DoFoT9
Aug 18, 05:38 AM
A blue PS3 is a nice idea.
pretty darn cool! won't go very well with the black look that i am after though ;)
pretty darn cool! won't go very well with the black look that i am after though ;)
mdriftmeyer
Apr 25, 03:56 PM
Except secured
How does an encrypted db aide your sense of security when the information is about publicly listed cell towers [FCC registered], and ends up at Google which profiles your activities for trends which then allows them to resell this information through their AdSense service and more?
How did your sense of security become violated when the Telcos have historically sold your contact information to third parties who flood your mail box with junk mail and get you on lists w/o your consent? Does it send you through the roof that your liberties are being violated?
Do you scream at Safeway, Albertsons, Starbucks and every other business that profiles your buying habits that it pushes you to file a class action lawsuit?
I think not.
This and all subsequent lawsuits will be thrown out. Apple is in compliance with the FCC rules and regulations set by Congress.
If you notice, Congress has been conspicuously absent since sending off a letter to Steven P. Jobs.
The only people pushing this story are blogs and journalists [HuffingtonPost, WSJ, etc] because it gets them massive click through results.
People are crying about a location service doing what it's designed to do, yet they acted as if RFID tags that WalMart wanted to deploy, a few years back, was no big deal.
One of the obvious reasons Apple sees no reason to encrypt the db is it's one extra process to decrypt/encrypt each time a new tower cell is logged to the phone as it keeps probing for the best signal, shortest path to that signal solution, across a spread spectrum.
But then again, I forget that 99% of all consumers are Physicists, Engineers, Mathematicians, Doctors, and we produce children with Ph.D's ala Wesley Crusher dealing with Particle Physics at the tender age of 15 so commonly that the thought of an unintelligent human has long since become a relic to the evolution of the species.
While everyone screams about tracking they conveniently ignore the IP address that keeps them tracked using their own computer(s).
How does an encrypted db aide your sense of security when the information is about publicly listed cell towers [FCC registered], and ends up at Google which profiles your activities for trends which then allows them to resell this information through their AdSense service and more?
How did your sense of security become violated when the Telcos have historically sold your contact information to third parties who flood your mail box with junk mail and get you on lists w/o your consent? Does it send you through the roof that your liberties are being violated?
Do you scream at Safeway, Albertsons, Starbucks and every other business that profiles your buying habits that it pushes you to file a class action lawsuit?
I think not.
This and all subsequent lawsuits will be thrown out. Apple is in compliance with the FCC rules and regulations set by Congress.
If you notice, Congress has been conspicuously absent since sending off a letter to Steven P. Jobs.
The only people pushing this story are blogs and journalists [HuffingtonPost, WSJ, etc] because it gets them massive click through results.
People are crying about a location service doing what it's designed to do, yet they acted as if RFID tags that WalMart wanted to deploy, a few years back, was no big deal.
One of the obvious reasons Apple sees no reason to encrypt the db is it's one extra process to decrypt/encrypt each time a new tower cell is logged to the phone as it keeps probing for the best signal, shortest path to that signal solution, across a spread spectrum.
But then again, I forget that 99% of all consumers are Physicists, Engineers, Mathematicians, Doctors, and we produce children with Ph.D's ala Wesley Crusher dealing with Particle Physics at the tender age of 15 so commonly that the thought of an unintelligent human has long since become a relic to the evolution of the species.
While everyone screams about tracking they conveniently ignore the IP address that keeps them tracked using their own computer(s).
AwakenedLands
Mar 31, 06:46 PM
I bet they tried, but it didn't work well. They're just feigning ignorance. As they themselves said, they cut corners. I read this as they didn't optimize the software-- it's probably very processor and RAM intensive. Just speculation though.
That's just MORE reason to open source it. Cutting corners is the one thing Apple generally doesn't do (or they spin it perfectly). If Google cut corners on Honeycomb to meet some "deadline", that's one thing that could benefit from a community of free coders willing to code for Android.
To me it sounds like there is a flaw with Honeycomb that is pretty serious, but they need to make it available for phones as soon as they can to keep up with Apple. Once fix it becomes open.
That's just MORE reason to open source it. Cutting corners is the one thing Apple generally doesn't do (or they spin it perfectly). If Google cut corners on Honeycomb to meet some "deadline", that's one thing that could benefit from a community of free coders willing to code for Android.
