inkswamp
Nov 5, 03:31 PM
I'm actually not too thrilled to see this. Mac OS X does NOT need virus protection. Companies like this make OS X seem like it's prone to viruses.
Blah blah blah. Lack of AV software makes Macs very unattractive to business settings.
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
Blah blah blah. Lack of AV software makes Macs very unattractive to business settings.
It installs various components into your system, so no, not until Apple modifies their guidelines.
Seeing how many things it does install and the size of the download, I wouldn't install this on any computer. Looks like FUDware to me.
One of the barriers to integrating Macs into corporate and business environments is the lack of anti-virus tools. Yeah, you can dismiss this as FUD (and maybe there's some truth to that) but the fact remains--someday, one way or another, there will be a Mac OS X virus. I defy you to find one IT dept. in the country that wants to be caught off-guard by that. If you're going to have Macs in a business environment, the IT staff needs to know that they're protected in the event of an OS X virus outbreak. Whether any OS X viruses exist now or not and whether AV companies are trying to sell products with FUD is irrelevant in that context.
Those of you who want to see wider adoption of Macs in business environments ought to be happy to see this kind of thing showing up, regardless of whether you personally need it or not.
AaronEdwards
Apr 26, 02:43 PM
And there's a huge difference between a 17" Macbook Pro and a 11" Macbook Air.
But they both get counted as laptops, don't they?
And what's your reasoning for why iPods don't get counted here? Because they don't have monthly contracts? How does that make sense? Should we only count iMac sales if they're hooked up to a monthly ISP or something?
Think about this.
People didn't argue that the iPod or the iPad should be counted until Android smart phones started to get really close and then overtake the iOS smart phones.
You can demand that they should be counted, but everyone will know the real reason for it.
But they both get counted as laptops, don't they?
And what's your reasoning for why iPods don't get counted here? Because they don't have monthly contracts? How does that make sense? Should we only count iMac sales if they're hooked up to a monthly ISP or something?
Think about this.
People didn't argue that the iPod or the iPad should be counted until Android smart phones started to get really close and then overtake the iOS smart phones.
You can demand that they should be counted, but everyone will know the real reason for it.
Undecided
Apr 18, 03:11 PM
Here we go again! Stupid Lawyers :(
Lawyers don't sue people; people sue people.
Lawyers don't sue people; people sue people.
cjpadlock
Aug 2, 11:57 AM
As for the camera discussion... No one has thought that maybe they would make it an option, like glossy / no glossy on the mac book. When you add to cart camera would be defult (as in the apple stores) and then a drop down menu would allow you to take it off
genetechnics
Jul 30, 08:04 AM
Very good questions.
ps. Apple might choose to make a phone with no music capability... just to delineate the product. That gives people something to understand... and then they can release the combo products.
It's Apple Computer.
ps. Apple might choose to make a phone with no music capability... just to delineate the product. That gives people something to understand... and then they can release the combo products.
It's Apple Computer.
Popeye206
Apr 20, 05:42 AM
What will you do if Apple do make it bigger?
Well... of course I'll bail on Apple and get an Android or MS based phone!
NOT! :p
Personally, I don't think they will. I think they are more concerned about all their customers - men and woman. Large and small. They know overall feel in the hand for all their customers is important and that it's important that it slips easily in your pocket. I don't think anyone here can argue that Apple is one of the best, if not the best out there right now, at product design. This does not happen by accident... I'm sure they test and try many variations to get where they're at.
There are more important things they can do than mess with the best smart phone screen on the market.
No matter what, there's always going to be competitors with something that's bigger or more. But again, it's not about any single thing that makes the overall product. It's the overall product that makes the iPhone so great.
Well... of course I'll bail on Apple and get an Android or MS based phone!
NOT! :p
Personally, I don't think they will. I think they are more concerned about all their customers - men and woman. Large and small. They know overall feel in the hand for all their customers is important and that it's important that it slips easily in your pocket. I don't think anyone here can argue that Apple is one of the best, if not the best out there right now, at product design. This does not happen by accident... I'm sure they test and try many variations to get where they're at.
There are more important things they can do than mess with the best smart phone screen on the market.
No matter what, there's always going to be competitors with something that's bigger or more. But again, it's not about any single thing that makes the overall product. It's the overall product that makes the iPhone so great.
toddybody
Mar 28, 10:24 AM
Ehh...I cant see this happening. Unless of course the iPhone 5 is what will follow an iphone 4s (with A5)...in that case, duh 2012 makes sense...
itcheroni
Apr 18, 06:51 PM
Yet you haven't convinced many here. Doesn't that indicate that perhaps you need to address it again, and perhaps find other ways to illustrate your point? It's not like I'm unwilling to be convinced. I just haven't heard a good reason to accept your argument.
Well, if you guys agreed with me then I would have to rethink my position. :D
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
Well, if you guys agreed with me then I would have to rethink my position. :D
It's kind of a prerequisite for a collapse that 99% of the population is unprepared.
BC2009
Apr 7, 11:46 AM
If the demand for touch panels increases then the manufacturers of touch panels will rejoice and expand their business thus increasing the supply. The real problem here is that RIM probably wants terms on touch panel production that are not all-too-inspiring to the manufacturers to warrant expansion. For example, Apple is confident that they will sell X units of iPads in Y units in 2012, and so on. So Apple prepays for what they need.
