&cs=19&l=en&s=dhs&p=320-4688~320-5123~)) is only $289.No the E207WFP 20 is 1650x1050.
I advocate the 2007FP 20 1600x1200 for only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). That extra 150 verticle pixels is very helpful.
I advocate the 2007FP 20 1600x1200 for only $359.20 (http://accessories.us.dell.com/sna/productdetail.aspx?c=us&l=en&s=dhs&cs=19&sku=320-4687). That extra 150 verticle pixels is very helpful.
newdeal
Mar 25, 06:38 PM
It makes me laugh that people are saying bad things about this when the playbook did it it was the best thing ever and the software it was displaying wasn't nearly so advanced
islanders
Dec 28, 08:09 PM
Well here is a link for LCD outselling CRT in both Europe and North America.
http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-6138678.html
http://news.com.com/2100-1041_3-6138678.html
Agaetis Byrjun
Feb 21, 05:30 PM
It's finally all finished. Put the Craftsman tool chest in this weekend. It mostly hold cable and repair tools for guitars.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
The white box on the front right leg of the desk is actually a Belkin remote. I've wired the desk so that when I hit that switch the 3 displays, audio monitors and all USB controllers will turn on.
I hate wires showing so I went to great lengths to hide them.
rezenclowd3
Jan 28, 01:07 PM
I like the idea of a pop-up navigation system!
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
Less chance of theft or break-in
And one more motor/slider mechanism to fail. I will stick with vehicles that don't have fancy shmancy electronics. Besides....its more weight ;-)
ChrisA
Sep 1, 03:09 PM
Going to 23 inches will make the imac even more UNatractive to many people. Now in a few years when you need to upgrade insted of throwing away an expensive 20" LCD screen yu will be throwing away a VERY expensive LCD screen.
What I want is a little box like the Mini but larger that has the iMac parts inside. A full sized disk, 64-bit memron, lots of RAM slots and a good GPU.
What I want is a little box like the Mini but larger that has the iMac parts inside. A full sized disk, 64-bit memron, lots of RAM slots and a good GPU.
Earendil
Nov 28, 10:32 AM
Well, you just made my point better than me. Of the millions of Macs sold, how many are to customers needing correct color and really care about the finer details of the monitor's specs?
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
*snip*
I have both the Dell and the Apple cinema display 20".
*snip*
But who cares? A very small percentage of Apple's market cares or could even tell the difference.
And that percentage shoots up when you take into account only the Pro style Towers. And it's a shame your Cinema display is showing age sooner than I would think it should. Still, in my own experience with color reproduction and accuracy in Photography, the cinema displays I have used have exceeded my Dell 2005. In regular computer use I wouldn't be able to tell them apart (aside from the back light bleed on the Dell).
If Apple has been all about getting "switchers" and trying to persuade Windows users that Apple and OS X is better, than why is Apple ignoring that market with their monitor offering? You said so yourself, these are "PRO" monitors. Because they want you to buy iMacs. That's an extremely limited choice if you ask me. Oh, I can hear the fan boys now, screw you if you don't care about color seperation and the finer details of image quality. Go buy your $hi+ dell and get off of this board.
Do you see any fan boys making posts here? I see some people here that are ignorant of the way monitors work and yet are trying to pass opinions on Apple/Dell/LCD market as gold though.
That's the issue though, currently Apple doesn't sell a consumer computer that either doesn't already come with a monitor, or where you aren't supposed to already have a monitor.
the MacBook and iMac both have screens built in, the MacMini, if you saw any of it's advertisements or presentation, is meant as a direct replacement for a PC box. i.e. bring your own mouse, keyboard and monitor. I as well as another guy have already said this though.
It's a problem, still, I want too want Apple to sell a consumer level monitor. But Apple certainly doesn't have to enter that market if they don't want to. Besides, the market for a cheap 17" monitor is TINY. You're talking Mini owners (who don't already have a monitor) maybe a few laptop owners, and...? G5 owners? If you're plugin a $150 LCD up to a G5 you should be shot :P Unless you are running three at once or something.
