talmy
Feb 24, 09:44 AM
It's a big deal for me (if it is truly a replacement for Snow Leopard Server). Paying $500 for Lion Server to run on a Mac mini that only cost $850 to begin with is a bit steep! Now I can just get the family pack Lion and it is covered.
MacNut
Apr 30, 10:45 PM
The correspondents dinner was tonight and Trump got destroyed. He did not look happy.:p
rhett7660
Apr 1, 08:48 AM
Wow... short sighted on the networks part. I'm surprised.... no difference than just having another TV in your house, just on your Tablet. It would be interesting to know more about their motivation behind this... maybe they want to go direct? In other words, maybe Discovery and the other channels want to sell direct subscriptions and not go through channel partners like Time Warner?
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
This is probably why they WON'T do this. I am with you. I wish I could scrap 90% of the channels I get and just get that I watch. Lower my bill by a few bucks, I would be a happy camper. But I don't see that happening anytime soon thou. Who knows though. Maybe this is the beginning!!
If that is the case... I smell disaster for the networks. Who wants to buy individual channels for their computers, iPads or other devices? Not me? It would have to be dirt cheap.
Hummm.... thinking about it... maybe it's not so dumb? If each channel was $.99 and I could pick Ala-carte who I wanted, I know my Cable bill would go from $40 per-month to less than $10. Maybe they are onto something thinking about it?
This is probably why they WON'T do this. I am with you. I wish I could scrap 90% of the channels I get and just get that I watch. Lower my bill by a few bucks, I would be a happy camper. But I don't see that happening anytime soon thou. Who knows though. Maybe this is the beginning!!
seashellz
Apr 5, 04:31 PM
Well, this is confusing.
Last year Macrumors posters told me in no uncertain terms that CR is always wrong.
So how am I supposed to take this news?
uh....use your own brain......lol a no brainer
Last year Macrumors posters told me in no uncertain terms that CR is always wrong.
So how am I supposed to take this news?
uh....use your own brain......lol a no brainer
more...
ftaok
Apr 1, 02:01 PM
I'd gladly pay $5 per channel knowing those channels are supported and any funding is stripped from the others. That'd half my monthly bill, and $5 a channel is more than fair, right?Then perhaps you'd be one of the ones that would end up paying less. However, if you think the channels you keep would remain unchanged, I think you'd be disappointed. Get ready for sitcoms, reality shows, and political pundits 24/7.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
If the others can't appeal to their subscribers, bye bye crap channels.Just because a channel can't garner enough subscribers doesn't mean it's crap. Look at the stuff these days that get the ratings. This is what cable TV may be reduced to if forced to go ALC.
But PS - All of the above is utterly irrelevant. These cable channels are ADVERTISEMENT supported, like newspapers, NOT subscription supported.... so they'd fail because they could no longer sell false numbers of "potential viewers" anymore, so they'd fail because they suck, not because they don't make money from subscribers.You're right that it's irrelevant, but not because of where the money comes from. It's irrelevant because it won't happen any time soon. There's no support for ALC from any group other than consumers. The Democrats don't want ALC because it will hurt diversity in programming. The Republicans don't want ALC because they see it as interfering with a free market. The cable companies don't want ALC because it involves change and may hurt their bottom line. The networks don't want ALC because it would mean fewer channels/less profits. People who work in the TV industry don't want ALC because they may lose their jobs.
Yeah because being hard headed and refusing to change with the times has done so well for us as a country (Car Industry, housing market, manufacturing process, infrastructure improvements, etc)....I'm not saying that ALC is bad; some days, I'm on your side. I flip flop on this all the time because there are such goodsides and downsides to this. Change can be good, but there are always unintended consequences to change. In the end, it's just TV, so there's nothing earth shattering. Just good, honest debate.
BTW, this has gotten way off topic. Sorry.
strwrsfrk
Apr 28, 02:27 PM
seriously just shut ur pretty faces with the tired backlit keyboard anthem. this is like the least desirable feature esp since it has a direct impact on battery life.
