Megadooomer
Mar 22, 01:18 PM
Except the biggest spec is missing from it: compatible with the Apple App Store. Sorry, specs are not the end all and be all of device popularity. What good are specs if few developers write the device?
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
Absolutely. Have you read the developers comments on the SDK? I downloaded it to try and compile a simple game, which I had already written in Flash/AiR. It runs AiR/Flash, so simple right? NO! You have to jump through a million hoops, (Flash>Flex (which just got switched toFlash-Builder with the new CS5 Workflow, SDK compiler, install VMWare, re-install simulator...)
My first game in iOS was prototyped in an evening, 3-5 hours max. I spent 3 WEEKS trying to get things straight in the Playbook SDK and the thing still won't run right.
This is rediculous. Apple provided a sleek, fun SDK to use. Blackberry relied on Adobe, a 3rd party notoriously terrible at providing a simple, consistent user experience. Flash still barely runs on most platforms.The processes are esoteric and convoluted. Android still has far fewer good, independently developed games, and it already runs on millions of devices for developers to cater to. The Playbook will fall flat entering the market at this point and in this way. It will run almost nothing except perhaps for enterprise/data-base Flex applications, which the IPad can already run fine, in addition to running a million other Apps, including Ereading/News updates. Developers will forget about it, consumers will lose interest, and it will be forgotten before the bugs are even ironed out. RIP Playbook, nice gimmick with the free game.
PS what is with this old "walled garden" argument? Can you connect a camera, or a midi keyboard or a guitar to your Android tablet? Can it play a version of Doom written by Carmack? Can it consistently read and annotate any PDF? The "walled garden" thing is a myth. You can jailbreak and load anything, the only difference is you *may* void the warranty, which is only a problem because AppleCare is generally so awesome compared to other companies that people are afraid of endangering it.
misterniall
Nov 29, 07:10 AM
Perhaps we should all get a rebate for every crappy album ever released by Universal. I really want some of the stuff that these record execs are smoking, on top law suits and strong arm tactics now they expect to get money from every iPod not because the have provided any service or contributed in anyway to the product. Rather, they just want it. Hell, who doesn't ... I would also like to get in on this deal. Please Apple/Microsoft/SanDisk I would like to get $0.50 for every unit you sell. Sign me up. I think it is time that artists really evaluated the balance of power. I think it is time that artists should reevaluate the distrubution of wealth in the recording industry. Perhaps that lost money isn't due to pirating like the execs want you to think.
Free money always welcome.
Free money always welcome.
gorgeousninja
Apr 21, 09:29 AM
Choosing icons that have taken on universal meanings and thus are similar, is quite a bit different from direct copying, of which we see none.
The closest ones in that group are probably the phones, and yet if you search for a phone icon on the web, or even on cell phone buttons, probably a quarter of them are slanted. Moreover, green is an extremely common color for the primary phone button, which is why Apple chose it themselves.
The use of rounded square icon backgrounds is a bit more damning, but still a style choice. Also, Apple's has a shadow and my Fascinate doesn't have the rounded square on most anyway.
Btw, I have noticed that Apple hasn't tried to claim ownership of the twirling wait symbol, but a lot of us were using that before they were.
I think Apple might have much better luck showing that the Galaxy phone shape greatly resembles the 3GS.
ooh i was just waiting for that magical term 'generic' that we always hear about after another 'copy' comes along. 'Style choices' is a classic, are you a politician?
"Hey look at how well designed that iPhone is I think I'll make a few 'style choices' and copy every single one of their icons..then have my lawyers deem them all generic".
The closest ones in that group are probably the phones, and yet if you search for a phone icon on the web, or even on cell phone buttons, probably a quarter of them are slanted. Moreover, green is an extremely common color for the primary phone button, which is why Apple chose it themselves.
The use of rounded square icon backgrounds is a bit more damning, but still a style choice. Also, Apple's has a shadow and my Fascinate doesn't have the rounded square on most anyway.
Btw, I have noticed that Apple hasn't tried to claim ownership of the twirling wait symbol, but a lot of us were using that before they were.
I think Apple might have much better luck showing that the Galaxy phone shape greatly resembles the 3GS.
ooh i was just waiting for that magical term 'generic' that we always hear about after another 'copy' comes along. 'Style choices' is a classic, are you a politician?
