Thunderhawks
Mar 22, 02:56 PM
I don't know if they can make the iMacs look better, IMO. They look really nice. hardware improvements would be the best way to keep these machines alive. unless ofcourse they pull of something amazing like they always do lol.
To each their own, but in all reality, these are the best looking "all-in-ones" that i have ever seen.
How about folding a 27" in the middle?
54 inch screen , sweet:-)
To each their own, but in all reality, these are the best looking "all-in-ones" that i have ever seen.
How about folding a 27" in the middle?
54 inch screen , sweet:-)
DavPeanut
Aug 28, 01:23 PM
Yeah, Apple would NEVER do THAT. :rolleyes:
These are products that are now competing directly with the products or the PC industry. I have been using macs since I was about 4, but now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design, which are huge for most of Apple's current market. The ability to run Windows though has helped recently to increase Apple's sales, but it means that apples are now directly competing with Dell, HP and the like. It used to be that apple boasted about their benchmarks versus PCs, but with the Mac Pro, they have been boasting about their price. The innards of a high-end Dell workstation are almost identical to those of the Mac Pro, and likewise, the MacBook and MacBook Pros are very similar to the offerings of the rest of the computer industry. If apple wants to be able to market their products based solely on their products special features they won't sell. It has been the comparible performance along with the things that make Apples Apples that have caused MacBooks to become backordered.
These are products that are now competing directly with the products or the PC industry. I have been using macs since I was about 4, but now that Apple is using Intel Processors, all they really have going for them are their ability to run OS X and their design, which are huge for most of Apple's current market. The ability to run Windows though has helped recently to increase Apple's sales, but it means that apples are now directly competing with Dell, HP and the like. It used to be that apple boasted about their benchmarks versus PCs, but with the Mac Pro, they have been boasting about their price. The innards of a high-end Dell workstation are almost identical to those of the Mac Pro, and likewise, the MacBook and MacBook Pros are very similar to the offerings of the rest of the computer industry. If apple wants to be able to market their products based solely on their products special features they won't sell. It has been the comparible performance along with the things that make Apples Apples that have caused MacBooks to become backordered.
toddybody
Apr 14, 12:51 PM
Glad to hear it:D
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
Im really stoked to see the Ivy Bridge benchmarks...the i72600k blew my mind:eek: I feel bad for the enthusiast folks who bought a 980x :(
AidenShaw
Sep 11, 05:43 PM
Aiden, it's just not like you to make a statement like this without adding the links...
http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/cfp2000.html ;)
Note the Dell Precision Workstation 390 (Conroe) and the Precision Workstation 690 (Xeon 5100).
3 GHz Xeon - 2775
2.93 GHz Conroe Extreme - 2872
That "horrible buffered memory" is about a 3.5% handicap....at most. (The memory, chipsets, motherboards are all different.)
And one shouldn't say "but the FB-DIMMs are clocked faster" - the buffering is what enables the faster clock, as well as what adds the latency. The two tend to balance out, and the net result is that you can put 64 GiB of RAM on the Xeon - which you couldn't do without buffering!
http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/cfp2000.html ;)
Note the Dell Precision Workstation 390 (Conroe) and the Precision Workstation 690 (Xeon 5100).
3 GHz Xeon - 2775
2.93 GHz Conroe Extreme - 2872
That "horrible buffered memory" is about a 3.5% handicap....at most. (The memory, chipsets, motherboards are all different.)
And one shouldn't say "but the FB-DIMMs are clocked faster" - the buffering is what enables the faster clock, as well as what adds the latency. The two tend to balance out, and the net result is that you can put 64 GiB of RAM on the Xeon - which you couldn't do without buffering!
tsugaru
Mar 22, 03:18 PM
As for proc choices, I don't see Apple putting in a 2x00(S) processor.
- marketing would suck for it (why only 2.8GHz stock on the 2600S vs 3.4GHz stock on the 2600?)
- Intel charges more for the S models (dunno if that carries over to Apple, but maybe)
- the 27" has carried the i7-860 and i7-870 easily. Those are both 95W TDP processors. 2600S -> 65W TDP and the 2600/2600K -> 95W TDP. So the TDP doesn't increase, but the speed does.
- marketing would suck for it (why only 2.8GHz stock on the 2600S vs 3.4GHz stock on the 2600?)
