chimerical
Nov 28, 07:42 PM
(Did the music companies ask for money for every CD player or Tape Recorder sold? Nope)
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
Actually, yes. I believe that CD-R/CD-RW blank discs and recorders have had some type of royalties fee added to the price, which gets passed down to us consumers. It's frustrating.
dialectician
Aug 7, 05:35 PM
Ok, so I take the point, made ad nauseam, that these features are not entirely new or innovative, since there are third party apps out there that do the same. And perhaps Apple is copying Vista, which doesn't really bother me either.
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
Bottom line: time machine will make a huge difference for most users in terms of preventing or remedying data loss!
squeeks
Apr 28, 03:44 PM
I think it is absolutely appalling that you people are calling anyone who just wanted proof that Obama is qualified, per the constitution, to be president (being born in America) a racist. That is an awful big accusation and personally I can't believe the administration at MR allows that kind of talk.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
This is exactly why I no longer donate to this site.
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:39 PM
I still think it's funny that everyone thinks these Macbook Pros are "long overdue" - when, exactly, did the FIRST Dell laptop with C2D ship? I thought it was supposed to be around tomorrow...but surely it couldn't have been before last Monday or so at the earliest.
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
So that's, what? A week behind in the worst case scenario? Oh God...
However - if they waited till November, then yeah, I'd agree that they were overdue...:)
I see your point... I think Merom has been really overhyped, and I can say that I have gotten caught up in it all. There has been so much talk about Merom for so long, that it's almost hard to believe that it's brand new. Perhaps Santa Rosa will be the same later on...
rovex
Mar 22, 02:27 PM
Actually it is less than 50% the screen area of an iPad. Maybe you should check your math before calling someone stupid.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
I got confused, but nonetheless the smaller screen results in smaller body which in turn means better portability. Which A LOT of individuals want.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
iPad display is about 45 square inches
Playbook display is about 21.5 square inches
I got confused, but nonetheless the smaller screen results in smaller body which in turn means better portability. Which A LOT of individuals want.
And before calling out irony, "your maths" has an 's' at the end. Thanks for playing.
Multimedia
Aug 17, 03:51 PM
Some people do things called graphic design and video editing for a living. Sometimes, when you want to make money and put food on the table, you want top of the line equipment.:rolleyes:Yes. I agree totally. If you are making your living with your Mac doing graphics and video work, every minute saved is another minute you can take on another client or meet a perviously impossible deadline. So in that case the extra $850 is made up in a matter of a few weeks or months at worst. Totally understandable when time is money for the Mac professional. :)
portishead
Apr 12, 01:05 PM
Good for you ;)
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
I know. I'm lucky that I don't have to deal with that. That's what I mean by different people, different workflows. If I had to work with the DSLR workflow, it would drive me crazy. Dealing with source files, converting, proxies, offline, online.
One thing I have never had to deal with in FCP is having an offline/online workflow. It's saved me a lot of headaches I used to have to deal with in Avid. Not that Avid was bad, but capturing once is always easier than twice.
Used to be like that for me but on the projects I work on everybody's gone crazy over DSLRs so I'm stuck with converting.
I know. I'm lucky that I don't have to deal with that. That's what I mean by different people, different workflows. If I had to work with the DSLR workflow, it would drive me crazy. Dealing with source files, converting, proxies, offline, online.
One thing I have never had to deal with in FCP is having an offline/online workflow. It's saved me a lot of headaches I used to have to deal with in Avid. Not that Avid was bad, but capturing once is always easier than twice.
notjustjay
Apr 27, 10:33 AM
Really? So you're telling me that the location saved, of the cell tower 100 miles away, is actually really MY location?
Wow!
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
Wow!
I think it's not as bad as what the media would have you believe, BUT it is worse than what Apple wants you to think.
Sure, cell towers could be up to 100 miles away. And when I ran the mapping tool and plotted my locations, and zoom in far enough, I do indeed see a grid of cell towers as opposed to actual locations where I've been standing. All anyone could know is that I've been "somewhere" in the vicinity.
