Felix_the_Mac
Jul 10, 10:35 AM
I hope they build in support for ODF and stop giving support to MS Open XML.
till
Apr 14, 09:31 AM
The fact that it's showing up on existing apps with no secret changes is a bit odd.
That would seem to rule out anything that involves an Intel processor. So Apple TV, then? Or nothing.
That would seem to rule out anything that involves an Intel processor. So Apple TV, then? Or nothing.
satkin2
Apr 1, 02:55 AM
No having a Lion preview I can't say for sure, but I would imagine this will look odd if windowed along side other windows with a different UI. However the push from Apple appears to be for full screen apps. You'd simply switch your app and the whole screen shows what your working on.
In full screen mode I can see how this iCal UI would work, it will be like having your whole screen as a calendar. I can only really see an issue when working with side by side windows. No matter how much Apple push thier ideas, some people will prefer to work this way.
To be honest I couldn't care what it looks like. Its the abilities of the programme that matter to me. If there are new features introduced that make iCal a better programme then great. The UI is ultimately just superficial to the abilities the programme offers the user.
In full screen mode I can see how this iCal UI would work, it will be like having your whole screen as a calendar. I can only really see an issue when working with side by side windows. No matter how much Apple push thier ideas, some people will prefer to work this way.
To be honest I couldn't care what it looks like. Its the abilities of the programme that matter to me. If there are new features introduced that make iCal a better programme then great. The UI is ultimately just superficial to the abilities the programme offers the user.
PopCulture
Feb 15, 09:22 AM
When will this drama end? Ugh! He needs to clean it up and head back to work.
more...
alexf
Oct 18, 04:53 PM
This quarter, Macs accounted for $2.213 billion in revenue. iPods accounted for $1.559 billion, plus another $452 million in music-related revenue, for a total of $2.011 billion. So, even without counting Mac peripherals and software, music revenue was less than Mac revenue.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
Got it, thanks. Makes sense now that I read the PDF on Apple's site.
Last quarter, Mac revenue was $1.866 billion, while iPods sold $1.497 billion, plus another $457 million in other music-related revenue, for a total of $1.954 billion for the music end.
Got it, thanks. Makes sense now that I read the PDF on Apple's site.
andrewbecks
May 3, 08:45 AM
Any idea when these new iMacs will begin showing up at Amazon or Best Buy? Just curious if they're usually available immediately after they are released or a few days later.
more...
res1233
Apr 13, 10:45 PM
I'm not sure why we even need an iPhone 5.
The iPhone 4 is a great form factor. It does the job. At most what it needs is a spec jump (64GB, and maybe clock the CPU faster) and that should hold people over for another year.
I mean, before we had:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3Gs (pretty much the same form factor but faster CPU)
iPhone 4
I suspect we may get an iPhone 4 plus or something like that.
Also, do you people really need a new phone every year? I had my Treo 650 for nearly four years. The only reason I only kept my Palm Pre for less than a year was that it started having hardware problems.
This makes me sad. The palm pre part. It was a great phone, but unfortunately its hardware was terrible. It may have been to palm what the iPod was to Apple if only they hadn't slacked in that area. Quite a shame...
The iPhone 4 is a great form factor. It does the job. At most what it needs is a spec jump (64GB, and maybe clock the CPU faster) and that should hold people over for another year.
I mean, before we had:
iPhone
iPhone 3G
iPhone 3Gs (pretty much the same form factor but faster CPU)
iPhone 4
I suspect we may get an iPhone 4 plus or something like that.
Also, do you people really need a new phone every year? I had my Treo 650 for nearly four years. The only reason I only kept my Palm Pre for less than a year was that it started having hardware problems.
This makes me sad. The palm pre part. It was a great phone, but unfortunately its hardware was terrible. It may have been to palm what the iPod was to Apple if only they hadn't slacked in that area. Quite a shame...
jameselson
May 3, 07:55 AM
It was possible to use the previous 27" as an external display for a MacBook. Can't see any mention of that after a brief scan, and it's a deal-breaker for me. Anyone spot such a feature?
more...
Sad Keanu Reeves in a Helmet
Sad Keanu Reeves triste
more...
Keanu Reeves
They took the sad-looking
more...
Keanu barely knows of the
Sad Keanu Reeves: The original
more...