Backlit keyboard is a nice aesthetic feature for many. It's also extremely useful for those of us who type while looking at the keyboard and tend to do a lot of traveling at night/underground. Plus, since all iterations of the keyboard have user-controlled brightness levels, the argument against it as a power sink fail. In my opinion, and as someone who really wants a backlit keyboard, the best argument against the feature is that it has the potential to increase the price to maintain such a large margin.
The TDP of the C2D and 320M combined is about 25W, I believe. The i5 2357m is a 1.4GHz proc with the HD3000 core and a TDP of 18W. By including this as the base processor, the battery life would inherently improve (without increasing the size of the battery), but a little bit of internal space would open up where the 320M was. This could be used for an SDHC card on the 11", or increased battery, or maybe an additional USB port. My wish would be to bump the base speed of the i5 up to 1.6GHz or even 1.8GHz and maintain a TDP of 25W.
A larger screen and/or thinner bezel would be nice, but I'd settle for coloring the darn thing black (without the weight of the glass over the screen). The bezel on my MacBook Pro is fantastic in comparison; I find the silver distracting.
A 2lb 11" Air with an i5 proc at 1.8GHz, a 256GB SSD, backlighting, 8+ hour battery-life, and a starting price of $100 less (dream on, I know), and there is no way I could keep myself from buying one.
Backlit keyboard is a nice aesthetic feature for many. It's also extremely useful for those of us who type while looking at the keyboard and tend to do a lot of traveling at night/underground. Plus, since all iterations of the keyboard have user-controlled brightness levels, the argument against it as a power sink fail. In my opinion, and as someone who really wants a backlit keyboard, the best argument against the feature is that it has the potential to increase the price to maintain such a large margin.
The TDP of the C2D and 320M combined is about 25W, I believe. The i5 2357m is a 1.4GHz proc with the HD3000 core and a TDP of 18W. By including this as the base processor, the battery life would inherently improve (without increasing the size of the battery), but a little bit of internal space would open up where the 320M was. This could be used for an SDHC card on the 11", or increased battery, or maybe an additional USB port. My wish would be to bump the base speed of the i5 up to 1.6GHz or even 1.8GHz and maintain a TDP of 25W.
A larger screen and/or thinner bezel would be nice, but I'd settle for coloring the darn thing black (without the weight of the glass over the screen). The bezel on my MacBook Pro is fantastic in comparison; I find the silver distracting.
A 2lb 11" Air with an i5 proc at 1.8GHz, a 256GB SSD, backlighting, 8+ hour battery-life, and a starting price of $100 less (dream on, I know), and there is no way I could keep myself from buying one.
more...
Gasu E.
Sep 26, 09:49 AM
According to US law, a trademark holder MUST defend their trademarks, or they risk losing them. Google is struggling with this, as they're trying to encourage people not to use it as a generic verb.
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
Absolutely. Having received a couple of cease-and-desist letters myself (from Microsoft, actually), I think Apple's letter to Podcast Ready is extremely polite and accomodating for letters of this type. Also, note it was carefully crafted just for Podcast Ready, undoubtedly at significant expense. If Apple had a larger agenda of controlling the term "podcast" in all its uses, I suspected this note would have been a bit more boiler-plate and re-usable.
My take on this is not that Apple is trying to own all uses of the term pod or podcast, but to establish the legal boundaries between the reach of their trademarks and common usage. In order to do this, Apple has to take a somewhat aggressive stance. The actual boundary will be adjudicated by negotiation, and at some point, probably the courts.
Wikipedia Linky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_domain#Trademark)
Absolutely. Having received a couple of cease-and-desist letters myself (from Microsoft, actually), I think Apple's letter to Podcast Ready is extremely polite and accomodating for letters of this type. Also, note it was carefully crafted just for Podcast Ready, undoubtedly at significant expense. If Apple had a larger agenda of controlling the term "podcast" in all its uses, I suspected this note would have been a bit more boiler-plate and re-usable.