(And this isn't new. Some time ago I came upon a car crash and called 911 on my cell phone to report it. They were able to get the location to send emergency services just by where I was calling from. It wasn't 100% accurate -- they asked if I was near a major intersection and I told them it was about a block from there.)
However, if it's also tracking wifi hotspots, those can pinpoint you pretty closely. Most people stay within 30-50 feet of their wireless router, and the ones you spend the most time connected to will be the ones at home, at work, and and at your friends' houses.
EagerDragon
Sep 19, 04:47 AM
Hope they do the upgrade soon. However I plan to buy in summer 2007 when they release Leopard and Santa Rosa.
troop231
Mar 22, 12:52 PM
All formidable looking tablets, it is indeed the year of the tablet.
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
So what is next year the year of? Phones again let me guess
deannnnn
Jun 8, 09:26 PM
I would rather just order it online if I didn't want to drive to an Apple Store.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
I used to go to RadioShack every time I needed some kind of cable or needed to convert some kind of cable into another kind of cable. Then I learned that they're prices are insanely high and I've been being ripped off. Now I buy from cmple.com.
Seriously, RadioShack needs to die.
I used to go to RadioShack every time I needed some kind of cable or needed to convert some kind of cable into another kind of cable. Then I learned that they're prices are insanely high and I've been being ripped off. Now I buy from cmple.com.
Dr.Gargoyle
Aug 11, 02:09 PM
If long run is 10yrs, I'll grant you that. But in the US and much of Asia (Australia maybe) where there's CDMA carriers, CDMA2000 1x-EVDx is going to be around for a while.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
Actually WCDMA also inherits much of it's tech from CDMA/IS-95 and I have seen some documentation that shows that WCDMA can be compatible with CDMA2000 just like UTMS/WCDMA is compatible with GSM. But it sounds as if the upgrade path for GSM/GPRS/EDGE to WCDMA is easier than going from CDMA2000 1x to WCDMA.
But since for the next several years CDMA2000 1x-EVDO will be better than the GSM related technologies. And by the time WCDMA takes over, the iPhone will be as antiquated as the Newton.
Apple needs to create both versions as CDMA has about 5x% of the US market... and Apple has and probably will continue to cater to the US market first.
OK. let us just cut to the chase. The keyword here is hand-over. CDMA2000 doesnt support it from GSM. GSM has 81%. Hence cdma is and will always be a small local network that can be used in small pockets on this planet. Furthermore, I seriously doubt ITU/FOMA will change anything in the standard to allow any compability for CDMA2000 since it is not in their interest.
The faster cdam/CDMA2000 moves to oblivion the better.
We would all benefit from one standard, cheaper phones, worldwide access, lower minute rates (from higher competition) Just look at how Vz bills you.
Having multiple standard on cellphones is just as clever as having two incompatible internet.
Hellhammer
Apr 6, 10:20 AM
ULV CPUs (17W) will go to 11.6". The TDP of 320M is not known but 9400M has TDP of 12W so it is quite safe to assume that the TDP is similar to that. That means current 11.6" MBA has TDP of 22W (includes CPU, GPU, chipset) while SB 11.6" MBA would have a TDP of 21W (17W for the CPU and ~4W for the PCH).
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
13" will go with LV CPUs (25W). Again, currently it has 17W for the CPU and 12W for 320M. That's 29W. 25W CPU and ~4W for PCH gives you the same 29W.
11.6" - Core i5-2537M (option for Core i7-2657M)
13.3" - Core i7-2629M (option for Core i7-2649M)
Machead III
Sep 19, 03:50 AM
It would be fantastic for the MacBook to have the Core 2 Duo, (MacBookPro is a given), the fact is, Apple needs to do this update to stay in the same ballpark as the pc notebook makers.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
The fact that we all want dedicated graphics and it's a no-brainer to add it, means that it won't happen.
