ArchaicRevival
Apr 30, 01:59 PM
Curious that everyone is clamoring for a thunderbolt-enabled machine, but there isn't a single thunderbolt drive available on the market.
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Everybody said that to Nikola Tesla when he introduced the AC... It's new, and we have to redesign everything now, and Edison is gonna lose all his investments oh my god! We can't do that!
A century later...
I guess some people just need to feel like they have new stuff even if it's totally pointless.
Everybody said that to Nikola Tesla when he introduced the AC... It's new, and we have to redesign everything now, and Edison is gonna lose all his investments oh my god! We can't do that!
A century later...
DeathChill
Apr 16, 10:47 PM
I can't wait to see what people will come up with for Thunderbolt. I am disappointed that Apple hasn't released a cable for your iPhone/iPad though =/
It would be pointless until an iPad/iPhone came out that supports Thunderbolt. The current dock connector is limited to USB 2.0 speeds.
It would be pointless until an iPad/iPhone came out that supports Thunderbolt. The current dock connector is limited to USB 2.0 speeds.
petej
Aug 23, 06:51 PM
Apple can recoup a portion of its payment if Creative is successful in licensing this patent to others.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
This clause in the press release is very strange. Makes me wonder what price Creative would place on a license sale to Microsoft for its Zune and what Apple would recoup. Unless Microsoft can find a way to avoid infringing this patent, it effectively means that for every Zune sold, Apple will get some cash. Haha-hehe
Look out Sandisk too.
iMacZealot
Sep 14, 02:09 AM
I bought a XDA II PDA phone TWO or Three years ago already have WiFI.
I should have said anything with Windows that's a phone. But that's my point: basically, the only types of phones that have Wifi in them are some "mobile" windows devices.
Happy Now? :)
I should have said anything with Windows that's a phone. But that's my point: basically, the only types of phones that have Wifi in them are some "mobile" windows devices.
Happy Now? :)
longofest
Oct 12, 12:25 PM
I hope people like Red, because this is definitely the iPod to buy... goes to a great cause, and doesn't cost you anything more.
Eidorian
May 3, 11:09 AM
You think SB IGP could drive 2 Cinema Displays? :eek:For a desktop OS, sure.
Ivy Bridge will bring it up to 3 displays. AMD has 6 displays for embedded systems now.
Ivy Bridge will bring it up to 3 displays. AMD has 6 displays for embedded systems now.
prady16
Sep 5, 12:35 PM
I am betting on iPhone!
DRewPi
Sep 2, 12:17 PM
Hey guys, just hope some stuff comes out on the 5th, like new MBP with some C2D, i guess that should show up... and doesn't need any kind of keynote show.... and maybe the mini ... to with some improved specs ... as far fot the MB, that is what I'm waiting for ... shouldn't show up at least by the end of the month !!! But who KNOWS ..... ???? :rolleyes: A litle suprise would be nice !!!!
jdechko
Jul 14, 09:22 AM
Woohoo! 3GHz here we come. As was mentioned before, though, a mid-sized tower priced at the iMac level (but upgradable) would be the final logical step in the Apple product line. That would leave Woodcrest to the high end MacPro with its quad configuration.
munkery
Mar 23, 04:20 PM
http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Much of the information in the PDF (http://www.macforensicslab.com/Malware_on_Mac_OS_X.pdf) associated with this article (http://www.macforensicslab.com/ProductsAndServices/index.php?main_page=document_general_info&products_id=174) is incorrect. For example:
Page 26
It refers to the bundle architecture as insecure. The argument presented would be true if security sensitive apps were not owned by system. Given that they are owned by system, malware cannot modify the bundle of an app owned by system without authentication when the app is run with user privileges in an admin or standard account.
For example, show package contents of iTunes, Safari, or Mail and try to create a folder in the bundle. In relation to the example in the article, try renaming iTunes. The argument in the article relies on actions that can not be completed in an OS X admin account; these type of changes are even more restricted in a standard account.
Apps not owned by system are vulnerable but without privilege escalation can not install rootkits or keyloggers. Even apps owned by system run with user privileges and require privilege escalation to install dangerous payloads.
Mac OS X does not prompt for authentication if you install apps in the proper location for that user account type. When installed in the proper location, apps are sandboxed from the system level of Mac OS X by the Unix DAC model used within Mac OS X.
Windows is less secure because most apps (Chrome only exception I can recall) install their associated files in levels of the system that require authentication regardless of user account type (unless Admin in Windows XP because running as superuser - no authentication required to install with elevated privileges - very dangerous). It is easier to trick Windows users to install a trojan with elevated privileges given that almost all apps ask for authentication to install and the user can not distinguish the intent of that authentication.
Page 30
The claim that the Application folder is unprotected is false. Security sensitive apps within the Application folder are owned by system.
Also, security sensitive system binaries are still stored in /bin and /sbin in Mac OS X.
Page 31
The ability to read the contacts stored in Address Book could be used by a worm to propagate. But, malware that uses this to spread is not likely to appear in the wild if the malware is not profitable. It is unlikely that malware will be profitable without being able to hook (this is a specific function) into apps owned by system.