Apple sells a consumer mini, but not a consumer monitor? Why not? You all are hammering away at the professional quality of this monitor. But I have both the Dell and the Apple and they look about the same to me. Actually, before Apple updated their monitors the 20" looked terrible next to the Dell. (I have both generations) And are the "Pros" who need that color perfection buying 20" monitors? Probably not. 23" and 30" would be my guess. So why have a high priced 20" display?
Many professionals run Duel 20" screens. In fact I see this setup far more often that a 30" screen.
So all this hupla about color correction is making my point. Apple wants you to buy an iMac and they keep their monitors price high and limit their computer offerings to give you the incentive to buy one.
wow wow wow. You just me on that logic jump. Apple sells some high end systems to Professions in industry that demand at least a certain standard. Apple also sells other computers. Apple Sells monitors that are aiming at (hitting is another matter) those professionals that demand a certain standard. Apple doesn't currently sell any other monitors. How is that proof that Apple is trying to personally screw you out of your cash?
Since that's all they sell they are making a good profit off of them. Don't get me wrong, they are nice computers, beautiful even, but what if I wan't something more flexable? Maybe a little more expandible. My choice is a $600 mini (not too flexable or expandable) or a $2400 Mac Pro. Big Difference. Oh, that $1499 price spot fits nicely with an iMac however. See my point?
Yeah, there is a gap, and I do see it as a problem. No one in the entire thread is disagreeing with that. You ideas on why there is a gap is viewed a little bit more negative than I would, but whatever.
If they lower the price of the 20" any more it will cut into their sales of 20" iMacs. And that is why it's hovering close to $700 and not $200 or $300 cheaper.
Another huge jump in logic based on no facts and stretched assumptions. Do you know what Apple takes home at the end of the day from each monitor sale, each iMac sale, and each Mini sale? Can you provide that data to back up any of your conclusions? It sure would go a long way in getting anyone to side with you on that point. However, until you do, I'm going to say this one more time:
Cinema Display = Pro quality Display (I don't give a hoot if your eyes can't see it, the components alone show it, and that is what cost money to make not your eye sight)
Pro Quality = not cheap, don't go looking for a $200 monitor for pro work.
And for the last time, I'm still waiting for someone to show me a display that matches the Cinemas tech specs and qualifications and also cost downwards in the $400 range that people keep speaking about. Because until someone does, I'm inclined to believe, based on my own looking, that Apple is right with the industry on this one (or close) and all our whining on cost means jack.
So, comfort yourself all you want that you have a "pro" quality monitor. If that makes you feel better parting with $300 then go for it.
In light of that little sarcastc jab, the irony is that you are one of, if not the only user, to have admitted to owning a 20" Cinema display in this thread so far :rolleyes:
[quote]I doubt you could tell the differnce with both monitors sitting side by side. I have both and I can't realy see a $200 - $300 price justification, at least at the low end. Oh, I'm just a poor consumer, not a "pro", so I should go buy my crappy Dell and be happy. Right?
I'll just quote myself on this one...
[QUOTE=Earendil]You seem to be coming at me as if I stand on some high ground, when in fact I own (as stated in my signature) a 20" wide Dell monitor
So just trust me when I say that the difference in my Photographs, and Photo editing on my Dell vs an Apple monitor is different, and a noticeable difference not just in color, but in back lighting and change in color based on viewing angle. When I'm surfing the web I don't notice/care, or playing games, or just about anything else. And since I don't make money on my photos, or do too much printing, I went with the Dell because the price/benefits ratio did not justify the Apple monitor. I wish Apple had provided a consumer level monitor for me to buy, it would go far better with my Powerbook, but they didn't. I'm not going to discount their current line up just because I can't afford it, and I don't think you should discount it just because you don't understand it technically.
But if you had been following the thread you'd know that about me already...
But if Apple really want's to get people to switch in larger numbers they need to offer a little more choice at a competitive price. A nice quality 20" monitor competitvly priced to go with that mini or a mid-range tower. I'm asking Apple to drop their price on their monitors $200 and offer a $1200 - $1500 tower. Is that asking too much?
