daneoni
Mar 31, 05:35 AM
I was sharing this because I found it interesting, its supposed to be just 384MB shared. Just thinking if Lion enables more memory shared??:rolleyes:
No it's doesn't. Snow Leopard also reports 512MB
No it's doesn't. Snow Leopard also reports 512MB
Cougarcat
May 4, 07:33 PM
I wonder if it somehow partitions the hard drive to make a small partition with a bootable installer on, and then installs Lion onto the larger, primary partition?
Well, it does make the Recovery partition, where you can access disk utility. You can use that to do a clean install? I'd like to know more about how it works.
What was hard about previous installations ? Pop CD in, run upgrade. Same process.
Speed. (Of course, you do have to download it first.) ;) But you don't have to wait for the disk to arrive.
Well, it does make the Recovery partition, where you can access disk utility. You can use that to do a clean install? I'd like to know more about how it works.
What was hard about previous installations ? Pop CD in, run upgrade. Same process.
Speed. (Of course, you do have to download it first.) ;) But you don't have to wait for the disk to arrive.
davisjw
Aug 7, 05:43 PM
Time to sell the wife and kids...
aldejesus
Mar 30, 11:13 PM
Is Lion available to iOS developers as well? Or is it solely for those with paid memberships to the "Mac Developer Program"?
Only for paid membership to Mac Developer Program.
Only for paid membership to Mac Developer Program.
ChickenSwartz
Aug 2, 01:52 PM
i can't wait!! and it's gonna be so hard buying a Macbook tomorrow and not being able to open it til the 7th!
Wish I could get a MBP for <$1500 then I would be in the same situation.
Wish I could get a MBP for <$1500 then I would be in the same situation.
DeathChill
Apr 8, 08:14 PM
I disagree. The OS on the most number of devices always ends up "winning" (for a lack of a better word.) It has happened time and time again. Windows beat MacOS after a few years due to it being on a wider range of hardware. The same happened with Android on phones. It will most defiantly happen again; if not with Android, defiantly with an OS which works on the same business model and is not tied to specific hardware.
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
You're ignoring a huge factor: price. Mac products were more expensive than their PC counterparts. That's not at all true for the iPad. As well, Apple has huge brand cachet and their products are gorgeous to look at and touch.
I'm not sure that choice is going to be a huge advantage in the tablet market as there's not much differentiation that is going to matter to the normal consumer. Sure, there can be different sizes but most people are happy with the iPad's size (no, not tech nerds who demand to have a tablet they can carry everywhere ;)).
The 'average user' customer likes choice. The iPad provides none. An iPad is an iPad and that is that. Whereas Android provides a wide range of models and sizes and colours and specs.
You're ignoring a huge factor: price. Mac products were more expensive than their PC counterparts. That's not at all true for the iPad. As well, Apple has huge brand cachet and their products are gorgeous to look at and touch.
I'm not sure that choice is going to be a huge advantage in the tablet market as there's not much differentiation that is going to matter to the normal consumer. Sure, there can be different sizes but most people are happy with the iPad's size (no, not tech nerds who demand to have a tablet they can carry everywhere ;)).
professor08
Apr 20, 05:07 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
I dont agree. A 4" screen would be larger real estate, but that would mean developers would have to rewrite their apps to fit the new size. For example, the iPad has an obviously larger screen space, which means that developers had to scale their software up to match, because lets face it, the 2x button just makes things look like pixels and thats just awful, this is not SNES system.
But the iPad has similar dimensions and screen ratio. But a 4" display would makes things look stretched, so developers would have to code each app to fit the new stretched screen. This would also be quite annoying on the app store, looking for apps which work on 3g, 3gs, i4 and i5 and iPad and iPad 2. It would just become a nuisance to download an app to see its stretched on older phones. this wouldn't be a good move by apple just yet. Apple like to care for older tech users, the 3g and 3gs users, and this larger screen would make apps not run as smoothly.
Dr. Scott
Apr 5, 01:36 PM
Apple is strict. This request is not unusual for them. Piss them off and you get excluded from having your apps on the worlds coolest gadgets... And no corporate sluts want that to happen.
KnightWRX
Apr 20, 11:43 AM
Calendar wise it is... but most people don't view the middle of September as "summer". Meteorological summer is over by then, and that's MUCH more important, IMO.
That's not "Calendar" summer, it is based on cycles of the sun, precisely, the solstices and equinoxes. ;)
It just so happens that the Fall equinox falls in mid-september while Summer solstice is on the 21st of June.
This is true the world over, it is not a "US thing".
That's not "Calendar" summer, it is based on cycles of the sun, precisely, the solstices and equinoxes. ;)
It just so happens that the Fall equinox falls in mid-september while Summer solstice is on the 21st of June.
This is true the world over, it is not a "US thing".