My take on this is not that Apple is trying to own all uses of the term pod or podcast, but to establish the legal boundaries between the reach of their trademarks and common usage. In order to do this, Apple has to take a somewhat aggressive stance. The actual boundary will be adjudicated by negotiation, and at some point, probably the courts.
Spanky Deluxe
Oct 26, 10:03 AM
Second in line here at the moment, the queues building slowly. Feeling just a *tad* geeky!
more...
HobeSoundDarryl
Mar 23, 02:49 PM
Apparently you don't understand just how many iOS devices apples has sold.
Apparently you don't understand just how more TVs are sold to people without iDevices. Yes, the iDevice crowd is thick here, but here is not everywhere TVs are sold. Many of our iDevice owners around the world are still awaiting the ability to rent ANY video via iTunes, much less to be able to rent it and then sling it to an airplay-enabled TV.
Apparently you don't understand just how more TVs are sold to people without iDevices. Yes, the iDevice crowd is thick here, but here is not everywhere TVs are sold. Many of our iDevice owners around the world are still awaiting the ability to rent ANY video via iTunes, much less to be able to rent it and then sling it to an airplay-enabled TV.
macguy77
Mar 24, 05:06 PM
I just got off the phone with sale rep, and all they have is 32gb and 64gb left. When asked about the price, she said $500 for 32gb (??). I mentioned the article and she still said $500. Weird? Is there an official link to this somewhere on the verizon site, as all I can see is it bundled with mifi @ 429.99 (16gb).
$299 is definitely a steal!
$299 is definitely a steal!
more...
GregR
Apr 19, 11:12 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPod; 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)
Also the guy is pointing to the camera/LED flash in the second video. And the camera looks different, maybe a little smaller? And there is a little screen around the two, which catches the light at one point.
Also the guy is pointing to the camera/LED flash in the second video. And the camera looks different, maybe a little smaller? And there is a little screen around the two, which catches the light at one point.
rhett7660
Apr 25, 03:19 PM
What does ANY of this have to do to Apple rejecting a Pulitzer Prize-winning cartoonist from the App Store?
Probably the same reason "what does the original post have to do with the Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist getting his app rejected." This person was merely commenting on another posters post.
I am waiting to see if the app gets rejected a second time before I lay judgment.
Probably the same reason "what does the original post have to do with the Pulitzer Prize winning cartoonist getting his app rejected." This person was merely commenting on another posters post.
I am waiting to see if the app gets rejected a second time before I lay judgment.
more...
garybUK
Mar 16, 04:27 AM
Surely a 'Made in USA' car is a thing to avoid? Big, no style, bad engines (huge capacity with no power), poor reliability, nasty plastics inside.
Get a european one, more reliable (VW, BMW, Mercedes, Audi) far far superior technology in the engines, safer and better for the environment, plus you pump money into our economy :p
Some really sexy cars: VW Scirocco, BMW 3 Series Coupe, Renault Megane Coupe, Audi TT, Volvo C30.... plus they will last for years!
Get a european one, more reliable (VW, BMW, Mercedes, Audi) far far superior technology in the engines, safer and better for the environment, plus you pump money into our economy :p
Some really sexy cars: VW Scirocco, BMW 3 Series Coupe, Renault Megane Coupe, Audi TT, Volvo C30.... plus they will last for years!
jsiegl
Mar 20, 02:58 PM
It seems like the majority of the comments are about Price, personal purchase and Higher ed use cases. All of these comments miss the point of what the announcement is about, institutional purchases. This is about school's buying large quantities, and really, since I have a hard time imagining that a University would be buying 10 packs of iPods . Yes, I know that schools like ACU have innovative 1:1 ipod /phone programs where they provide devices to the student, that is not really what this bundle is about). The target audience of a program like this is clearly K12. It is similar to bundles that apple currently has of 32 iPod touches and a Bretford cart or use in a K12 classroom.
This is all interesting, but the biggest challenge and obstacle that Apple has in K12 is that the iPod ecosystem is a consumer model. It is also not a Higher ed model, where students own their own device and are conditioned to the requiremet of buying their content. I work as a technologist for a 200+ school district and we have been trying to figure out for the better part of a year how to make this consumer product work in k12 setting.