Page 33
Starts off talking about trojans, trojans are easily avoided with user knowledge in Mac OS X because most apps do not require authentication to install if installed in the appropriate location where the Unix DAC model protects the system.
Viruses using the model shown in the article will not be successful without privilege escalation. This is the reason why Mac OS X malware is not successful in the wild.
By default, very few server side services are exposed in Mac OS X and those that are exposed are sandboxed. Vectors for worm propagation are limited to client side. Client side worms require authentication to install and spread if do not include privilege escalation via exploitation because of the Unix DAC model used in Mac OS X. Trojans used to trick users to authenticate are less likely to be successful in Mac OS X as stated above.
Satori
Apr 19, 06:46 AM
Do any of these suits ever actually get resolved?
combatcolin
Oct 27, 09:56 AM
Liked the short advert.
Did make me laugh.
Apple should rip out all there roofing at there HQ and replace it with Solar Panels and replace the heating systems with CHRP systems.
That would help a lot.
Did make me laugh.
Apple should rip out all there roofing at there HQ and replace it with Solar Panels and replace the heating systems with CHRP systems.
That would help a lot.
truz
Aug 28, 09:49 PM
Will an Apple Retail store upgrade your cpu? What's the cost to have this done without a warranty void?
Also,
The Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 1066MHz will work in an imac intel? newegg sells them for $369
Core 2 Duo Extreme runs at 2.93GHz
Also,
The Intel Core 2 Duo E6600 Conroe 1066MHz will work in an imac intel? newegg sells them for $369
Core 2 Duo Extreme runs at 2.93GHz
thejadedmonkey
Nov 13, 06:18 PM
Aplenty needs to clean up their act here.
Rogue isn't a small homegrown company, they deserve to be respected. With policies like this, the App Store might just eventually die.
I hope it dies. It's an abomination among software development.
Rogue isn't a small homegrown company, they deserve to be respected. With policies like this, the App Store might just eventually die.
I hope it dies. It's an abomination among software development.
Westside guy
Apr 11, 02:18 AM
They'll change the key and force a firmware update on any airport express user who wants to update itunes.
Unlikely - this would require the new private key be embedded in the firmware update package, which would defeat the purpose of replacing the old key.
This is a fundamental issue with DRM solutions - you, as the consumer, have to hold the private key. They (Apple) can obfuscate where that key is, but in the end it has to be accessible in some manner. It's the same thing with iTunes DRM. If someone cares enough, they can almost certainly retrieve the private key (which is how Requiem works).
I'm guessing Apple may make some half-hearted move or another; but I doubt they care all that much.
Unlikely - this would require the new private key be embedded in the firmware update package, which would defeat the purpose of replacing the old key.
This is a fundamental issue with DRM solutions - you, as the consumer, have to hold the private key. They (Apple) can obfuscate where that key is, but in the end it has to be accessible in some manner. It's the same thing with iTunes DRM. If someone cares enough, they can almost certainly retrieve the private key (which is how Requiem works).
I'm guessing Apple may make some half-hearted move or another; but I doubt they care all that much.
0815
Apr 20, 12:17 PM
Time to check my wifes iPhone backup tonight :rolleyes:
Manic Mouse
Sep 9, 07:25 AM
Yes of course it can, you obviously don't understand what x86_64 is.
No need to be rude. I was just asking a question!
No need to be rude. I was just asking a question!
tekmoe
Aug 28, 03:05 PM
hahahahahhahaha
merom is better than everyone anticipated... ---> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/intel-core-duo-whassup-faster-197105.php
all the people who said it's only marginal at best can stick it where the sun don't shine! suckaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzz
merom is better than everyone anticipated... ---> http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/laptops/intel-core-duo-whassup-faster-197105.php
all the people who said it's only marginal at best can stick it where the sun don't shine! suckaaaaaaaaaaaaaazzzz
miamijim
Apr 4, 12:38 PM
I'm actually surprised this doesn't happen more often. Applestores must be filled with cash. I would think one would be a bit easier to rob than a bank.
I see no reason why anyone would carry cash...
You do not have to have a credit card you can have a debit card and pay with that.... cash has no place in retail anymore. This would solve a hell of a lot of hold up issues.
The only people who need to deal in cash are drug dealers.
I see no reason why anyone would carry cash...
You do not have to have a credit card you can have a debit card and pay with that.... cash has no place in retail anymore. This would solve a hell of a lot of hold up issues.
The only people who need to deal in cash are drug dealers.
kreach
Apr 20, 09:58 AM
nice! Actually.
iamrawr
Apr 25, 02:38 PM
dooo iittt!!! :D so excited to get my next mbp 3-5 years from now.
