spydr
Mar 31, 09:52 PM
Chill people. This is simply an adoption of the iPad calendar which hasn't really raised any objections of this scale before. Now in an attempt to unify the look and feel, whether you like it or not, this move is going to happen.
I for one, asked for this on the very first day I got my iPad � I couldn't wait for when my desktop calendar would look that polished and pretty, but yet with all the features if not more. Glad to know it is coming soon.
I for one, asked for this on the very first day I got my iPad � I couldn't wait for when my desktop calendar would look that polished and pretty, but yet with all the features if not more. Glad to know it is coming soon.
rubberwheels
Apr 17, 11:32 PM
I love the Macbook Air but I would hate it if they released a new one. Especially since this was only out in 10/2010.
Gold89
May 3, 07:47 AM
Looks like a solid update, shouldn't be long before a Mac Mini and Mac Pro update to complete the lineup.
Full of Win
Apr 28, 10:01 AM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
That is Awesome.
Queso
Jul 25, 11:26 AM
What if he is?
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
Then good for him, but if he's that much of a power user, he's looking at a redesign of the PowerMac case, not a mini-tower.
Point is that there ARE lots of people who like to expand their systems.
Yeah, lots of gamers. But they aren't going to buy Macs anyway are they?
To them, iMac is completely unsuitable, and PowerMac is simply too much (too much space, too much technology, too much money, you name it). There have been LOTS of people saying that they would love to see a relatively inexpensive Mac that is expandable. iMac is not that. Neither is PowerMac.
You want a huge selection of models, each one suited to your particular needs? Apple tried the multiple models approach back in the 90s and nearly went bankrupt as a result. Keeping the range small means they have tight control on inventory and can dedicate the Apple Stores to showing what Macs can do. So far it's brought the company a lot of money.
What happens if the screen in the iMac breaks down? The whole computer becomes useless. What if you need faster vid-card? you have to buy a new computer. All-in-one has it's benefits, but it has it's drawbacks, and there are lots of people who do not want those drawbacks.
You may as well throw these criticisms at laptops. However, they sell. Apple mini-towers traditionally don't.
Yes, minitower (for example) has it's drawbacks as well, but there are lots of people who would be willing to accept those drawback for the benefits such a system offers.
But obviously not enough from the studies Apple have conducted, otherwise where is it?
Well good for you. How that helps ME is beyond me.
Just showing how the iMac does have "desirability" for hundreds of thousands of real buyers, something some posters here seem to refute.
Are we using somekind of miniature-desks or something? I have a rather typical desk, and it currently has a Mac Mini, a TFT-screen, old, huge printer that does not work, and it still has plenty of space for mouse, keyboard and other items.
Yeah, I used to have one of those, then I realised how much wasted space it was causing and ditched it for a smaller one. You obviously live in a bigger place than me, but then for me it's location, location, location :)
And that "small metallic box" means that your iMac loses that all-in-one elegance it now has.
I don't care about "all-in-one elegance". I didn't buy an iMac because it matches the curtains. I just want something that takes up minimum space. The iMac does that perfectly.
Some of us would be willing to accept that. A minitower would consume about as much desk-space as two Mac Mini's. That's more than reasonable IMO.
But only SOME of you. Why aren't Apple releasing a mini-tower? Jobs' arrogance or because they don't think it'll sell in enough quantity to justify it? As for two Mac minis, the case would have to be a standard depth to fit standard parts, otherwise we're back in the realm of special Mac versions of hardware.
Let's wait and see what comes out at WWDC. The G5 case had to be enormous for cooling reasons. The MacPro might be a lot smaller, fitting your requirements much closer whilst keeping Apple's range in check.
bluebomberman
Jul 10, 01:31 PM
Maybe that's the way it strikes you, but this isn't the way it strikes those of us who've been using Pages since it came out.
But all of my work is poorly-researched, so maybe that's why I like it.
:rolleyes:
A bit harsh, aren't you? They're supposedly integrating better search features into the next version of Pages precisely to improve the researching component of writing. So it's not like I'm the only one who thinks that Pages needs more to better compare to Word. As it stands, I'll give Pages a shot if I need to do something fancier than writing for MFA workshops.