To me it sounds like there is a flaw with Honeycomb that is pretty serious, but they need to make it available for phones as soon as they can to keep up with Apple. Once fix it becomes open.
LightSpeed1
Apr 11, 03:53 PM
I think I'm done with the iPhone 5 rumors. At this point I think I'll just wait till June-July. It's not that far away.
aafuss1
Aug 6, 05:23 PM
Mike,
I know you're concerned about name-maybe Apple could license the use to you.
Leopard-Public beta like Vista. No-as it can be easily uploaded to torrent sites-like with the Tiger leaks. Apple should keep the preview ADC members only.
I know you're concerned about name-maybe Apple could license the use to you.
Leopard-Public beta like Vista. No-as it can be easily uploaded to torrent sites-like with the Tiger leaks. Apple should keep the preview ADC members only.
DJsteveSD
Mar 31, 02:59 PM
you keep using that word� (http://cl.ly/0x032o272d2a3g1t1k3d)
lol
lol
ergle2
Sep 14, 01:17 PM
True (today anyway; in the NT era they were indeed separate platforms though. Which brings me to my next point..)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
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.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
Point of total (and obnoxious) pedantry here -- XP and W2K3 Server aren't strictly the same codebase; The latter was a huge rewrite job with some fairly significant internal changes.
XP 64bit is based on W2K3, and Vista originally started out on the XP code base and then was scrapped, and was started over using the W2K3 codebase.
It doesn't invalidate your point in any way and the latter is most definitely descended from the former, but unlike previous products they weren't released in parallel. I mention it purely because I find it interesting, and it's also an example of how Windows is "evolving", so to speak.
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.
This is very common on both sides of the divide. Many Mac-only people seem to think Windows is still stuck in the Win9x days, and many of the Windows-only types seem to think MacOS is still in the 8.x days.
I guess it's a little like when your friend has kids and you don't see them for a few years, and you're surprised that instead of still being little kids they're teenagers... :)
azzurri000
Sep 18, 11:32 PM
All I have to say is:
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
"what the hell is taking them so frigging long?"
This update better be bitchin!
LightSpeed1
Apr 5, 05:26 PM
Hopefully there will be new iMacs to go with it. Refresh please!You and me both.
JM-Prod
Apr 10, 08:17 AM
Faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
Hmm, you want a faster horse or did you think my comments were screaming for them?
If my expectation are met, it would be a revolution in editing.
The second since introducing digital non-linear editing in the late 80's.
Not faster horses.
rdowns
Jun 8, 07:09 PM
That's me!
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
Why would there be any difference? Do Cheese Doodles purchased form the Piggly Wiggly taste any better than those purchased from Publix?
Nearest Apple Store is 90 minutes away. Nearest Authorized AT&T store that would carry the iPhone is like 60. Radio shack is just 10 minutes.
I'm wondering though, what would be the advantages/disadvantages to buying it at Radio Shack vs AT&T vs The Apple Store? Once I have the item purchased, will I notice any sort of difference what-so-ever?
Cheers.
Why would there be any difference? Do Cheese Doodles purchased form the Piggly Wiggly taste any better than those purchased from Publix?
gnasher729
Aug 27, 06:54 AM
OK, that's wierd. Who would get angry about having research into what the public wants done for them???
No wonder Nintendo sucks so much.
BTW, Congrats on ur 500 Posts!
Very simple. What these companies are all afraid off: You think of some way to improve a Macintosh, or an iPod. You have the same idea as thousand other people, including the guys at Apple. You send the idea to them. They implement the idea - which they developed on their own, independent of what you sent them, and what thousand other people thought of. You see your idea implemented and promptly sue Apple for millions of dollars. The case ends up in front of a jury full of idiots who promptly take your side against the evil corporation and give you millions of dollars.
All that mess can easily be prevented by not accepting any ideas from people who are not paid by the company.
No wonder Nintendo sucks so much.
BTW, Congrats on ur 500 Posts!
Very simple. What these companies are all afraid off: You think of some way to improve a Macintosh, or an iPod. You have the same idea as thousand other people, including the guys at Apple. You send the idea to them. They implement the idea - which they developed on their own, independent of what you sent them, and what thousand other people thought of. You see your idea implemented and promptly sue Apple for millions of dollars. The case ends up in front of a jury full of idiots who promptly take your side against the evil corporation and give you millions of dollars.
All that mess can easily be prevented by not accepting any ideas from people who are not paid by the company.