"Hey look at how well designed that iPhone is I think I'll make a few 'style choices' and copy every single one of their icons..then have my lawyers deem them all generic".
sotorious
Apr 11, 01:49 PM
Is that source creditable. I was thinking of making the jump ship to an iphone try it out for a year, but the thought of waiting till june to get a phone was a killer in it self. Now waiting till October is def a no go. I already have my phone for a year and that is way to long just for looking at the same phone that whole time.
filmantopia
Apr 10, 01:23 PM
I bet they're going to lower the price too. :apple:
MacAddict1978
Mar 26, 02:18 PM
It must be conspiracy right. Right.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
It couldn't just be an honest mistake as a result of a stretched development team.
No. It must be the same guys who shot Kennedy messing up all our tech. It's probably something to do with the Chinese.
With all the cash Apple sit's their butts on, there is NO EXCUSE for their development teams, or any team to be stretched thin. Back in the day when Apple was still the little engine that could and trying to avoid that second foot falling in the grave, ok. Yes, they needed to stretch themselves, innovate with little expense, but not today.
Some will argue Apple is slow with development because they want to get it right. Though history in the past 5 years shows us consistency with hardware issues in just about every thing they have released, and software bugs to match on the other end. We've seen delays in OS releases the past few times, and still buggy when they do come out. Leopard was released with an installer that failed and forced tons of people mass headaches, even the tech savvy. The bloody installer was buggy! I expect the darn thing to at least install before glitches tick me off.
Hire some damned people already. The money you spend denying things are buggy or denying the existence of hardware issues (that magically a month or 2 later you fix even though you denied it was a problem in the first place) could easily expand your teams.
And while I don't subscribe to the original posters conspiracy theory, I think he's half right. THey just don't care. iPhone 3G users anyway? They bricked everyone's phones with a bad update, and then acted like everyone was crazy, then admitted it was slow (no, unusable) gave a shoddy fix that made it usable but so bad you had to either hack your phone to put an old version of IOS on it, or you were running to upgrade. Wait, maybe I do buy into his theory. It's one thing to not support old technologies, it's another to leave them crippled and not look back.
wmmk
Aug 17, 09:49 AM
I don't like Adobe anymore. :mad:
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
I dunno, I mean, I guess they could use core image, but really. CS3 will probably have PS, Illustrator, ID, FW, Flash, DW, CF, Contribute, Bridge and Acrobat. That's 10 apps. Would you want to develop 20 apps, just so that Mac users could have Core Image? Until competitors come along with Core Image support, don't expect Adobe to have it.
Mr Fusion
Mar 26, 01:33 AM
http://dissociatedpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/facebook-meh-button-500.png
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
Yet another unimpressive "major" update to an O/S that's showing it's age and irrelevance. (Hell it's already to most consumers nothing more than "That thing you gotta hook your iPad up to to make it work.) Compared to the iDevice world, the computer side of Apple has ground to a halt. Is it intentional I wonder...? ;)
Enough!! Combine MacOS and iOS already!!! The transition is so painfully slow, would someone else in tech get off their lazy ass and prod these guys to move a LITTLE quicker?!?
:rolleyes:
Tones2
Apr 19, 02:39 PM
Boy. Why do we go back and forth like this arguing between fanboys and non. It's pointless. Nobody cares about your or my opinion, and you're not convincing anyone who disagrees with you as people NEVER change their opinions about anything ever.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
I'm not why I do it either, but never again.
AppleScruff1
Apr 8, 02:31 AM
I heard galaxy tab is better than Ipad. Is it true??
It's way better. Better get one while you still can.
It's way better. Better get one while you still can.
Kranchammer
Apr 6, 04:43 PM
You both ignored HOT DOGS! Sheesh, hot dogs rule. The only problem is kids under 6 choking on them unless you cut them right. But that will be fixed in the v3.0 hot dog, they will come pre-sliced.
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
GTFO. :mad:
Or are you counting on the deal with that swedish sausage company to save hot dogs from doooom?
The race to the bottom continues...
zero2dash
Sep 18, 01:44 PM
Plenty of people ran NT on their desktops.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
Admission of your mistakes is a good step in becoming a better person.
Key word being DESKTOPS.
MP machines were server based long before they were included in desktops. I'd like to see where people had dual Xeon based DESKTOPS 'cause I've never seen it. It's not impossible but it's also not a good cost-based answer either. :p
The server/desktop division with Windows - as with OS X - is one of marketing, not software. Windows "Workstation" and Windows "Server" use the same codebase.