Now if they could just give the MacBook a real graphics card, I'd be a taker.
Randy at MacSeven.com (http://www.MacSeven.com)
The fact that we all want dedicated graphics and it's a no-brainer to add it, means that it won't happen.
MIDI_EVIL
Sep 13, 07:04 AM
Is there a possibility to assign single cores, or even pairs of cores to certain jobs?
For example, have two cores rendering, two cores encoding, two cores processing regular actions, and two cores making breakfast?
Does my PowerBook G4 have 8 Cores? What is an 8-Core?
Rich.
For example, have two cores rendering, two cores encoding, two cores processing regular actions, and two cores making breakfast?
Does my PowerBook G4 have 8 Cores? What is an 8-Core?
Rich.
digitalbiker
Aug 25, 03:31 PM
Over the years I have bought a lot of computers for my business from a lot of different venders. To be honest Apple hardware support has never impressed me! :mad: I have actually had much better support from Dell than from Apple.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
As far as .Mac goes it is one of the most poorly supported systems I have ever used in my life. They have a lousey limited faq sheet, common problems, email support is pitiful, and they don't take voice support. .Mac is a joke for $100.00 a year.
In general Apple's entire help system in OS X sucks. Searchs within the context of an application gives you all kinds of crap from every application on the system. Also there is no depth to the system. If your problem isn't the most elementary problem possible (99% of which you can figure out yourself) then it won't be in any of the help files.
jackc
Aug 8, 05:16 AM
I hope there's been a significant overhaul in Spotlight, beyond what Steve hinted at already. There was no video demo on the website, so hopefully that's the case. It was a really underdeveloped feature in Tiger.
shamino
Jul 14, 03:55 PM
So why use woodcrest WITHOUT dual processor configuration? Makes no sense, any single proc models should be conroe.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
4M of L2 cache is another good reason. According to recent reports, only the "extreme edition" of the Core 2 (aka Conroe) chip will have 4M. And it will cost more than Woodcrest.
Macs have ALREADY had two optical bays (including twin CD drives). And none of these configs include two drives, you'd only have a second one if you wanted it.
Where have you been shopping recently? Only one model PowerMac has ever had two optical drive bay.
The MDD G4 PowerMac towers (August 2002-June 2004) have two optical drive bays. The G4 PowerMacs that came before only have one (the lower bay is only big enough for floppy-size devices, like zip drives.) The G5 PowerMacs only have one externally-accessible bay of any size.
I would love the ability to install two optical drives, but your claim that Apple is currently shipping this somewhere is simply not true.
bretm
Jul 20, 10:39 AM
Ive already trademarked "OctoCore" and "CoreOcto";)
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
El OchoCoro
Just keep saying it to yourself. After about the 12th time it just starts rolling off your tongue...
El OchoCoro
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.
VanNess
Aug 5, 05:52 PM
As far as I'm concerned, my interest in WWDC rumor mongering is closed. Now that we're in the final weekend, there's too much potential for bogus, wild info from anonymous but suddenly "in the know" sources that will get a kick out seeing false info entertained in sites like this.
Insofar as all of the present rumors/claims combined, there just isn't enough there to justify the amount of "to be announced" sessions for developers that are on the WWDC event schedule, and it isn't likely they are Intel/Universal Binary-related (that particular cat is obviously already out of the bag), so at this point I have no idea what Leopard will bring. All bets are still off.
And what's this nonsense from Thinksecret?
A release date for Leopard is not expected at WWDC and it appears unlikely that the operating system will ship by the close of based on its current development status, sources say.
Well, they certainly aren't going to give an exact day and time of release, but you don't have to be "in the know" to understand that they are going to give a time frame for it's release (i.e., first quarter 07 or first half 07), as they typically do. Common sense tells you that. What's Jobs supposed to say? "Oh, I don't know. Not sure when we are going to release it. But we'll definitely get around to it one of these days."