Plus, I save a couple of bucks.
But all of my work is poorly-researched, so maybe that's why I like it.
:rolleyes:
A bit harsh, aren't you? They're supposedly integrating better search features into the next version of Pages precisely to improve the researching component of writing. So it's not like I'm the only one who thinks that Pages needs more to better compare to Word. As it stands, I'll give Pages a shot if I need to do something fancier than writing for MFA workshops.
Plus, I save a couple of bucks.
chaosbunny
May 2, 04:28 AM
Nice PR stunt for Obama. :rolleyes:
I'm surprised so many people believe this fairy tale.
I'm surprised so many people believe this fairy tale.
jessica.
Sep 14, 09:08 AM
Congrats!
Thanks. Watch for my YouTube� unboxing later. :p
Thanks. Watch for my YouTube� unboxing later. :p
GekkePrutser
Apr 18, 04:32 AM
Any have a guess guess what this might mean for the 11"? Will that have to be even more of a compromise? I'm worried the C2D/320M might be a better option for me if Apple go for Sandy Bridge and have to cut even more corners on the 11" due to even harsher space/energy drain constraints.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
If the CPU option for an 11" bump is only a marginal performance increase (*if* Apple choose to bump this summer), the nVidia GPU seems too good to lose.
It's not a marginal increase. The Sandy Bridge 1.4Ghz ULV (expected to be in the new 11") is 40% faster than the C2D LV 1.86Ghz chip that's currently in the base 13" in some benchmarks.
Blue Velvet
Aug 2, 06:02 AM
No it is not and I dare you to prove me wrong! The majority of the creative class uses pcs period.
Wrong. Of course, sequestered in your teaching post-graduate architectural world you may not see the wood for the trees and in the readily-accepted use of the word, 'creatives' do not include those who use AutoCAD.
The design, print, packaging, promo, photographic and fashion industry is overwhelmingly Mac-based.
Saying 'period' at the end of a sentence doesn't make it correct. Nor does one campus switching to PCs make it a summer. ;)
Wrong. Of course, sequestered in your teaching post-graduate architectural world you may not see the wood for the trees and in the readily-accepted use of the word, 'creatives' do not include those who use AutoCAD.
The design, print, packaging, promo, photographic and fashion industry is overwhelmingly Mac-based.
Saying 'period' at the end of a sentence doesn't make it correct. Nor does one campus switching to PCs make it a summer. ;)
Yaboze
Apr 14, 09:13 PM
Well, ATT iP4 here, I can confirm 3rd party apps pop open then animate when opening after that.
All Apple core apps open with animation on the first shot.
Animations seem better than .1 and .2, but not totally smooth.
All Apple core apps open with animation on the first shot.
Animations seem better than .1 and .2, but not totally smooth.
(marc)
Apr 24, 04:58 PM
[...]
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
[...]
People get beat up for no reason all the time. It doesn't have to do anything with bullying or the victim being a transgender. From what the victim said, the attackers used a standard "excuse" to start a fight. ("Why are you talking to my man?", if I understood correctly.)
You think these girls decided to attack this girl out of love? No, they were bullies who picked out a vulnerable target they felt they could take.
[...]
People get beat up for no reason all the time. It doesn't have to do anything with bullying or the victim being a transgender. From what the victim said, the attackers used a standard "excuse" to start a fight. ("Why are you talking to my man?", if I understood correctly.)
dXTC
Dec 30, 08:33 AM
A wild Snorlax appears....
Yeah, I've heard that before. Apparently, she's become somewhat of a cliche' in Photoshop contests on Fark.com.
Yeah, I've heard that before. Apparently, she's become somewhat of a cliche' in Photoshop contests on Fark.com.
Full of Win
Apr 28, 10:01 AM
So the iPhone went from being pummeled by Android to now just being badly beaten.
That is Awesome.
That is Awesome.
FloatingBones
Nov 25, 12:34 AM
For the last time, STOP SPEAKING FOR OTHER PEOPLE!!! You have NO right what-so-ever to speak for anyone but yourself and yet you continue to state that EVER SINGLE iOS USER hates Flash and is glad to be rid of it and yet this Skyfire app proves just the opposite.