Multimedia
Aug 3, 12:30 AM
Wow, measuring battery life by cities. Sounds amazingly scientific. I'm gonna say "You're wrong" just because you cited such a field report. That's disgraceful... :oTwo reporters sitting next to each other with same Notebooks Except For The Processor. Doing the same things. One makes it to 3 hours while the other makes it to 5 hours. Did you watch the video on my revised post with the link to it? These guys were at the Core 2 Duo launch last week. You gonna call them liars?
What's with all the anti Core 2 hostility here?
What's with all the anti Core 2 hostility here?
vincenz
Mar 28, 10:46 AM
Surprised by the turn of events... but as all rumors, we have to take it with a grain of salt. Who knows who's right but Steve and his coterie?
number9
May 7, 02:27 PM
Uh $9 a month is $108 a year.
People routinely get Mobileme for roughly $70 through Amazon or less through other places like eBay.
Amazon Mobileme (http://www.amazon.com/MobileMe-Individual-Updated-2009-Version/dp/B001AMLRU4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1273246907&sr=8-1)
Hell even Apple doesn't make people pay that much.
http://www.apple.com/promo/
$30 MiR or you get Mobileme for $69 with the purchase of a new Mac.
Uh, I rounded. Didn't think it'd matter whether I said $8, $8.33, or $9.
Yes, I can get it cheaper elsewhere or through Apple with a rebate (if you spend another $200 to over $1000 first), but:
1.) If I'm going to use MobileMe, and I like it (which, I do), I'm going to have to keep subscribing, and while I enjoy the features, I don't think paying for them is worth my money. They are merely added conveniences that would be nice to have, if free, but are only supplementing current functionality that I can live with. But, when I'm paying student loans, a car payment, rent, and trying to plan for a potential wedding and then a mortgage in the next year and a half, I can think of better things to spend $8 or 9$ a month on. I'd much rather go see a movie or something instead of syncing my email and contacts quicker. Just a personal choice that won't apply to everyone, but it's why I don't see the need to pay for it right now.
2.) I don't buy a new Mac, iPhone, or iPod touch every year to keep getting a rebate. While enticing if I were in the market for anyone of those items, I'm not. Again, just my personal situation.
People routinely get Mobileme for roughly $70 through Amazon or less through other places like eBay.
Amazon Mobileme (http://www.amazon.com/MobileMe-Individual-Updated-2009-Version/dp/B001AMLRU4/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=software&qid=1273246907&sr=8-1)
Hell even Apple doesn't make people pay that much.
http://www.apple.com/promo/
$30 MiR or you get Mobileme for $69 with the purchase of a new Mac.
Uh, I rounded. Didn't think it'd matter whether I said $8, $8.33, or $9.
Yes, I can get it cheaper elsewhere or through Apple with a rebate (if you spend another $200 to over $1000 first), but:
1.) If I'm going to use MobileMe, and I like it (which, I do), I'm going to have to keep subscribing, and while I enjoy the features, I don't think paying for them is worth my money. They are merely added conveniences that would be nice to have, if free, but are only supplementing current functionality that I can live with. But, when I'm paying student loans, a car payment, rent, and trying to plan for a potential wedding and then a mortgage in the next year and a half, I can think of better things to spend $8 or 9$ a month on. I'd much rather go see a movie or something instead of syncing my email and contacts quicker. Just a personal choice that won't apply to everyone, but it's why I don't see the need to pay for it right now.
2.) I don't buy a new Mac, iPhone, or iPod touch every year to keep getting a rebate. While enticing if I were in the market for anyone of those items, I'm not. Again, just my personal situation.
bloodycape
Nov 22, 10:49 PM
yeah. except they forgot to put RAM in it...and the firmware is crap so far..and the battery last about...erm, 24 hours..and they wont support mac..ever!
great phone though!:)
If I am not mistaken the phone is Linux base which does mean Apple support from my knowledge of Linux pdas.
great phone though!:)
If I am not mistaken the phone is Linux base which does mean Apple support from my knowledge of Linux pdas.
IntelliUser
Nov 17, 04:26 PM
ESET Cybersecurity for Mac
http://www.eset.com/home/cybersecurity-for-mac
�*unless I'm missing something, no on-access scanning
ESET Cybersecurity adds an extra layer of detection to OS X Internet security features:
Blocks any attempts to infect your Mac or steal your personal information.
Eliminates threats to your Mac from email and removable media, such as USB, FireWire, CDs, and DVDs.
Protects your Mac from malicious third party applications.
It's pretty much a full-featured NOD32 for Mac.
http://www.eset.com/home/cybersecurity-for-mac
�*unless I'm missing something, no on-access scanning
ESET Cybersecurity adds an extra layer of detection to OS X Internet security features:
Blocks any attempts to infect your Mac or steal your personal information.