My guess is that it won't happen until 07, about the same time frame Tiger was released. Although Apple may finish it's hardware transition for the present generation of machines come Monday, Universal Binaries are still very much in progress. Throwing in major new OS changes, new API's etc., courtesy of Leopard on top of the existing Universal Binary transition efforts isn't likely to sit well with developers if the release date for Leopard is too soon - as in by the end of the year. Risks developers either throttling back on UB support or support for whatever goodies that are new in Leopard. And by the looks of the number of yet to be announced sessions at WWDC, there may quite a number of new goodies.
With Microsoft's Vista constantly trying to steer it's way out of oblivion, in this case time is on Apple's side.
Insofar as all of the present rumors/claims combined, there just isn't enough there to justify the amount of "to be announced" sessions for developers that are on the WWDC event schedule, and it isn't likely they are Intel/Universal Binary-related (that particular cat is obviously already out of the bag), so at this point I have no idea what Leopard will bring. All bets are still off.
And what's this nonsense from Thinksecret?
A release date for Leopard is not expected at WWDC and it appears unlikely that the operating system will ship by the close of based on its current development status, sources say.
Well, they certainly aren't going to give an exact day and time of release, but you don't have to be "in the know" to understand that they are going to give a time frame for it's release (i.e., first quarter 07 or first half 07), as they typically do. Common sense tells you that. What's Jobs supposed to say? "Oh, I don't know. Not sure when we are going to release it. But we'll definitely get around to it one of these days."
My guess is that it won't happen until 07, about the same time frame Tiger was released. Although Apple may finish it's hardware transition for the present generation of machines come Monday, Universal Binaries are still very much in progress. Throwing in major new OS changes, new API's etc., courtesy of Leopard on top of the existing Universal Binary transition efforts isn't likely to sit well with developers if the release date for Leopard is too soon - as in by the end of the year. Risks developers either throttling back on UB support or support for whatever goodies that are new in Leopard. And by the looks of the number of yet to be announced sessions at WWDC, there may quite a number of new goodies.
With Microsoft's Vista constantly trying to steer it's way out of oblivion, in this case time is on Apple's side.
Mattie Num Nums
Apr 19, 02:19 PM
Well if I'm wrong about the information, then I don't think anyone will argue about the fact that the Palm OS has been around since 1996, and the Apple iPhone uses a similar interface..
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
I said that in another thread and was laughed at.
Its the same idea though. Its a grid layout with icons that are shortcuts to Applications. Same idea.
All I'm saying is that If there were devices using a similar interface before the iPhone came out I don't see how its fair to sue anyone for it..
http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9153/palmtranicononpalmos.jpg
I said that in another thread and was laughed at.
Its the same idea though. Its a grid layout with icons that are shortcuts to Applications. Same idea.
cult hero
Mar 26, 12:13 PM
For example SAMBA has been removed and completely replaced with a ground up clean room implementation of SMB2 which will translate into better support for Windows Vista and 7 clients as well as the latest versions of Windows. Why hasn't that been mentioned by the nay sayers here?
Do we know this? I know Samba is being replaced but does anyone have any details?
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
Do we know this? I know Samba is being replaced but does anyone have any details?
I presume it's going to have better support for Vista and 7 clients purely because if Apple didn't care about that there would be no reason to ditch the older version of Samba that's GPL2. However, does anyone have any actual details on what Apple's Samba replacement is?
jholzner
Aug 6, 08:32 PM
You have absolutely no chance of winning any legal battle based on what you've described here.
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
I'm on your side. Apple already owns the trademark for Mac so if they want they could have sued them before the Mac Pro was out.
Also, while you're whining about who stole what from who, maybe change your 'save' icon on your site. It's nearly identical to Apples.
I'm on your side. Apple already owns the trademark for Mac so if they want they could have sued them before the Mac Pro was out.
0 comments:
Post a Comment