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
What I said: Users of the 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash plugins is completely true. There are no Flash plugins for this device. Nobody can run a shred of Flash content in their browser on this device.
No amount of nonsensical shouting will change the facts.
You have every right to give your opinion on the matter, but it is your opinion, not the opinion of every single iOS user in existence.
But owners of those 120M+ iOS devices are doing just fine without Flash. Nobody forced them to buy those devices. If they were somehow "disappointed" because there are no Flash plugins available, nobody prevented them from returning them or reselling them.
That is NOT a shortcoming of Flash dude.
Also incorrect. There are huge shortcomings of Flash, and you've never addressed them.
You've never addressed the identity-leaking of Flash cookies: Flash doesn't honor the cookie privacy settings of the browser. More than half of the top 100 websites are now using Flash cookies to track users and store information about them. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt) Do you actually like the fact that those sites do an end-run around the cookie privacy settings by using Flash? I can't find a single rational person that likes the identity-leaking.
You've never addressed the quirkiness that Flash brings to the browser UI. On my Mac, scrolling works differently when my mouse is over a Flash region. Certain keyboard shortcuts cease to work. Text that appears in a Flash window is not searchable with the browser's text-finding feature. My Mac doesn't behave like a Mac inside of a Flash window.
The engineering choice made for iOS is simplicity. Layering Flash on top of the browser would compromise that simplicity. Click-to-flash semantics would add yet another layer of clutter and obfuscation to the UI.
You've never addressed Adobe's inability to deal competently to secure their software. Security experts believe that Adobe is going to surpass Microsoft as the #1 target for security attacks. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-231.htm) Besides Flash, Adobe Reader is a vector for zero day bugs (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt). I really don't know how you do that: it's a PDF reader! The bugs have been around in Adobe Reader for years and Adobe still hasn't fixed them.
If Apple enabled Flash in iOS Safari, they would be farming out the correct operation of their iOS browser to a company that has proven to be one of the least competent companies in dealing with malware attacks. Noted security expert Steve Gibson mocks their cluelessness:
"[Adobe:] how is that quarterly update cycle going for you?" (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-273.txt)
I have yet to find a single Flash enthusiast who can address those issues. I'm hardly surprised that you can't address them, either.
That is a shortcoming of Steve Jobs' choosing.
Nonsense. They are engineering and design choices. If Apple made bad engineering and design choices, they would never have sold 120M+ of these devices.
If you think they are a "shortcoming": there are simple solutions. Don't buy an iOS device. If you did buy one, sell it. Or maybe you can see if it will blend (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAl28d6tbko).
One thing is certain: Apple will not compromise their iOS browser with Flash, and complaining about that is rather silly.
Even if Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete, that doesn't mean people don't want to be able to access the entire Web in the here and now.
Adobe Flash is on the road to becoming obsolete. Even Adobe acknowledges the fact (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999).
Between the 120M+ iOS devices, the click-to-flash plugins disable Flash downloads on Windows, Mac OS X and Linux machines, and Adobe's new Flash-to-HTML5 conversion tools (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1039999), the abandonment of Flash will continue to accelerate.
You just don't seem to comprehend that.
You are correct. Flash is a legacy technology, and its day has passed.
You seem to have this deep seated hatred of Flash
There are fundamental failings in both the design and deployment of Flash. I listed three of those earlier in my reply.
The thing that got my attention was when I realized that Flash was maintaining its own set of cookies and that those cookies did not honor the privacy settings of my browser. I then learned about click-to-flash plugins to minimize my exposure to Flash. The shocking thing to me was how much disabling Flash improved the browsing experience: faster page loads, less flashing advertisements, and far less CPU usage.
and I can tell that if Steve had said "I LOVE Flash" instead you would almost undoubtedly be here fighting against HTML5 and for Flash.
You imply that I blindly agree with Apple's (and Jobs's) decisions. That is not the case.
I strongly disagree with Apple's decision to prevent Hypermac from selling external batteries for Mac computers (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1032695). Hypermac makes a quality product, and they are filling a niche that Apple ignores. Magsafe is a wonderful technology, but they should be licensing this tech to third-party vendors. I fondly hope that Apple addresses this deficiency in their strategy and product accessories soon.