Keanu Reeves (Or His Reps)
Video: Keanu Reeves Discusses
more...
Tagged: keanu reeves, sad
Obligatory Sad Keanu Shop of
Chara Hits a Sad Keanu Reeves
more...
Icaras
Apr 26, 12:33 PM
I don't know about other countries, but I've noticed so many people in America just expect almost everything to be free these days.
I mean, seriously? It's getting a little tiresome.
I mean, seriously? It's getting a little tiresome.
Rodimus Prime
Apr 29, 02:57 PM
can anyone tell me why this market is so important? even at .99 cents a song the margins for the retailer can't be that much.
well per song not much but it adds up fast. Even if Amazon and Apple only bring in 10-15 cents per song at .99 cents per song. That adds up fast.
Between Amazon and Apple I like Amazon better. Plus I get like 10 bucks a year in free song from Amazon for text books I buy threw them. It is a nice bonus and I can promise you doing that little give away has pushed me to buy more text books from Amazon proving they are the same price as lets say B&N or the campus book store but often times Amazon is the cheapest and I am running on my free Amazon Prime for student member ship 2 day shipping to boot.
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
depends on the song what Apple and Amazon pays.
But as for the explain why Amazon would get a lower price. Record company hate the control Apple has and they are trying to break it and chances are Amazon has other options for those same record company to sell products threw them. like CD and if they owned or own other companies that sell complete different products like Sony which sells TV, dvd players ect.
well per song not much but it adds up fast. Even if Amazon and Apple only bring in 10-15 cents per song at .99 cents per song. That adds up fast.
Between Amazon and Apple I like Amazon better. Plus I get like 10 bucks a year in free song from Amazon for text books I buy threw them. It is a nice bonus and I can promise you doing that little give away has pushed me to buy more text books from Amazon proving they are the same price as lets say B&N or the campus book store but often times Amazon is the cheapest and I am running on my free Amazon Prime for student member ship 2 day shipping to boot.
Apple pays 70% straight to the record companies, which would be $0.90. If Amazon pays the same, then they have $0.21 loss before they even start. Or Amazon gets different prices than Apple, which would need some explaining.
depends on the song what Apple and Amazon pays.
But as for the explain why Amazon would get a lower price. Record company hate the control Apple has and they are trying to break it and chances are Amazon has other options for those same record company to sell products threw them. like CD and if they owned or own other companies that sell complete different products like Sony which sells TV, dvd players ect.
more...
koruki
Jul 25, 04:39 PM
Next time i wanna buy a $1000 app I'll find an eleven year old to download it so I can claim the money back from Apple.
"There's an eleven year-old for that"
"There's an eleven year-old for that"
peapody
Jan 26, 11:03 AM
@jessica
no big deal! You don't have to apologize! Who cares?! I just didn't get to sending your reply (phone call with my residency director)...I replied but then you send the above message - don't jump so quickly. :o
no big deal! You don't have to apologize! Who cares?! I just didn't get to sending your reply (phone call with my residency director)...I replied but then you send the above message - don't jump so quickly. :o
more...
Cigsm
Apr 30, 07:41 PM
You can't beat it because it's a pirate site. NONE of the money from the site goes to the artists, songwriters, producers, labels, etc.
There's a reason it's based out of Russia. So I hope you're happy knowing your essentially buying stolen property.
I don't buy from either of these any more after being introduced to Gomusicnow.com (or any of the other 25 similar sites). 9 cents per song, or ~$.80-$1.5 per ALBUM. Quality 320 for most newer albums and 220-300 for older. Can't beat it.
There's a reason it's based out of Russia. So I hope you're happy knowing your essentially buying stolen property.
I don't buy from either of these any more after being introduced to Gomusicnow.com (or any of the other 25 similar sites). 9 cents per song, or ~$.80-$1.5 per ALBUM. Quality 320 for most newer albums and 220-300 for older. Can't beat it.
Ivan P
Apr 29, 07:24 AM
The strangest part for me is, that his white iPhone is made of plastic instead of glass - maybe he should buy it at the Apple Store and not on the streets, Mr. "I can measure the thickness by hand, but not detect that it's fricken glass."
They're not talking about the glass screens at all - they're referring to the material on either side of the stainless steel band on the side of the phone (that holds the glass in place). It is most certainly some form of plastic or rubber.