MacinDoc
Aug 26, 08:39 PM
I agree. But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it. :mad:
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
Apple has, on occasion, introduced new or upgraded features on its consumer computers when those computers were refreshed between refresh cycles of their professional computers. For example, at one time, the iMac had a faster SuperDrive than the Power Mac. Of course, with the next refresh of the pro computers, the new/upgraded features seen previously in the consumer products have always been added.
Blue Velvet
Mar 23, 06:11 AM
Libya is more like Bosnia than Iraq. A moment of force has the potential to change the scope of the conflict, hopefully for the positive, in a way that a full-blown invasion would merely complicate. That's the central part that fivepoint, who is merely interested in making another partisan screed, is ignoring.
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
Well exactly. Far easier to tag together some buzzwords, maybe pull something from FoxNews than it is to think critically about the issue. This inane comparison between coalition numbers was also picked up by Steve M.:
Fox Nation huffily declares that "Bush Had 2 Times More Coalition Partners in Iraq Than Obama Has in Libya." Bush's thirty-nation list, of course, included such global powers as Azerbaijan, Estonia, Latvia, and Uzbekistan, and didn't include the likes of, y'know, Germany and France.
But if we're going to play games like this, in the run-up to the war, how many coalition partners did Bush attract per week? The Libyan uprising started just about a month ago and Obama's coalition is fifteen nations. When do you date the start of the "Iraq crisis" the Bushies manufactured? The Axis of Evil speech, fourteen months before the war began? The Battle of Tora Bora, a month before that? The first administration meetings on Iraq regime change, mere days after Bush's inauguration, and more than two years before the Iraq War started? By that standard, Bush barely acquired one coalition partner a month! Obama obtained more than three partners a week!
I'm reminded of the 2000 electoral maps that measured Bush's vote by geography, as if winning a county with more jackrabbits than people was the equivalent of winning a county full of apartment buildings.
http://nomoremister.blogspot.com/2011/03/well-if-were-going-to-be-ridiculous.html
Meanwhile, Juan Cole lays out ten reasons why this is not like Iraq:
Here are the differences between George W. Bush�s invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the current United Nations action in Libya:
1. The action in Libya was authorized by the United Nations Security Council. That in Iraq was not. By the UN Charter, military action after 1945 should either come as self-defense or with UNSC authorization. Most countries in the world are signatories to the charter and bound by its provisions.
2. The Libyan people had risen up and thrown off the Qaddafi regime, with some 80-90 percent of the country having gone out of his hands before he started having tank commanders fire shells into peaceful crowds. It was this vast majority of the Libyan people that demanded the UN no-fly zone. In 2002-3 there was no similar popular movement against Saddam Hussein.
3. There was an ongoing massacre of civilians, and the threat of more such massacres in Benghazi, by the Qaddafi regime, which precipitated the UNSC resolution. Although the Saddam Hussein regime had massacred people in the 1980s and early 1990s, nothing was going on in 2002-2003 that would have required international intervention.
4. The Arab League urged the UNSC to take action against the Qaddafi regime, and in many ways precipitated Resolution 1973. The Arab League met in 2002 and expressed opposition to a war on Iraq. (Reports of Arab League backtracking on Sunday were incorrect, based on a remark of outgoing Secretary-General Amr Moussa that criticized the taking out of anti-aircraft batteries. The Arab League reaffirmed Sunday and Moussa agreed Monday that the No-Fly Zone is what it wants).
5. None of the United Nations allies envisages landing troops on the ground, nor does the UNSC authorize it. Iraq was invaded by land forces.
6. No false allegations were made against the Qaddafi regime, of being in league with al-Qaeda or of having a nuclear weapons program. The charge is massacre of peaceful civilian demonstrators and an actual promise to commit more such massacres.
7. The United States did not take the lead role in urging a no-fly zone, and was dragged into this action by its Arab and European allies. President Obama pledges that the US role, mainly disabling anti-aircraft batteries and bombing runways, will last �days, not months� before being turned over to other United Nations allies.
8. There is no sectarian or ethnic dimension to the Libyan conflict, whereas the US Pentagon conspired with Shiite and Kurdish parties to overthrow the Sunni-dominated Baathist regime in Iraq, setting the stage for a prolonged and bitter civil war.