I never said otherwise.
The hardware they run on is where it differentiates.
Most people/corporations run server-based OS on servers and workstation-based OS on desktops (or "workstations" in the business world). It's not impossible to run a server OS on a desktop or a workstation OS on a server but it is incredibly stupid.
Well, if you can't find evidence of Windows running on well on machine with >2 processors, or of the significant low-level changes Microsoft have made to ensure it does, you aren't looking very hard.
Bad dual core support? Citations please. I think this is a case where a Mac fan is simply speaking out of ignorance of their "enemy" platform.
I erronously bundled in "dual core" with "sketchy 64-bit support". Don't know why. From what I hear, 64-bit support in XP64 is sketchy because of device driver issues (and drivers not being natively 64-bit). I don't have any true 'dual core' systems myself but my P4 3.0C HT works fine in XP Pro. I apologize for lumping in "dual core" in.
Similarly, if you're one of the "Vista is just XP with a fancy skin" crowd, you've obviously not done much research. The changes in Vista are on par with the scale of changes Apple made to NeXT to get OS X.
User Account Protection is a big change. I've seen the list of "new features" and it doesn't do anything for me. UAP is nice...it's just really late. I'm sure there's changes "under the hood" like the ones implemented in XP sp2 to prevent buffer/stack overflows, etc. and I'm sure that's what you're referring to.
I think people who say stuff like that are exhibiting a syndrome common to Mac folk who've never spent any time in the PC world -- they take negative comments they remember regarding versions of Windows or the PC experience from about 5 years back and assume they apply to today. XP, for example, really was for the most part a window-dressing of Windows 2000, but that is not the case for Vista. You see similar statements regarding "blue screens of death", overall system stability, etc, which suggest they haven't seen or used a PC since the late 90s/early 00's.
So - are you inferring that Windows 2000 or Windows XP never blue screen? Because (if you are) that's a load of crap. I've seen blue screens in both OS's. Granted it's usually tied to hardware only, but it still happens. I've had an external USB drive blue screen in XP every time I turned it on, tried on 3 XP computers. Hardware fault, no doubt. Lately my HP Laptop dvd drive has been causing XP Pro to blue screen every other time I insert a dvd-r. Again - hardware fault.
Otherwise are both OS's stable? Damn straight. But problems do occur and I hope you're not suggesting otherwise. No OS is without its flaws.
KnightWRX
Mar 26, 07:58 AM
2) $129 is too much. This one cracks me up. Apple is bundling a $500 product into the OS (and other OS based servers are far more expensive) and people think $129 is too much?
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
Apple is bundling a bunch of GUI management tools, akin to Webmin. Was that worth 500$ before ? Nope. Is it more expensive elsewhere ? No. Let's face it, OS X Server was always a toy Unix compared to other big-Iron Unix systems and even to Linux as far as enterprise support goes. Volume management, hello Cupertino ?
Their old archaic way of managing storage is atrocious and no, I don't necessarily want to hook up with a huge array and run Xsan, I just want to intelligently manage my local storage. No, just RAID1 volumes is not enough, I want my volumes logical and independant of my physical volumes. I want to be able to move logical extents to new physical extents without having to take down anything on the box.
And what about those GUI tools ? I can't even just do X11 tunneling over SSH to my desktop to run them, I have either run their Remote Desktop stuff or use a 3rd party solution like VNC... What good are they ? At least make them web based (HP Systems Management Homepage type stuff) and join in to what the rest of the industry got clued into years ago if you don't want to code GUI stuff over X11.
And other OS based servers are not more expensive. Solaris is free (http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/solaris/downloads/index.html). I won't even bother linking to all the free distributions of Linux that are ready for the server (Fedora, OpenSuSE, Arch, Ubuntu). The BSDs. Unix server product vendors make their money off of support contracts, not the actual software itself, an arena Apple obviously wants no part of.
All the bits and pieces of server software is mostly re-packaged open source components nowadays anyhow. Most every vendor out there is using Apache and Tomcat in their web-based products, Postfix on the mail side, I've seen a lot of MySQL and PostgreSQL based products (HP uses both, MySQL I've seen in their Output Manager product, PostgreSQL in their System Fault Management, Symantec uses MySQL for Brightmail), and let's not even get into OpenSSL and OpenSSH...