They're not talking about the glass screens at all - they're referring to the material on either side of the stainless steel band on the side of the phone (that holds the glass in place). It is most certainly some form of plastic or rubber.
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.
tigress666
Apr 22, 05:30 PM
Ugly, unsymmetrical, having a bit of a bezel actually is good for appearances.
And think of this, you don't always hold your phone vertical like that (it still looks ugly unsymmetrical vertical), for many things you are holding it horizontal. That would drive me buggy to have it that lopsided when using it horizontal just cause how ugly and unsymmetrical it would be.
As for the gesture button? Don't think so. That would be awkward to try to do those gestures in that smaller area.
Not to mention I am pretty sure what made the interface for the iPhone so popular and Apple's whole philosophy is that it was very intuitive how you operated it. When you want to change screens you flick the screen like you are pushing the screen you don't want to the side to reveal the screen you want. Not so intuitive like that to tell people to learn gestures on a small area where they aren't visually reminded of what they are doing.
And think of this, you don't always hold your phone vertical like that (it still looks ugly unsymmetrical vertical), for many things you are holding it horizontal. That would drive me buggy to have it that lopsided when using it horizontal just cause how ugly and unsymmetrical it would be.
As for the gesture button? Don't think so. That would be awkward to try to do those gestures in that smaller area.
Not to mention I am pretty sure what made the interface for the iPhone so popular and Apple's whole philosophy is that it was very intuitive how you operated it. When you want to change screens you flick the screen like you are pushing the screen you don't want to the side to reveal the screen you want. Not so intuitive like that to tell people to learn gestures on a small area where they aren't visually reminded of what they are doing.
more...
onthecouchagain
Apr 24, 12:30 AM
No one asks what happens to Tmobile if the merger doesn't go through. Do they just continue along their merry way with the nice 3 million bonus from ATT? What will Deushe Telekom do with them if ATT merge doesn't go through? Go to the next bidder? Or just continue being the "4th" network provider?
mrblah
Jul 27, 04:13 PM
Mr Blah, your name seems to be appropriate. No one looks at a tower and says, "Hey, that looks like a really innovative computer." However, how many people think that (maybe not in those exact words, but the idea) about the iMac? I'd venture to guess a lot more than ever thought that about a Dell. That's why Apple's viewed as the leader in the computer industry even by a lot of people who don't have or even want Macs. If Apple sacrificed that for the sake of perceived benefit on the part of the same people that go for Dells because they're "tools", they're not going to gain anything. Apple survives and flourishes by being the technology leaders, not by copying overused designs like towers.
Well go and tell that to Dell and their massive market share and we'll see if they take you seriously and change their marketing strategy. Theres ideology and then theres reality, I suggest you take a trip into reality. People may think Apple is innovative but so what? Most people buy whats cheap, not whats innovative, and since Dell isnt innovative in anything they do they can afford to be cheap. We have solid proof that innovation doesnt sell as well as affordability, what is there to argue about exactly? I think Apple is perfectly fine with having such a tiny market share especially since iPod is keeping them afloat (how many billions does Jobs need? Hes probably in no rush to make mroe money), but if Apple fans expect Apple to try and get more market share then they should expect them to lower their prices and offer things like Dell.
Well go and tell that to Dell and their massive market share and we'll see if they take you seriously and change their marketing strategy. Theres ideology and then theres reality, I suggest you take a trip into reality. People may think Apple is innovative but so what? Most people buy whats cheap, not whats innovative, and since Dell isnt innovative in anything they do they can afford to be cheap. We have solid proof that innovation doesnt sell as well as affordability, what is there to argue about exactly? I think Apple is perfectly fine with having such a tiny market share especially since iPod is keeping them afloat (how many billions does Jobs need? Hes probably in no rush to make mroe money), but if Apple fans expect Apple to try and get more market share then they should expect them to lower their prices and offer things like Dell.
CorvusCamenarum
May 2, 02:30 AM
It turns out that this luxury, customized security hideaway where they caught him was only built five years ago (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/us-binladen-compound-idUSTRE7411NX20110502).
Who wants to take bets that the Pakistani government knew where he was all along and has been playing us for years, taking over $50 billion (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/us-binladen-compound-idUSTRE7411NX20110502) from us in aid (best numbers I could find) while pretending to help track him down?