We've been running pilots in several schools / classes since late spring of 09 and the biggest problem we have is getting a straight answer on how to liscence paid applications. We've asked several Apple representatives "if I buy a class set of 32 ipods, and I want to use a paid app, how many copies does the school need to buy, how many itunes accounts do we need, how many computers do we need to sync all 32 devices and how can we purchase using ta purchase order (no school is going to relish tying a credit card to a personal account, or cutting a PO for 30 $25 itunes gift cards!)
The answer we have gotten back every time has been not 32, not 1, not 1 for every 5 devices, but the question does not apply, the iPod and iTunes are consumer products and the enduser agreement is for consumers not institutions, and when asked for advice we've been told that Apple does not provide interpretations of their agreements and how we choose to interpret it is a mater that we should take up with our in-house council.
The good will and glow of Apple in education will continue to drive adoption of the ipod and ipad. I know millions of stimulus dollars went to ipods in school districts around the country, unfortunately, until Apple accepts the fact that school districts are not individuals and they have to "think different" and work with us when we ask for advice on how to successfully use their products in K12, much of the money and the potential will go o waste.
This is all interesting, but the biggest challenge and obstacle that Apple has in K12 is that the iPod ecosystem is a consumer model. It is also not a Higher ed model, where students own their own device and are conditioned to the requiremet of buying their content. I work as a technologist for a 200+ school district and we have been trying to figure out for the better part of a year how to make this consumer product work in k12 setting.
We've been running pilots in several schools / classes since late spring of 09 and the biggest problem we have is getting a straight answer on how to liscence paid applications. We've asked several Apple representatives "if I buy a class set of 32 ipods, and I want to use a paid app, how many copies does the school need to buy, how many itunes accounts do we need, how many computers do we need to sync all 32 devices and how can we purchase using ta purchase order (no school is going to relish tying a credit card to a personal account, or cutting a PO for 30 $25 itunes gift cards!)
The answer we have gotten back every time has been not 32, not 1, not 1 for every 5 devices, but the question does not apply, the iPod and iTunes are consumer products and the enduser agreement is for consumers not institutions, and when asked for advice we've been told that Apple does not provide interpretations of their agreements and how we choose to interpret it is a mater that we should take up with our in-house council.
The good will and glow of Apple in education will continue to drive adoption of the ipod and ipad. I know millions of stimulus dollars went to ipods in school districts around the country, unfortunately, until Apple accepts the fact that school districts are not individuals and they have to "think different" and work with us when we ask for advice on how to successfully use their products in K12, much of the money and the potential will go o waste.
more...
Friscohoya
Mar 25, 05:10 PM
Actually for apple this is page one news.
finalcut
Apr 30, 07:29 PM
gamestop only allow preorder for pc. Do they give code for mac? I dont want to pre-order a pc product since I want to play on native mac.
more...
ob81
Nov 5, 07:36 PM
Hong Kong, Japan & a few other countries have been using technology like this for a while. Hopefully it'll start being mainstream in Western countries soon.
Hong Kong uses a SMART type card for everything, transport, vending machines, etc etc.
Japan uses their mobile phones, AFAIK :P
Yeah, it is so wide spread in Japan that you can use it at little corner shops these days. Great technology.
Hong Kong uses a SMART type card for everything, transport, vending machines, etc etc.
Japan uses their mobile phones, AFAIK :P
Yeah, it is so wide spread in Japan that you can use it at little corner shops these days. Great technology.
eobet
May 23, 04:11 PM
Can anyone see any difference between medium and high/ultra settings?
I have the latest MBP and apart from a small amount of glow here and there, I see no difference.
I have the latest MBP and apart from a small amount of glow here and there, I see no difference.
Kai
Sep 21, 04:25 PM
its interesting that every intel mac so far, other than the mac mini, has needed a SMC update (if my memory serves me correctly).