Ravich
May 4, 03:32 AM
What has Apple done since the iPhone:
1. kill Xserve
2. Drop their dedicated three ACD CCFL LCD lineup that was top notch and replaced with one stripped down iMac LED LCD
3. Ditch "Resolution Independence" (it's been over 4 years, c'mon Apple!)
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)
5. Begin merging iOS with OS X Lion
5. Funnel less money into Pro-Apps (Final Cut X is meh)
6. Ditch ZFS+ development from Sun Microsystems to replace HFS+ before it was too late
7. Wreck .Mac w/ MobileMe to market Windows iDevices owners w/ little Windows OS integration (iDisk, iLife, and FUNCTIONAL Office syncing are lacking making MobileMe a rip-off for Windows users)
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.
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.
10. OpenGL is seriously lagging
11. iLife '11 in 32-bit?!
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.
13. Produce more than one LED LCD and w/ longer than 2' Mini-DisplayPort/USB chords (had to buy Griffen cables to extend both of my 24" LED LCD's to my 2010 Mac Pro at ~$30 each)
15. iWork '11?
16. iOS err, OS X App Store?
17. USB 3.0?
18. Blu-Ray (need I say more)
19. Lack of "daisy chaining" display with Mini-DisplayPort. "ThunderBolt" ports can daisy chain but:
I think I covered enough :)
u mad bro?
Seriously though. Most of that is just you being angry at apple. It has nothing to do with the Mac Pro. At all. Not including a blu-ray drive is a FAR bigger nuisance to consumers than it is to professional users, yet you list it because, what? You're angry?
Apple has no reason to discontinue the Mac Pro.
1. kill Xserve
2. Drop their dedicated three ACD CCFL LCD lineup that was top notch and replaced with one stripped down iMac LED LCD
3. Ditch "Resolution Independence" (it's been over 4 years, c'mon Apple!)
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)
5. Begin merging iOS with OS X Lion
5. Funnel less money into Pro-Apps (Final Cut X is meh)
6. Ditch ZFS+ development from Sun Microsystems to replace HFS+ before it was too late
7. Wreck .Mac w/ MobileMe to market Windows iDevices owners w/ little Windows OS integration (iDisk, iLife, and FUNCTIONAL Office syncing are lacking making MobileMe a rip-off for Windows users)
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.
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.
10. OpenGL is seriously lagging
11. iLife '11 in 32-bit?!
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.
13. Produce more than one LED LCD and w/ longer than 2' Mini-DisplayPort/USB chords (had to buy Griffen cables to extend both of my 24" LED LCD's to my 2010 Mac Pro at ~$30 each)
15. iWork '11?
16. iOS err, OS X App Store?
17. USB 3.0?
18. Blu-Ray (need I say more)
19. Lack of "daisy chaining" display with Mini-DisplayPort. "ThunderBolt" ports can daisy chain but:
I think I covered enough :)
u mad bro?
Seriously though. Most of that is just you being angry at apple. It has nothing to do with the Mac Pro. At all. Not including a blu-ray drive is a FAR bigger nuisance to consumers than it is to professional users, yet you list it because, what? You're angry?
Apple has no reason to discontinue the Mac Pro.
jz1492
Nov 13, 03:25 PM
So they "knew" they were Right after being told otherwise. :rolleyes:
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
If I remember correctly, apps that get rejected multiple times experiment unusual delays in the approval process.
Maybe they have never developed software for a client and so it is their way or else. Sad.
If you want to develop for the highly rewarding AppStore you have to come to grips with the fact that it is a combination of both models -there is a client, Apple, and there are customers. Fail to please any of them at your own risk.
On the other hand, new openings in a crowded marketplace are more of a good thing for everybody. Farewell, strong-headed developers! :D
Tones2
Mar 29, 12:25 PM
Over FOUR YEARS, which is a major amount of time in this market, I think iOS, Andriod and Windows phones with all be pretty much the same. I think there's going to be a point where that not more more to do with hardware in terms of innovative features. The OS's themselves are really just shells for running apps anyway, and they will all do this fairly effectively in similar ways, a lot like OSX and Win7 are two good OS's. The key will be the app market, which Apple currently holds a huge lead, but in 4 years it would seem that Android and Windows will catch up in terms of IMPORTANT apps to run, so that will be levelized as well.
The iPhone will always have the crazy fanboys to their advantage but Android and Windows phones have the flexibility factor of an open platform where a number of manufacturers can make phones at different price points in different markets.
So in 4 years, I think all will have similar market shares, with iOS being at the bottom of the three just in terms of number of phones because of the closed platform syndrome, but not by much. However, the iPhone will be the most profitable of the three for the OS manufacturers since Apple also maks the hardware.
So let's call it a tie - everybody wins, including the consumer. Remember fanboys - competition and choice is a GOOD thing!
Tony
The iPhone will always have the crazy fanboys to their advantage but Android and Windows phones have the flexibility factor of an open platform where a number of manufacturers can make phones at different price points in different markets.
So in 4 years, I think all will have similar market shares, with iOS being at the bottom of the three just in terms of number of phones because of the closed platform syndrome, but not by much. However, the iPhone will be the most profitable of the three for the OS manufacturers since Apple also maks the hardware.
So let's call it a tie - everybody wins, including the consumer. Remember fanboys - competition and choice is a GOOD thing!
Tony