Heck, even Apple does this. OS X server is just a bunch of open source components packaged up together. Apache, OpenLDAP, OpenSSH, ClamAV...
So please, pretty please, with a cherry on top, let's not call OS X Server something worth 500$ and compare it to "others that are more expensive but in actuality are free to download and run and only expensive to get vendor support for".
This rant was longer than it should have been. I love OS X as a desktop OS. I'd pay 129$ for a Lion upgrade with my eyes closed. Best of both worlds. Unix underpinnings and powerful command-line (everything is there!) with integration for all my server products yet fast and easy to setup GUI that is mostly consistent so as to attract a large user base that makes it a good proposition for commercial software vendors to port their packages to. Apple just never got really serious about the server side of it (and lets face it, it's not their business and they obviously want no part of the entreprise market) and I'm not faulting them for that. Let's not be as disingenious as to claim their selling you a 500$ product for 129$ though.
I'm shocked at how many people are so willing to just wave away all the nice under-the-hood changes and improvements that Snow Leopard offers just because there aren't any super-radical UI changes... really disappointing to be honest. Does it really have to be all flashy to be of interest to you? What, the functional side of things doesn't matter any more?
See how this little change in your comment still makes it apply very much to the MacRumors crowd ? ;) The fact is, you're not really dealing with technical people on MacRumors, no matter how much some of them pretend they are. Heck, some of them still believe that HTML is a programming language and that they are web developers because their tools of choice are PhotoShop and Dreamweaver.
iGary
Aug 11, 11:19 AM
I've been looking at the Treo, but they're not easy to come by for Vodafone contract, if at all.
And they suck - I had a 600, which fell into the water and was replaced by insurance with a 650, which is only marginally better.
I don't believe the rumor - Steve wouldn't blab, he just wouldn't.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
And they suck - I had a 600, which fell into the water and was replaced by insurance with a 650, which is only marginally better.
I don't believe the rumor - Steve wouldn't blab, he just wouldn't.
We only have a month to wait, though. :)
mrwonkers
Apr 6, 10:31 AM
No Real web designer uses iWeb...
Tried it for 5 minutes until i realised how closed up it is, ie no code view.
Not that i really need any graphic program anyway. TextWrangler and Notepad++ FTW!
Its not made for real web designers, its made for MILFs and Soccer Moms who just wanna wack a site 2getha...
Tried it for 5 minutes until i realised how closed up it is, ie no code view.
Not that i really need any graphic program anyway. TextWrangler and Notepad++ FTW!
Its not made for real web designers, its made for MILFs and Soccer Moms who just wanna wack a site 2getha...
SirHaakon
Apr 6, 09:44 AM
Nobody's using Blu-Ray, in my experience.
You must have pretty limited experience.
It's the only logistical way to deliver high-bitrate 1080p material to clients.
You must have pretty limited experience.
It's the only logistical way to deliver high-bitrate 1080p material to clients.
noire anqa
Mar 26, 07:22 AM
I use my computer as a "real computer" and I like virtually every change I've seen. I wish people wouldn't generalize so broadly and presume that because certain additions aren't something that they use that it has nothing to do with "real work."
jessica simpson wedding shoes.
jessica simpson shoes
Super Dave
Aug 5, 06:38 PM
More speculation than rumour, but for Leopard I'd bet on:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
-Resolution Independent UI http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2006/5/22/4065
-Quartz 2D Extreme http://arstechnica.com/reviews/os/macosx-10.4.ars/14
Honestly, I'm surprised they're not in the rumour roundup.
David :cool:
VanNess
Aug 7, 09:24 PM
Alright, I'll take these one by one...
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
Time Machine: Nice feature, nice implementation, nice eye-candy - but I don't see it as a heavily used feature. I mean, you should hope that it doesn't have to be heavily used. I think I can count the number of instances on one hand where I deleted a file that I regretted deleting later, and I've never screwed up my install to the point where I would need to revert the system back to a previous state. Others may have had different experiences from me and this is a nice "insurance policy" utility to have, but overall I don't see it as having a major impact on the majority of Mac users in day to day usage.