- Intel charges more for the S models (dunno if that carries over to Apple, but maybe)
- the 27" has carried the i7-860 and i7-870 easily. Those are both 95W TDP processors. 2600S -> 65W TDP and the 2600/2600K -> 95W TDP. So the TDP doesn't increase, but the speed does.
DrFrankTM
Sep 12, 06:59 AM
@Multimedia: Ok, but if Clovertown is available as early as November, I can't imagine Steve making Santa angry and not updating the Mac Pro until January. It's not a great time to buy a computer... yet. Things are moving too fast right now. In sixty days, we'll be looking at quads and octos... I still can't believe that it's coming that fast.
retroneo
Mar 22, 01:34 PM
What about the Mac Pro? It's way past due, would that come first, before the iMac?
Sandy Bridge Xeon's are due in November.
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro.
With Thunderbolt, you will be able to connect the new iMac or Mac mini of them to Fibre Channel arrays, have three displays or use external PCI chassis for existing PCIe cards. iMac CPU performance with the desktop Sandy Bridge CPUs will exceed most Mac Pro configurations. The new iMac's ability to use 32GB of RAM matches the Mac Pro too. You can configure the iMac using SSDs for less than the price of the Mac Pro too.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Sandy Bridge Xeon's are due in November.
I wouldn't be surprised if the iMac and new Mac mini are the replacement for the Mac Pro.
With Thunderbolt, you will be able to connect the new iMac or Mac mini of them to Fibre Channel arrays, have three displays or use external PCI chassis for existing PCIe cards. iMac CPU performance with the desktop Sandy Bridge CPUs will exceed most Mac Pro configurations. The new iMac's ability to use 32GB of RAM matches the Mac Pro too. You can configure the iMac using SSDs for less than the price of the Mac Pro too.
By the time November comes around, Thunderbolt may cause the death of the Mac Pro.
Vegasman
Mar 30, 11:57 AM
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/app
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
278891
I think this is enough to show that Microsoft is unequivocally correct. The term has been in use for much longer than Apple's launching of the store and it has been ubiquitous in the computer industry for a long time.
The way to distinguish (if it needs to be done) between app stores is by saying the name of the app store before hand, ie the Apple App Store, the Amazon App Store, or the Microsoft App Store.
Examples of uses (Dvorak in his references to "killer app"):
2005: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/a-k...or-real-estate
2004: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1599324,00.asp
2003: http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1191830,00.asp
GGJstudios
Mar 19, 02:17 PM
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
"fanboy"
Again, who are you referring to? I'm not a fanboy, or a boy of any kind. I have no allegiance or loyalty to any brand or manufacturer (except Harley-Davidson, but for very different reasons). It's amusing to see how people try to bash Apple or Macs for the wrong reasons, then resort to calling people "fanboys" when their arguments aren't accepted. Apple and Macs have plenty of weaknesses. Attack one of the legitimate ones and you'll have sensible people agree with you. Make a case against Apple or John Deere or Mattel or Coca-Cola or any other company that isn't based in fact, and you'll get resistance. That doesn't make those who oppose such a case "fanboys".
Malware includes computer viruses, worms, trojan horses, spyware and other malicious and unwanted software or programs. The idea that OSX and/or Unix/Linux based operating systems is free from such threats is absurd.
No one has presented the idea that Mac OS X is free from all malware threats. Since your reading comprehension might need some help, I'll repeat my statement again:
there is no Mac malware in the wild that can't be avoided with some common sense and prudent action on the part of the user.
Viruses for Mac OS X don't exist, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Trojans for Mac OS X do exist, but can be avoided by the user being careful what they install, so antivirus isn't needed to protect against them.
Meanwhile, the answer on here to avoiding potential pitfalls in things like Flash is to (surprise), not install or use it. Hey guys, don't power on your computers and you will always be safe! :rolleyes:
I use Flash all the time and have never had any issues with it.
Even Apple themselves regularly release security updates. WTF is the point of a security update if there's no possible threat to OSX?
Again, no one has said there are not threats to Mac OS X; only that those threats don't require any AV software to defend against them.
Just because a threat is less likely than on other systems does not mean that it does not exist. Yet people on here won't even admit that much.
Either you're not reading or not comprehending the posts that have been made. No one is saying that NO threats exist; only that those threats can be avoided by the user without the need for AV software.
Only a fanboy would take a post that suggests that a false sense of security can lead to dangerous behavior that might be a liability in the future (good advice in almost any market/situation) and twist it into "Boy you're ignorant; we are INVULNERABLE! OSX cannot be hacked or attacked! It's impossible!