If you search, you can find where I commented on this in the public record weeks ago.
Yes, I honestly believe that. You have no vested interest in either one. You're just being Steve's doormat.
Now you know better.
I see no reason why ANYONE should have to convert to HTML5.
Too many laptop users are tired of the CPU loading and battery suck of Flash apps.
Too many users don't like that Flash alters the UI inside of the browsers: altered scrolling behavior, keyboard shortcuts that don't work in Flash, text searches that don't work with text in a Flash app.
Too many privacy advocates are bothered that Flash maintains a separate set of cookies and those cookies do not honor the privacy settings of the browser. Commercial websites are using those Flash cookies to track users. (http://www.grc.com/sn/sn-209.txt)
Too many security advocates are wary of using Adobe products because of Adobe's poor track record against security attacks.
Even if all those four large concerns were addressed, websites have to deal with the growing number of users that use Flash-blocking plugins. Advertisers that deliver their ads with Flash have no guarantee that users will allow those Flash apps to be downloaded and run on their machines.
Those are the reasons why Flash's viability for delivering web content is in decline. Even if you don't see the reasons, Adobe does (http://blogs.adobe.com/jnack/2010/10/adobe-demos-flash-to-html5-conversion-tool.html).
Rodimus Prime
Oct 1, 02:28 PM
All emergency calls are placed on a separate priority line/ or are given preference over all other calls at any point in time.
On top of that they will grab the tower with the best signal no matter what carrier it is on.
If you place a 911 call from an ATT phone and T-Mobile has a better tower in the area then you can sure as hell bet that the phone will be going to that tower.
emergency mode on a phone is very different than a normal call. It has the power to kick others off the line and you are given more dedicated bandwithe for the phone.
On top of that they will grab the tower with the best signal no matter what carrier it is on.
If you place a 911 call from an ATT phone and T-Mobile has a better tower in the area then you can sure as hell bet that the phone will be going to that tower.
emergency mode on a phone is very different than a normal call. It has the power to kick others off the line and you are given more dedicated bandwithe for the phone.
darkplanets
Mar 4, 10:06 AM
So physiological and psychological dependence don't exist then, it's all just a matter of willpower and choice?
They undoubtedly exist, as they're based on biochemical pathways. You can't necessarily change that, at least easily. I don't think that's the point hes trying to make, however, as he does have a point in the willpower effect-- it's basically the same as the placebo effect; your belief in something can have a positive chemical effect upon your bodies pathways. In the case of drug users, this can be seen in the "bottoming out" effect-- the addiction pathway doesn't suddenly flip, in fact in almost all cases it always remains permanently on, rather it's the person and their willpower who decides that they've had enough.
The human mind is an amazing thing, especially in its ability to either alter or deal with modified pathways caused by external stress factors.
They undoubtedly exist, as they're based on biochemical pathways. You can't necessarily change that, at least easily. I don't think that's the point hes trying to make, however, as he does have a point in the willpower effect-- it's basically the same as the placebo effect; your belief in something can have a positive chemical effect upon your bodies pathways. In the case of drug users, this can be seen in the "bottoming out" effect-- the addiction pathway doesn't suddenly flip, in fact in almost all cases it always remains permanently on, rather it's the person and their willpower who decides that they've had enough.
The human mind is an amazing thing, especially in its ability to either alter or deal with modified pathways caused by external stress factors.
aswitcher
Oct 24, 08:19 AM
FW800 on both sizes.
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
802.11n pending firmware upgrade...
200GB HDD (at 4200rpm) available.
Good initial RAM 1GB on lower models, 2GB on high end ones.
Everything else seems pretty much the same.
802.11n pending firmware upgrade...
8CoreWhore
Apr 28, 05:06 PM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
I thought it was thicker after I just bought... Guess I was right! but it fits in all the cases I have just fine. The white bumper plus the white iPhone looks AMAZING
Pic please. :D
I thought it was thicker after I just bought... Guess I was right! but it fits in all the cases I have just fine. The white bumper plus the white iPhone looks AMAZING
Pic please. :D
GregAndonian
Apr 15, 03:38 AM
Ok, here's my theory. I think Apple's "No Blu-ray" stance may play a role here... Perhaps.