It's even more strange that all of them seemed to become louder after the update. How lucky for Apple that all the reviews mentioning the Intel-Macs' exceptional silentness had already been written by then, eh? ;-)
No, there can't possibly be a scheme behind this, no, no... Apple would never do this!
It's even more strange that all of them seemed to become louder after the update. How lucky for Apple that all the reviews mentioning the Intel-Macs' exceptional silentness had already been written by then, eh? ;-)
No, there can't possibly be a scheme behind this, no, no... Apple would never do this!
Snowy_River
Nov 18, 01:03 AM
It smart for a teen, who is close to my age (20), to get into contact with a friend to get duplicated iPhone 4 cases in white, The look on the back looks original from Apple. I see Apple suing him for selling copy right infringement material. That would suck for him. I also see a issue for a Foxcomm employee letting material go out the door and Apple would get pissed over that. Apple has no power against the people. Only thing they can do is say "Oh well." :D
Unfortunately, you're wrong on most if not all counts.
First, it would be patented material, not copyrighted material. And patent infringement, especially design patents, is really quite easy to pursue.
Second, the Chinese supplier is "Foxconn", not "Foxcomm".
Third, and finally, in cases like these, as a general rule, even though Foxconn is the supplier, Apple is the owner of the parts. If Apple ordered that the parts in question be destroyed, putting them in a box and taking them home doesn't count, and certainly neither does selling them to a friend in the US. If they are the actual parts produced for Apple, then it is quite likely that they are, indeed stolen goods, and both this boy and the employee who got the parts for him are in trouble.
However, if the people involved were a bit smarter, then these parts would be from a production run not ordered by Apple. Under those circumstances, depending on how the contract is worded, there may have been enough wiggle room for them to sell these parts, especially given the fact that the actual Apple parts never went into formal production.
Finally, while it's arguably quite impressive that this kid was able to sell about 450 kits, to the tune of $130K, it's important to remember that this doesn't mean that he's made $130K. I would think it much more likely that he's getting maybe 10%-20% of that. Still, $13,000-$26,000 is not a bad haul for a couple months work...
Unfortunately, you're wrong on most if not all counts.
First, it would be patented material, not copyrighted material. And patent infringement, especially design patents, is really quite easy to pursue.
Second, the Chinese supplier is "Foxconn", not "Foxcomm".
Third, and finally, in cases like these, as a general rule, even though Foxconn is the supplier, Apple is the owner of the parts. If Apple ordered that the parts in question be destroyed, putting them in a box and taking them home doesn't count, and certainly neither does selling them to a friend in the US. If they are the actual parts produced for Apple, then it is quite likely that they are, indeed stolen goods, and both this boy and the employee who got the parts for him are in trouble.
However, if the people involved were a bit smarter, then these parts would be from a production run not ordered by Apple. Under those circumstances, depending on how the contract is worded, there may have been enough wiggle room for them to sell these parts, especially given the fact that the actual Apple parts never went into formal production.
Finally, while it's arguably quite impressive that this kid was able to sell about 450 kits, to the tune of $130K, it's important to remember that this doesn't mean that he's made $130K. I would think it much more likely that he's getting maybe 10%-20% of that. Still, $13,000-$26,000 is not a bad haul for a couple months work...
scott523
Sep 25, 10:01 AM
how many of us actually care much about aperture...?
Nope not me. :rolleyes:
I'm locking my eyes onto a possible new MacBook. :D
Nope not me. :rolleyes:
I'm locking my eyes onto a possible new MacBook. :D
edesignuk
Sep 7, 05:55 AM
Same kind of thing, but for the London Tube (http://www.themanwhofellasleep.com/gossip.html). Great stuff :D
8. I binned all the porn on VHS... there's no point in it anymore.
8. I binned all the porn on VHS... there's no point in it anymore.
coday182
Sep 25, 10:30 PM
why did they wait till now to worry about this?
shawnce
Sep 1, 11:17 AM
I don't remember... Is Core Animation based on OpenGL? The would be information under NDA still.