9. The US has not rewarded countries such as Norway for entering the conflict as UN allies, but rather a genuine sense of outrage at the brutal crimes against humanity being committed by Qaddafi and his forces impelled the formation of this coalition. The Bush administration�s �coalition of the willing� in contrast was often brought on board by what were essentially bribes.
10. Iraq in 2002-3 no longer posed a credible threat to its neighbors. A resurgent Qaddafi in Libya with petroleum billions at his disposal would likely attempt to undermine the democratic experiments in Tunisia and Egypt, blighting the lives of millions.
http://www.juancole.com/2011/03/top-ten-ways-that-libya-2011-is-not-iraq-2003.html
kutsushita
Jun 12, 12:54 PM
Another potential problem...
How many iPhone 4s is Radio Shack going to
have in stock on first day of sale?
It's not like they are the Apple or AT&T store.
If I could be assured of a phone on day one
from Radio Shack the deal would be a pretty
good one.
All the radio shacks in Houston sold around 67k evos first day (or so I was told by a manager.)
If anyone is in Houston and shops the galleria they've started a preorder list at the location next to the sanrio store. The manager said they will be opening early on the 24th as well.
How many iPhone 4s is Radio Shack going to
have in stock on first day of sale?
It's not like they are the Apple or AT&T store.
If I could be assured of a phone on day one
from Radio Shack the deal would be a pretty
good one.
All the radio shacks in Houston sold around 67k evos first day (or so I was told by a manager.)
If anyone is in Houston and shops the galleria they've started a preorder list at the location next to the sanrio store. The manager said they will be opening early on the 24th as well.
mr.steevo
Apr 25, 04:30 PM
Case in point: My GF has a few crazy stalkers who could find out from this data base where she actually spends most of her time. They are mentally challenged creeps who have no way to do this through hacking into ATT but they could steal her stuff at her public appearances. They actually showed up there.
Then she needs to speak with the police.
Then she needs to speak with the police.
bigandy
Nov 29, 11:37 AM
Same here, paying a levy on iPod's is like paying one on Hard drives as many of them contain copyrighted material, except they could never do that as the business world would go insane if they had to pay a levy to the music industry.
i agree too. it's kinda making you want to rip off their music seeing as you'd be paying for it already :rolleyes:
i agree too. it's kinda making you want to rip off their music seeing as you'd be paying for it already :rolleyes:
HecubusPro
Sep 19, 09:21 AM
That whole comment had the tone of a spoilt 13 year old...
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
You have no idea why some ppl are waiting for the next revision or upgrade - don't benchmark your rationale with others in way that dismisses other ppl who have equally legitimate reasons and opinions...
Some ppl (who don't have allot of money to drop every year for the next best thing) have to spend wisely - and perhaps just want a revB machine that is more stable and refined. I for one keep my macs until they die...so I will be waiting for revB to maximise my chances of a solid bug-free machine.
If that makes me spoilt - b/c I don't want to purchase new products year after year - then there is nothing I can do about your perceptions...
AMEN!!!! :D
bigmc6000
Aug 11, 11:51 AM
I really really really hope they just go in with a carrier on this (of course requiring Cingular to not cripple the functionality). There's no way in the world Apple would make as much money off of this as if they got in with one of the big guys. Just ask Disney - ESPN mobile is bombing as is Disney mobile. It doesn't work. And most of those you have to pay retail price for the phone - screw that. I'm going to be with Cingular anyway I might as well get them to take $200 off the phone for me.
PLEASE STEVE, GO WITH CINGULAR!!!!!!!
Note; I'm just saying Cingular since they are the only ones who really seem interested in offering iTunes on their phones...
PLEASE STEVE, GO WITH CINGULAR!!!!!!!
Note; I'm just saying Cingular since they are the only ones who really seem interested in offering iTunes on their phones...
mdntcallr
Sep 19, 09:54 AM
APPLE I NEED A NEW MACBOOK PRO. I NEED FIREWIRE 800, I NEED A DL SuperDrive, i'd like MEMROM. If you had to release a half-assed Prosumer laptop in the first place to start your transition for the love of god PLEASE update it now. Its been a LONG time since we've seen any updates. Apple is now competing in INTEL land, were they need to keep their laptops current. Release the laptops (notebooks in your case as you like to call them) i'll place the order and wait for them to ship. PLEASE.!
mike
umm, how about more than a simple basic update.
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
mike
umm, how about more than a simple basic update.
We need:
Firewire 800
Superdrive DL w/ OPTION FOR BLU-RAY!!!