No, you are asking for two very different things here.
1. You are asking Apple to produce a consumer level monitor that you can afford and falls in line with the market. I think everyone agrees with this idea, whether there is a large enough market for Apple to justify it (only Aple costumers would consider them) is up for debate.
and...
2. You are asking Apple to drop the price on their Pro displays without giving a reason (all your reasons apply to a consumer LCD), nor have you provided a similarly speced display to show that Apple is out of line with it's pricing.
There are large difference between a Mini and a G5. Just because most people wouldn't notice it doesn't mean it isn't there. Just relax and trust me that in two properly functioning displays, Apple's monitors are very good, and imho should never be compared to Apple's displays unless you are trying to convince a consumer (who can't tell the difference) not to buy it and buy an alternative display. I have done this before. Just like you'd never compare a Mini and a G5 unless grandma was thinking about buying a G5 to surf the web with...
~Tyler
MikhailT
Apr 10, 10:35 AM
I don't understand why everyone seems to dislike the "new" iCal so much. Clearly, it was adopted by iPad iOS at first and now by Mac OS X Lion. Nothing new here. Nothing unexpected.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:It doesn't look exactly the same on the iPad and an interface tuned to iOS shouldn't be used in the same away on the desktop. You can be creative with the interface controls and so on but this is too far. The colors are too distracting and much *brighter* than the one used on the iPad.
The problem that I have is that Apple seems to breaking away from their Human Interface Guidelines that every developers on the Macs platform follows. The sooner they do this, the more likely the third party apps are going to not follow it either. If every apps looks completely different, then it's going to be harder to get used to how things work on the Mac platform. Consistency is the number 1 thing that Mac OS X does successfully and if we break away from it, it's going to look ugly overnight.
I don't think people are complaining for the sake of complaining, in this case, they have a valid reason to. Not only is it look completely different, it can be distracting when you're used to all metal theme on OS X and you can't choose to disable this interface.
IMO, it's distracting, ugly and I want an option to turn this off. Otherwise, I'd just wait for a third-party app with a better interface and/or hacks to enable the *Aqua* theme.
I don't remember people disliking/complaining about the iCal look on iPad at all. I tell ya, people complain just for the sake of complaining. What a crowd. :rolleyes:It doesn't look exactly the same on the iPad and an interface tuned to iOS shouldn't be used in the same away on the desktop. You can be creative with the interface controls and so on but this is too far. The colors are too distracting and much *brighter* than the one used on the iPad.
The problem that I have is that Apple seems to breaking away from their Human Interface Guidelines that every developers on the Macs platform follows. The sooner they do this, the more likely the third party apps are going to not follow it either. If every apps looks completely different, then it's going to be harder to get used to how things work on the Mac platform. Consistency is the number 1 thing that Mac OS X does successfully and if we break away from it, it's going to look ugly overnight.
I don't think people are complaining for the sake of complaining, in this case, they have a valid reason to. Not only is it look completely different, it can be distracting when you're used to all metal theme on OS X and you can't choose to disable this interface.
IMO, it's distracting, ugly and I want an option to turn this off. Otherwise, I'd just wait for a third-party app with a better interface and/or hacks to enable the *Aqua* theme.
aliensporebomb
Apr 21, 01:34 PM
Despite the freaked brigade and people wanting to turn this into a huge political argument I think this guy at Reddit had the best thing to say about this:
I went to WWDC last year where the new Core Location system was discussed in great detail. If you went as well, or have the videos, look at the video for session 115, "Using Core Location in iOS". Skip to around 13:45 for the discussion of "Course Cell Positioning" where they discuss the cache in detail.
The purpose of this is offline GPS. Normally, each cell tower has an identifier and Core Location sends that identifier to Apple and asks for the latitude and longitude for that tower. This requires a data connection, and the use of data. Since cell towers don't move, however, it's inefficient to keep going back to Apple for that information so they cache it. Now if a tower appears with the same ID as the cache, tada! you have a cache hit and a faster fix with no data use. Which also means you can get a "course location" (as in rough) if you are near known towers and don't have a data connection.