Screw you, Pakistan.
Who wants to take bets that the Pakistani government knew where he was all along and has been playing us for years, taking over $50 billion (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/02/us-binladen-compound-idUSTRE7411NX20110502) from us in aid (best numbers I could find) while pretending to help track him down?
Screw you, Pakistan.
CalBoy
Apr 13, 08:20 PM
How reliable has Bloomberg been in the past? If they have a good track record, then this could actually be the first good sign that the iPhone 5 is delayed.
However, the article cites a random Toronto "analyst" as the basis for the delayed 5, and a tweet as the basis for the white version coming soon (in addition to two supposed informants).
I'm still convinced that Apple has done a good job of tightening up it's leaks this year, and we're seeing desperation from the tech sphere for any news. Does anyone remember the extremely crazy rumors from earlier this year? I have a feeling lots of plugs were leaked at that time, and this could be Apple testing security prior to WWDC.
However, the article cites a random Toronto "analyst" as the basis for the delayed 5, and a tweet as the basis for the white version coming soon (in addition to two supposed informants).
I'm still convinced that Apple has done a good job of tightening up it's leaks this year, and we're seeing desperation from the tech sphere for any news. Does anyone remember the extremely crazy rumors from earlier this year? I have a feeling lots of plugs were leaked at that time, and this could be Apple testing security prior to WWDC.
Brien
Mar 11, 02:26 PM
Brea Mall update:
Two employees came by about 10 minutes ago. They were counting the line, I am #204. line is at ~250-300, and they cannot guarantee stock for anyone just now getting here. For those who do come, I'm wearing a vintage Apple Mission Impossible shirt and am across from red robin.
Two employees came by about 10 minutes ago. They were counting the line, I am #204. line is at ~250-300, and they cannot guarantee stock for anyone just now getting here. For those who do come, I'm wearing a vintage Apple Mission Impossible shirt and am across from red robin.
jettredmont
Oct 23, 10:42 AM
just to clear up the confusion, is this a legal or technical restriction? Can you still do this with the basic edition technically, but illegally. Or are there technical restrictions being applied?
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
No one will know that until they try installing Windows on a VM.
And, yes, the detection of a VM is simple, given a handful of VM vendors: just look for the VM "hardware" signatures they use. On activation, if any matching hardware is found, pop up a dialog stating "This license of Windows is not applicable to a virtual machine, such as <Parallels or VMWare or Virtual PC>. Activation failed. Please see www.microsoft.com/suckyoudry to enhance your license to allow activation on this virtual machine."
That is precisely what Activation is for: detecting invalid hardware (usually, hardware on which this copy of Windows was not activated, but in thi case also VM hardware) and stopping full use of the product on it. We can't say for certain that they will do this until it happens or someone from MS breaks the code of silence regarding this issue. But they certainly have the means to do it.
scmacdaddy
Mar 17, 04:47 PM
2 White Ipads 16GB! :apple:
Had fun in line too.
Waited from 7 AM.
Which store? I'm thinking about getting in line at 7 tomorrow either spectrum or fashion island.
Had fun in line too.
Waited from 7 AM.
Which store? I'm thinking about getting in line at 7 tomorrow either spectrum or fashion island.
Earendil
Mar 31, 12:13 PM
I'd prefer a clean modern OS with usability first and foremost.
Who says they haven't? Maybe the iCal developers are so solidly done that they are dinking around with skins now?
And out of curiousity, what does a "modern OS" look like anyway? Is there some standard or generally accepted look for that? Or perhaps by "modern" you mean "not done before" ? I'm honestly curious about the answer to this.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy�
Eye candy that gets in the way of functional is stupid. Otherwise, as long as I can modify it, I couldn't care less.
Who says they haven't? Maybe the iCal developers are so solidly done that they are dinking around with skins now?
And out of curiousity, what does a "modern OS" look like anyway? Is there some standard or generally accepted look for that? Or perhaps by "modern" you mean "not done before" ? I'm honestly curious about the answer to this.
Screw the gratuitous eyecandy�
Eye candy that gets in the way of functional is stupid. Otherwise, as long as I can modify it, I couldn't care less.
ليست هناك تعليقات:
إرسال تعليق