Nvidia 7800 or 7900 option!! we need option for best vid card!! upgrade to 512 mb vram
and..... Magsafe Airplane/Auto POWER ADAPTER!!
bigwig
Nov 28, 07:37 PM
1) Who says the people who actually make the music would get any of this money in the first place?
My bet is that artist's contracts only pay out on music sales, not hardware royalties. Thus the cdrom tax and ipod royalties are profits they don't have to share with artists despite their pious rhetoric about how they need these revenues because piracy hurts recording artists.
My bet is that artist's contracts only pay out on music sales, not hardware royalties. Thus the cdrom tax and ipod royalties are profits they don't have to share with artists despite their pious rhetoric about how they need these revenues because piracy hurts recording artists.
MrChurchyard
Apr 6, 11:48 AM
I bet you that you'll never see a iPad with screen resolution like 2048x1536, it's a ****ing nightmare to iOS developers. You don't understand that it's ****ing crazy, iOS interface like MacOS X interface is not scalable. Apple have to change the whole GUI before making this step forward. You know why there is much smaller apps for Android OS that for iOS? Because Adnroid devices have tons of screen resolutions and every ****ing vendor think that this is better but they kill platform with tons of resolutions, it's hard for developers to make apps compatible with all resolutions, again GUI problem.
Not at all. It's pretty obvious that a future iteration of the iPad will have a 2048x1536 resolution, being exactly twice the current resolution. It will be just like they did for the iPhone with the Retina Display.
And it's extremely easy for devs to make a Retina Display enabled app. Actually you don't even have to touch the code (*) at all and just drop in the images at twice the resolution into the assets. Everything else is handled by the OS automatically. Text etc. is scaled appropriately anyway, and if you have the @2x versions of the images used, it will use those instead of the single res versions.
So no, no dev nightmare, no changing of the whole GUI, nothing of the sort.
____
(*)= for devs - yeah, I know about the �imageWithContentsOfFile" bug that won't load the @2x versions ;)
Not at all. It's pretty obvious that a future iteration of the iPad will have a 2048x1536 resolution, being exactly twice the current resolution. It will be just like they did for the iPhone with the Retina Display.
And it's extremely easy for devs to make a Retina Display enabled app. Actually you don't even have to touch the code (*) at all and just drop in the images at twice the resolution into the assets. Everything else is handled by the OS automatically. Text etc. is scaled appropriately anyway, and if you have the @2x versions of the images used, it will use those instead of the single res versions.
So no, no dev nightmare, no changing of the whole GUI, nothing of the sort.
____
(*)= for devs - yeah, I know about the �imageWithContentsOfFile" bug that won't load the @2x versions ;)
louden
Aug 27, 02:39 AM
But I refuse to buy any "So-Called" MacBook Pro until they have implemented the easy access HD professional feature they put in the MacBook. I would rather buy a C2D MacBook with that feature than ever buy a MBP without it.
To me, the most important thing is dedicated video graphics. I'd buy a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo today if it ran with a dedicated graphics card. That would give a user the freedom to run Vista under Parallels and still have pretty good performance.
There's a 15" MBP in my future...
To me, the most important thing is dedicated video graphics. I'd buy a 2.0 Ghz Core Duo today if it ran with a dedicated graphics card. That would give a user the freedom to run Vista under Parallels and still have pretty good performance.
There's a 15" MBP in my future...
ergle2
Sep 13, 03:02 PM
You totally missed my point. Even if an application uses only one thread at all times, that application is still a separate process from all of the other processes you have running. At any given time you'll have at least 30 something processes, even when no user-land applications are running. OS X will spread out those processes to try to utilize all the cores as much as possible.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
In reality, there are probably not too many non-Apple applications which routinely use 8 threads or more. In the near future I expect all applications to use at least 2-3 threads, even the most simple ones.
Sure, but all those background processes take next to no time to execute -- the extra latency of having more processors will probably slow things down far more than you gain from having up to 8 of those 30 be able to run at any one time.
I'm not saying there's no need for 8 cores -- markets such as databases, media production, rendering, etc. can already make use of that kind of power.
Regular desktops, not so much.
Many simple apps are already mutithreadedto some dgree, but it's to make them non-blocking rather than to spread processor load. If you look at Windows, you'll find a very high number of threads in even just a media player, but some of it's just there to repaint the GUI etc.
0 comments:
Post a Comment