That's all this is. It's a cache of identifiers (cell and wifi), locations, and their age (it's a cache, after all). Someone made the decision to never clean it out so they would have more and more information about those GPS "assists" (you know, A-GPS) and so they'd use less and less power and data over time for the places you frequent. It's a great idea, technically.
Practically, yes, you can track location over time. The file is readable only by root and you're free to encrypt your backups for now. I'm sure Apple will either encrypt the file or truncate the data in a future update (I would prefer encryption as I think it's technically sound, but I know many will disagree). I'm also sure someone is considering a toggle for the feature or a button to clear the database. Both are great ideas.
This isn't nefarious, this isn't being sent anywhere, and this isn't as bad as everyone is making it. This is a real feature with a major oversight. That's it.
Yes they probably need to encrypt this to keep thieves and insane people from taking it from your phone but it's nothing that other cellular providers aren't doing with their phones, you just can't see it necessarily.
I went to WWDC last year where the new Core Location system was discussed in great detail. If you went as well, or have the videos, look at the video for session 115, "Using Core Location in iOS". Skip to around 13:45 for the discussion of "Course Cell Positioning" where they discuss the cache in detail.
The purpose of this is offline GPS. Normally, each cell tower has an identifier and Core Location sends that identifier to Apple and asks for the latitude and longitude for that tower. This requires a data connection, and the use of data. Since cell towers don't move, however, it's inefficient to keep going back to Apple for that information so they cache it. Now if a tower appears with the same ID as the cache, tada! you have a cache hit and a faster fix with no data use. Which also means you can get a "course location" (as in rough) if you are near known towers and don't have a data connection.
That's all this is. It's a cache of identifiers (cell and wifi), locations, and their age (it's a cache, after all). Someone made the decision to never clean it out so they would have more and more information about those GPS "assists" (you know, A-GPS) and so they'd use less and less power and data over time for the places you frequent. It's a great idea, technically.
Practically, yes, you can track location over time. The file is readable only by root and you're free to encrypt your backups for now. I'm sure Apple will either encrypt the file or truncate the data in a future update (I would prefer encryption as I think it's technically sound, but I know many will disagree). I'm also sure someone is considering a toggle for the feature or a button to clear the database. Both are great ideas.
This isn't nefarious, this isn't being sent anywhere, and this isn't as bad as everyone is making it. This is a real feature with a major oversight. That's it.
Yes they probably need to encrypt this to keep thieves and insane people from taking it from your phone but it's nothing that other cellular providers aren't doing with their phones, you just can't see it necessarily.
Mechcozmo
Jan 10, 09:41 PM
I told you all !!!! $499 headless Mac - here it comes and marketshare will grow...welcome back Apple !!
Sigh... Apple is already back.... and we don't need this petition any longer... and the mini mac has been in development for a long time (1 year plus) so the petition didn't do anything with it.
39 signers in this period of time means it failed, BTW. :rolleyes:
Sigh... Apple is already back.... and we don't need this petition any longer... and the mini mac has been in development for a long time (1 year plus) so the petition didn't do anything with it.
39 signers in this period of time means it failed, BTW. :rolleyes:
AaronMT
Nov 23, 02:52 PM
A month renew of World of Warcraft. Haven't played in three years, and just installed the mac client.
charlituna
May 2, 10:33 PM
TO ALL FANBOYS:
This is better than what we have now.
Life goes on. Live moves forward. Apple is a forward-thinking company.
Deal with it!
The best part is that it is an option. You don't have to use this or Launchpad if you don't want to. The whole Finder thing is still there for all the geeks and such
This is better than what we have now.
Life goes on. Live moves forward. Apple is a forward-thinking company.
Deal with it!
The best part is that it is an option. You don't have to use this or Launchpad if you don't want to. The whole Finder thing is still there for all the geeks and such