Eliminates threats to your Mac from email and removable media, such as USB, FireWire, CDs, and DVDs.
Protects your Mac from malicious third party applications.
It's pretty much a full-featured NOD32 for Mac.
technicolor
Jul 21, 04:01 PM
I think there needs to be a bigger differentiation between the MB's and MBP's.
Happy Valentine#39;s Day
While the first Earth Day was
world earth day wallpaper.
wallpaper earth moon.
kpbpsw
Nov 2, 05:55 PM
There is no reason to put anti-virus software on your Mac!
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
It will not protect you from anything that is out there.
Sophos may be a reputable company or it may not be but you do not need this and it can only harm your system and promote a business that feeds on fear.
We (the Mac community) should not let the security industry get a toe hold in OSX.
viperGTS
Mar 26, 10:23 PM
i want what the "reliable sources" are smoking.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
jokes aside, this is terrible. too long of a wait.
and apple better not skimp my 4th gen touch on features, i want FULL iOS 5 support.
Don't panic
May 3, 02:09 PM
i'll go with drunken dwarf.
e-coli
May 7, 11:18 AM
It should be free. It's craptastic; painfully slow and full of bugs.
quinney
Apr 5, 02:37 PM
So uh what exactly would Toyota lose if they tell Apple to stick it? At best all I can guess are licenses to use use an iPod trademark or something similar to integrate into the car stereo, if they even have that option. I can't think of anything else.
Hundreds of millions of iPods have been sold, and people want to be able to control them through their cars' audio systems. Toyota knows the importance of this by the number of people who go into their showrooms and ask if their cars have this feature. I think it is really quite important and may be a deciding feature for people who are comparing cars of different brands, which are otherwise quite similar. Toyota is making a good business decision.
Hundreds of millions of iPods have been sold, and people want to be able to control them through their cars' audio systems. Toyota knows the importance of this by the number of people who go into their showrooms and ask if their cars have this feature. I think it is really quite important and may be a deciding feature for people who are comparing cars of different brands, which are otherwise quite similar. Toyota is making a good business decision.
macnerd93
Apr 26, 02:14 PM
I thought Android was a terrible OS, but I am still extremely impressed that iOS is where it is. Considering a lot of manufactures are using Android now, this is still pretty impressive iOS is able to be the second from the top on three devices iPhone, iPad, iPod Touch, although the report does state mobile phone usage so it might just include the iPhone and not the other two i mentioned
asdf542
Mar 30, 09:35 PM
No no no, we want useful UI improvements not iOS fluff.
So what part of 'iOS' fluff do Versions, Air Drop, Mission Control, Auto Save and Lion Server fit under?
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
So what part of 'iOS' fluff do Versions, Air Drop, Mission Control, Auto Save and Lion Server fit under?
'Useful' UI improvements? So what would you consider useful? Personally full screen apps, a native application launcher that can be organized, and resume are all useful to me. Get out of the mindset that just because it originated from iOS means that it won't be useful.
WildCowboy
Jul 21, 10:05 PM
Can someone tell me the advantages of the Merom chip?
More Speed? Less Heat? Improved battery performance?
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Intel claims that it will have 20% more performance at the same clock speed when compared to the current Yonah processor.
More Speed? Less Heat? Improved battery performance?
http://guides.macrumors.com/Merom
Intel claims that it will have 20% more performance at the same clock speed when compared to the current Yonah processor.
itcheroni
Apr 15, 06:25 PM
Which "game"? Are you "trading and investing" in companies by purchasing shares in IPOs, or are you "trading and investing" on Wall St.? If it is the latter, then basically you are buying and selling ownership interests in companies, which has almost no affect on underlying companies.
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?
Won't higher capital gains reduce your "take home" earned from trading in the secondary market? If so, don't hedge funds and the like start investing in more risk taking?
What do you think is/was the riskier investment? Investing in GE or investing in a start-up like Google? Innovation? I'm fairly certain buying 100 shares of GE from my broker didn't innovate a new lightbulb, but Google has innovated and expanded with the capital it received in its IPO. If you are trying to increase your rate of return over what you get from your GE shares, would you invest in AT&T or a little start-up called Chef John Smith, Inc. because you think he's an up and coming talent? One has a big upside, but also a lot of risk.
If the goal is to increase rate of return of an investment portfolio, your only choices are to be better at picking good stocks, or to invest in risker investments. Wouldn't that lead to an influx of start-up capital, innovation, hiring, and economic growth?
On the other hand, you can lower capital gains and encourage people to invest conservatively in the secondary market.
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. So, even if nothing "good" comes out of trading, one shouldn't have to make apologies for it. And if you were only able to invest in IPO's, who would you sell it to? Why invest in an IPO if you can never sell it?