Who are you referring to? I haven't seen anyone say such things in this thread or any other.
dal20402
May 3, 06:51 PM
2. Drop their dedicated three ACD CCFL LCD lineup that was top notch and replaced with one stripped down iMac LED LCD
... which is a better display in any way you care to name, except vertical resolution with the 30", than the 23" or 30" ACDs.
3. Ditch "Resolution Independence" (it's been over 4 years, c'mon Apple!)
Just like every other vendor, they realized it was pretty much impossible to implement. Use Windows at 150% mode and you'll see what I mean; *everything* is horribly broken. There will be pixel-doubled Macs within the next year.
4. Increased focus on iDevices and iOS (yeah, it's banked them $55+ billion, great, invest a small portion back into the Prosumer market Apple pulled away from with a full display line and a re-vamp of Pro-sumer desktops and apps, they revamped a mobile device market they can do the same with the Prosumer market and make money)
The prosumer market is tiny. Everyone in the country who is not dirt-poor or a Luddite has a phone. There are a few hundred thousand prosumers at most. You don't make money engineering expensive, cutting-edge products just for that market.
5. Begin merging iOS with OS X Lion
Merging? Some iOS interface features are being added to Lion. They are not "merging." Lion is not losing any capabilities (other than Rosetta).
5. Funnel less money into Pro-Apps (Final Cut X is meh)
You are saying Final Cut X is meh before anyone has even seen it? :rolleyes:
8. Replace reasonably priced PowerMac G4/5's w/ over priced/over powered Xeon Server based Mac Pro's and no serious revamp in over 8 years. PowerMac's cost anywhere from $1400+, were great for professional photographers/designers/professionals/small businesses, esp. paired w/ the late ACD CCFL line which worked perfectly with OS X.
There is no margin whatsoever in commodity desktop hardware; it's THE most price-sensitive part of the PC market. Apple doesn't do things where it can't generate high margins. It's not a charity, it's a business.
9. Drop focus on OS X development - iOS Lion is schizophrenic w/ iOS features in OS X: Launchpad, 2D Spaces, Mission Control, lack of TRIM for 3rd party Sandforce SSD's, painful ergonomic implementation of multi-touch w/ the "Magic Trackpad," etc.
What capabilities are missing from Lion as a result of iOS interface influence?
How is the Magic Trackpad "painful?" Mine is my favorite input device ever by a huge margin. My only problem with it is that Apple took about 3 years too long to release it. What would you do to make it not "painful?"
11. iLife '11 in 32-bit?!
What benefits would 64-bit provide to the user, other than a very small performance improvement? iLife applications' GUI threads are not using more than 4 GB of RAM.
12. "Pro-sumer" App's such as Aperture "improvements" w/ "Share to Facebook." Keep that consumer shizz in iPhoto and focus on better professional tools Apple.
Are you in favor of the prosumer, or the elitist "pro" who thinks their app is debased by a consumer feature? Prosumers use Facebook and (especially) Flickr. Since Apple already built the feature for iPhoto, it costs them nothing to throw it into Aperture.
16. iOS err, OS X App Store?
How is easier app installation hurting you?
17. USB 3.0?
Thunderbolt.
... which is a better display in any way you care to name, except vertical resolution with the 30", than the 23" or 30" ACDs.
3. Ditch "Resolution Independence" (it's been over 4 years, c'mon Apple!)
Just like every other vendor, they realized it was pretty much impossible to implement. Use Windows at 150% mode and you'll see what I mean; *everything* is horribly broken. There will be pixel-doubled Macs within the next year.
4. Increased focus on iDevices and iOS (yeah, it's banked them $55+ billion, great, invest a small portion back into the Prosumer market Apple pulled away from with a full display line and a re-vamp of Pro-sumer desktops and apps, they revamped a mobile device market they can do the same with the Prosumer market and make money)
The prosumer market is tiny. Everyone in the country who is not dirt-poor or a Luddite has a phone. There are a few hundred thousand prosumers at most. You don't make money engineering expensive, cutting-edge products just for that market.
5. Begin merging iOS with OS X Lion
Merging? Some iOS interface features are being added to Lion. They are not "merging." Lion is not losing any capabilities (other than Rosetta).