The thing I really don't like about Blu-ray being washed away by streaming and downloads is that right now there's no good way for people to share their own videos with people in a way that they'll be able to watch them on the TV in high quality, similar to how they'd watch a Netflix film. YouTube is great if you watch it on a computer, but on a TV device it's not full quality and it's hard to find things.
This is one of the key things I'm waiting for before I embrace the idea of streaming and downloads becoming the norm. Unlike Blu-ray, Netflix streaming doesn't have a recordable format. I was thinking before Apple could be a great candidate to fill this void.
With the new datacenter and the impending FCP X release, the pieces are coming together. Next they release a new version of the apple TV which, among other things, allows users to watch videos that they and others have uploaded- on the TV, in high quality.
THAT would be really cool. I still love Blu-ray. But it would be really sweet being able to upload a short film or video that I made and know that people will be able to watch it on their ix.Mac.MarketingName... :D
The thing I really don't like about Blu-ray being washed away by streaming and downloads is that right now there's no good way for people to share their own videos with people in a way that they'll be able to watch them on the TV in high quality, similar to how they'd watch a Netflix film. YouTube is great if you watch it on a computer, but on a TV device it's not full quality and it's hard to find things.
This is one of the key things I'm waiting for before I embrace the idea of streaming and downloads becoming the norm. Unlike Blu-ray, Netflix streaming doesn't have a recordable format. I was thinking before Apple could be a great candidate to fill this void.
With the new datacenter and the impending FCP X release, the pieces are coming together. Next they release a new version of the apple TV which, among other things, allows users to watch videos that they and others have uploaded- on the TV, in high quality.
THAT would be really cool. I still love Blu-ray. But it would be really sweet being able to upload a short film or video that I made and know that people will be able to watch it on their ix.Mac.MarketingName... :D
Consultant
Apr 28, 10:08 AM
Of course, because verizon can no longer tell people to buy the crappy knockoff called Android when people ask for the iPhone, now they have the real iPhone.
TheUndertow
Apr 17, 11:14 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_1 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8G4 Safari/6533.18.5)
I am going with either universal apps for iOS and Mac or appletv. Nothing else makes sense.
Wishing it was the :apple: Console that I have in my head, but that may be a little further out.
I am going with either universal apps for iOS and Mac or appletv. Nothing else makes sense.
Wishing it was the :apple: Console that I have in my head, but that may be a little further out.
iFiend
May 4, 12:41 PM
A sales rep reply is now how low the credibility standards have fallen?
While you are collecting more hard data like this, I'll be prepping my Black card for the purchase of a pair of new iPhone 5s in June.
Awesome card-name-dropping, dude. I am so impressed :rolleyes:
While you are collecting more hard data like this, I'll be prepping my Black card for the purchase of a pair of new iPhone 5s in June.
Awesome card-name-dropping, dude. I am so impressed :rolleyes:
Macaroony
Mar 9, 01:38 AM
I would like to see them pull off a change of actor for once, without changing the character. I think it's an insult to the audience's intelligence that networks think we can't accept someone else in the role. They always go for the knee-jerk reaction, which is to kill off the character. Give us some credit, and a chance for another actor to make the role his own. It's not like it's unheard of. How many James Bonds have there been??
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.
I'm sorry, but this never works. At some point, in every show that did the that it becomes some kind of inside joke on and off camera. I'm reminded of the 200th episode of Stargate: SG-1, where upon a ridiculous parody of the show one of the characters says:
"Never underestimate your audience. They're generally sensitive, intelligent people who respond positively to quality entertainment."
This on a sci-fi show with enough technobabble to keep you busy arguing with other viewers about the authenticity of the in-show's reality.
For movies it's different because each one is a narrative of it's own. You can't can't compare Sean Connery with Pierce Brosnan as you can't compare Never Say Never with Tomorrow Never Dies because both movies are done in their individual way.
On a television series, you have a continuous narrative that can change its direction, but as soon as you change major plot points or dare switch the main actors with new ones, that's a plain insult to the audience who watched from the start.