Enhanced Mail: This is nice, but html mail composition was promised for Tiger and that turned into, for all practical intents and purposes, vaporware. Now here it is front and center in Leopard. Grrrrrr. (Now you know why they called it Tiger, lol)
Enhanced iChat: Nifty new features, but here's the deal: Apple needs to look beyond Cupertino and survey the IM landscape that exists outside of the US, because it's huge. Most PC-using kids and twenty-somethings overseas live and breath and depend on two kinds of software, an internet browser and an IM client. Overseas, Yahoo and MS Messenger are all that's used and the features that are provided by those clients are heavily depended upon by the overseas youth culture because they were born and raised on that stuff. If iChat (or any other client) at a minimum can't provide support for Yahoo and MS Messenger protocols with absolute one for one feature parity with PC's, you can forget about selling a Mac (or at least the Mac OS) to these kids, because it's just an absolute deal-killer without IM support that they are used to. The IM culture overseas is just that big, that integrated, and they (along with their IM friends) don't use AOL and they don't use .Mac and they aren't going to. The IM scene overseas and it's dependence on MS Messenger and Yahoo is practically a youth culture in and of itself now and ignoring that is simply bad business for Apple at this point.
Spaces: This one looks pretty cool
Enhanced Dashboard: The only thing that really needs to be enhanced with Dashboard is widget collection organization. With the sheer number of widgets that are out now, hammering on the little arrows in the Widget Bar and watching bar after bar after bar of widgets fly by while you're searching for a particular widget that you may or may not remember the name of just isn't working. The Spaces (virtual desktop) feature may come to the rescue here if different collections of widgets can be maintained on separate desktops, but is seems like Spaces is overkill just for that. Dashboard needs it's own "Spaces" (multiple Dashboard instances) or a better way of managing large widget collections.
Enhanced Spotlight: Its all good
Enhanced iCal: Okay...what else?
More Accessible: This is actually quite good as I suspect disabled access to computers will become more of a focus as time goes on particularly with disabled or handicapped employees. So it's great that Apple is leading the charge here.
Core Animation: Another avenue to the treasure chest of Apple OS eye-candy for third-party devs, just in case Core Image wasn't floating anyone's boat
Increased 64-bit support: Which will be great whenever we see increased 64-bit applications showing up.
But the overall impression is, so what? Maybe I'm being overly optimistic, but I think the so-called "secret" unseen, unknown features are the ones that will really matter for most users, what was shown today is by and large fluff. If Jobs says Apple isn't going to reveal some of Leopard's features for fear of MS pulling one of it's copy jobs, then they must be fairly significant features worth protecting until the last minute. So what matters with Leopard isn't what was seen today, what really matters is what wasn't seen.
scott523
Sep 19, 07:52 AM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
I agree what you said, but at least it's what I've been waiting to hear. :D
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
I agree what you said, but at least it's what I've been waiting to hear. :D
goobot
Apr 25, 01:42 PM
I dont understand how anyone would get the info from your phone.
bedifferent
Apr 27, 09:32 AM
None of which are affecting my day to day life. However, since you say I can't go on living my life until all other worldly issues are resolved, I will be waiting for a e-mail letting me know when I can resume going about my daily routine.
* Newsflash You can do both *
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
Wow, I don't know what's worse, your apathy or the irony. They're called "priorities" and some people need to get theirs together… that would be called "reality"...
PS voting my comment down and others who like my comment, funny… in a sad way… ;)
* Newsflash You can do both *
Until then, I will stay fixed in front of my computer screen. :rolleyes:
This argument that we shouldn't worry about anything because bigger things are going on has got to stop. It's the most disingenuous comment you can make.
Wow, I don't know what's worse, your apathy or the irony. They're called "priorities" and some people need to get theirs together… that would be called "reality"...
PS voting my comment down and others who like my comment, funny… in a sad way… ;)
kenypowa
Apr 27, 08:09 AM
Funny comment from Engadget:
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Why is my iphone tracking me?
A: It's not. It's tracking networks and cell towers near wherever you go.
Q: What is the difference between tracking me, and tracking the towers wherever I happen to go? Isn't that the same thing?
A: No. Because it's crowd-sourced. Total crowd size = 1.
Q: Umm. Ok? Soo. Why have you been keeping logs for the past year?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Then why was it unencrypted?
A: That was a bug.
Q: Right. Then why when I opted out did it ignore my choice?
A: That was a bug.
smaffei
Apr 27, 08:05 AM
A lot of people are upset over this. But, no one seems to care that the US Government can snoop on any electronic communication it wants for well over 10 years now: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echelon_(signals_intelligence)
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
Data transmissions, cell phone calls, you name it. I think we're trying to cook the wrong goose if you ask me.
No comments:
Post a Comment