5. Funnel less money into Pro-Apps (Final Cut X is meh)
You are saying Final Cut X is meh before anyone has even seen it? :rolleyes:
8. Replace reasonably priced PowerMac G4/5's w/ over priced/over powered Xeon Server based Mac Pro's and no serious revamp in over 8 years. PowerMac's cost anywhere from $1400+, were great for professional photographers/designers/professionals/small businesses, esp. paired w/ the late ACD CCFL line which worked perfectly with OS X.
There is no margin whatsoever in commodity desktop hardware; it's THE most price-sensitive part of the PC market. Apple doesn't do things where it can't generate high margins. It's not a charity, it's a business.
9. Drop focus on OS X development - iOS Lion is schizophrenic w/ iOS features in OS X: Launchpad, 2D Spaces, Mission Control, lack of TRIM for 3rd party Sandforce SSD's, painful ergonomic implementation of multi-touch w/ the "Magic Trackpad," etc.
What capabilities are missing from Lion as a result of iOS interface influence?
How is the Magic Trackpad "painful?" Mine is my favorite input device ever by a huge margin. My only problem with it is that Apple took about 3 years too long to release it. What would you do to make it not "painful?"
11. iLife '11 in 32-bit?!
What benefits would 64-bit provide to the user, other than a very small performance improvement? iLife applications' GUI threads are not using more than 4 GB of RAM.
12. "Pro-sumer" App's such as Aperture "improvements" w/ "Share to Facebook." Keep that consumer shizz in iPhoto and focus on better professional tools Apple.
Are you in favor of the prosumer, or the elitist "pro" who thinks their app is debased by a consumer feature? Prosumers use Facebook and (especially) Flickr. Since Apple already built the feature for iPhoto, it costs them nothing to throw it into Aperture.
16. iOS err, OS X App Store?
How is easier app installation hurting you?
17. USB 3.0?
Thunderbolt.
MacRumors
May 3, 10:10 AM
http://www.macrumors.com/images/macrumorsthreadlogo.gif (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/2011-imac-notes-magic-trackpad-option-display-connectivity-boot-camp-update/)
In the wake of today's release of new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/apple-releases-new-sandy-bridge-quad-core-imacs-with-thunderbolt/), a number of tidbits about the new models have been surfacing.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/03/105401-imac_2011_mouse_trackpad.jpg
sony ericsson xperia x8 black
with price 2011, Sony
sony ericsson xperia x8 pink.
sony ericsson x8 black. xperia
sony ericsson xperia x10 price
sony ericsson xperia x10 white
Sony Ericsson is slashing the
Sony Ericsson Yendo Cell Phone
In the wake of today's release of new iMacs (http://www.macrumors.com/2011/05/03/apple-releases-new-sandy-bridge-quad-core-imacs-with-thunderbolt/), a number of tidbits about the new models have been surfacing.
http://images.macrumors.com/article/2011/05/03/105401-imac_2011_mouse_trackpad.jpg
Squire
Sep 1, 10:30 AM
I suspect we'll get ourselves all twisted 'bout this, tune in only to see iPod HiFi v 2.0 instead..
Good point. That's also what I'm "expecting" so I'm not disappointed. Actually, I'm not really in the market for anything that Apple has right now so a totally new product would be nice.
-Squire
Good point. That's also what I'm "expecting" so I'm not disappointed. Actually, I'm not really in the market for anything that Apple has right now so a totally new product would be nice.
-Squire
iliketyla
Mar 30, 01:45 PM
Microsoft has their own name. I guess they are just trying to protect the descriptive nature of the term. "Microsoft Marketplace, the app store for Windows Phone 7".
Microsoft does not intend to use the trademark.
I don't get why Apple filed for such a descriptive mark anyway. iTunes App Store was what they called it at first, what was wrong with that ? iOS App Store would also save all these legal troubles. Apple App Store another that's perfectly fine.
Ahhh, I didn't realize the first part.
Off topic, have you seen or used a Windows Phone 7 yet?
Microsoft does not intend to use the trademark.
I don't get why Apple filed for such a descriptive mark anyway. iTunes App Store was what they called it at first, what was wrong with that ? iOS App Store would also save all these legal troubles. Apple App Store another that's perfectly fine.
Ahhh, I didn't realize the first part.
Off topic, have you seen or used a Windows Phone 7 yet?
FSUSem1noles
Sep 26, 03:55 PM
YES! Finally, I reap benefits from being with Cingular!!!! :D
Bernard SG
Apr 29, 02:11 AM
Apple has done extremely well with mobile devices, but I don't know what Microsoft has to do with that. As far as I know, Windows still has about 90% of the market, and Apple still has a very small share. It looks to me like Apple isn't a huge player in the pc market, but they are the dominant one in the mobile market. Let's not forget that 50% of that $5.99 billion profit came from the iPhone and iPad.
- Windows Mobile was among the first platforms for smartphones and failed miserably.
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
- Windows Mobile was among the first platforms for smartphones and failed miserably.
- Global personal computer sales are slumping (-3% in Q1 2011) while Macs achieve a growth of 26%. There's clearly a loss of traction for Windows going on, despite all the praises for Windows 7.
X5-452
Aug 28, 12:29 PM
So, uh.... PowerBook G5's tomorrow?
maflynn
Mar 23, 04:32 PM
The seemingly only purpose of this app is to avoid the checkpoints could be dangerous to those of us who don't drink and drive. They should pull any app.
mmmmpsi
Mar 29, 12:46 PM
Let's ask yourself this.. they are saying that approx 1 in every 17 people now have a Windows based phone?? Do you know ANYONE that does?? Cause I know hundreds of people who have smartphones and not one of them has a Windows based phone.. major statistical failure!
pika2000
Apr 11, 02:06 AM
What I don't get is why can't Apple enable any iOS device (iPod Touch, iPhone, iPad) as an Airplay target device? Obviously iOS supports it as Apple TV can be a target for Airplay from iTunes.
jz1492
Nov 13, 04:09 PM
The difference is that Apple can veto the very concept of the app, after the fact. E.g.: google voice clients, podcast receivers, etc. (the list of examples is quite long). There's a difference between requiring a late tweak and vetoing the core functionality of the app.
I agree with that. ;)
Yet, that is not the case this time, or I'd say, for the majority of rejections. Apple most of the time allows you to make the necessary changes, as odd as they may seem.
I agree with that. ;)
Yet, that is not the case this time, or I'd say, for the majority of rejections. Apple most of the time allows you to make the necessary changes, as odd as they may seem.
Vegasman
Apr 19, 09:18 AM
LOL even the clock icon look the same, that's just cheap copying.
10:10 has been the primary way to show time on a static clock and watches for decades. The 10:10 position of the hands is used to highlight the logo which is usually located below the "12".
I wonder where Apple got the idea from?
10:10 has been the primary way to show time on a static clock and watches for decades. The 10:10 position of the hands is used to highlight the logo which is usually located below the "12".
I wonder where Apple got the idea from?
bdj21ya
Oct 12, 12:30 PM
Kinda said how a passionate music artist must make this initiative when countries with HUGE sums of cash prefer military spending in their budgets (Canada included) yet not for world equality for medicine.
Kinda said? Actually, it's equality that they're trying to fight AGAINST here. The problem is that there's too much equality, which means they can't afford the medicine.
I'm all for philanthropy, but I don't think that red is the way to go for selling more iPods.
Kinda said? Actually, it's equality that they're trying to fight AGAINST here. The problem is that there's too much equality, which means they can't afford the medicine.
I'm all for philanthropy, but I don't think that red is the way to go for selling more iPods.
pre10c
Apr 20, 10:09 AM
everyone is fine with sharing their personal info on facebook but a device that remembers where it has been?omg no!! anyway there aint a probleme as long as you dont lose your pc or iphone right?
TheManOfSilver
Sep 5, 04:47 PM
I think this is totally feasible, but one question that many of you haven't addressed is: "Do you see this interaction and interface happening for the Windows users?"
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
I agree completely. iTunes was ported to Windows to sell more iPods, and music. The iMovie Store (or whatever) will be included for Windows to sell more video iPods and Airport AV (or whatever it will be called). The living room box will have to play nice with PCs in order for this whole thing to have the same impact as the iTMS/iPod.
It may just be time for Front Row to be ported to Windows too. Wouldn't that just chafe Gates' butt?
I know we're all Apple fans here, but in order for the iTunes Movie Store to be successful, it will have to include "them."
w00master
I agree completely. iTunes was ported to Windows to sell more iPods, and music. The iMovie Store (or whatever) will be included for Windows to sell more video iPods and Airport AV (or whatever it will be called). The living room box will have to play nice with PCs in order for this whole thing to have the same impact as the iTMS/iPod.
It may just be time for Front Row to be ported to Windows too. Wouldn't that just chafe Gates' butt?