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
EDIT: I failed to make it clear, but I do hope that touch panel production expands for RIM and others to get the supply they need. I like Apple having competitors because Apple tends to take the good things competition comes up with and add them as line items to their proactive project plans. I don't believe that competition drives Apple (certainly not in the way that Apple's actions or Apple's critics are basically driving the competitions plans). Apple is a bit more proactive, but when they have a worthy competitor, Apple certainly picks up on any "good" ideas the competition has had that happen to fit with their long-term plans. I also applaud RIM and HP for not going the "me-too" Android/Honeycomb route. There is something to be said for not selling out to a third-party on software.
RIM is not as confident with their Playbook. They probably need contingencies in any long-term orders they place to ensure they can get out of buying touch panels they won't need. If these were 9.7-inch panels then the manufacturer could care less. Anything RIM walks away from, they can turn around and sell to Apple (very smart of HP). However, who is going to buy all those 7-inch panels if RIM's Playbook gets off to a false start? Samsung? Nope -- they make their own panels from what I have heard.
Supply and Demand.... When there is real demand for more touch panels from consumers than those being supplied to Apple for iPad then the manufacturers will expand their production and take advantage of the opportunity to increase profits. The real problem here is that RIM's attempt at media hype is not equivalent to real customer demand. The only tablet with a large amount of customer demand right now is the iPad. That is part of why I tend to believe that the "media tablet" category is a figment of the imagination for market analysts. Market analysts assign a level of demand to the "media tablet" category and make projections, but the difference between the "iPad" category and the rest of the "non-iPad media tablets" is staggering. The iPad category is flourishing, the "non-iPad media tablet" category is a fledgling state at best (if not failing).
If not for Apple's success with the iPad how many manufacturers would have already thrown in the towel with "media tablets" and once again written it off as "the technology for tablets is just not there yet for mass consumption". Tablets failed in various forms for over a decade. iPad is the first and only mass market success in this area. If not for Apple, there would be no such thing as "Honeycomb" or HP Touch Pad or Playbook -- these guys are hoping they can figure out what Apple did right and find some way to ride the same wave the iPad is on -- while technical specifications are there, they have not yet figured out the "magic" of iPad -- ease of use, awesome software market, and the emotional response Apple manages to evoke with their user experience. Just a few examples of emotional response.... There is something delightful about pinching a stack of photos to spread them out across the screen or the way Apple's tiled app icons and folders gets adults to collect apps the same way their kids collect trading cards -- these are very emotional things that Apple seems to understand.
EDIT: I failed to make it clear, but I do hope that touch panel production expands for RIM and others to get the supply they need. I like Apple having competitors because Apple tends to take the good things competition comes up with and add them as line items to their proactive project plans. I don't believe that competition drives Apple (certainly not in the way that Apple's actions or Apple's critics are basically driving the competitions plans). Apple is a bit more proactive, but when they have a worthy competitor, Apple certainly picks up on any "good" ideas the competition has had that happen to fit with their long-term plans. I also applaud RIM and HP for not going the "me-too" Android/Honeycomb route. There is something to be said for not selling out to a third-party on software.
eemsTV
Apr 20, 12:59 AM
How many people think this is some elaborate scheme to get people to think it will come out in the fall, when they might be setting people up for a surprise with the release of iphone 4 -white as the new ip5?
Multimedia
Aug 2, 10:17 PM
Hm. Hey guys... I'm a longtime reader of MR. I always read your comments and never recall posting (Creepy, eh?)
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.Nope. The entire line will be Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. MBP will get speed bump to 2.33GHz for further differentiation while MB will remain 2GHz. No logic to keep buying Core Duo processors for the same money as Core 2 or less than they bought Yonah to begin with. They are already making record profits. I doubt they will deliberately cripple mini, iMac and MB when everything is selling like hot cakes anyway. There are plenty of other ways each line differentiates from the other. To leave any line in Core Duo would be outright greedy and I dont' see Apple as having that personality trait.
I fugure it's a 50-50 chance Steve tells the developers next week they can start thinking about 64-bit optimization due to the Core 2 shift that will be complete this year.
Anyway apparently I once made an account although I don't remember.
None the less... I'm surprised at how much doubt there is about Core 2 Duos. Apple and Intel are more or less best buddies. You honestly expect Apple to not update their lineup? You don't think people will go... Hmm... Core Duo Macbook Pro... Or... Core 2 Duo Dell. Even a moron will say "2's better than 1!" Apple is KNOWN for having top of the line systems in their respective class, and now that that class is Intel processors, I have 0 doubt that Apple will introduce Core 2 Duos in it's Macbook Pros as soon as it can. The reason I say Macbook Pros is because I'm sure that Macbooks and Mac Minis will say with the Core Duos. Why? Apple needs to better differentiate their pro line from their consumer line, because right now there is not much difference between the Macbook and Macbook Pro, performance-wise (Yes I know Integrated Video, Glossy Screen, etc.) but Proc. to Proc., Almost no difference.
As for "Meroms in iMacs..." Maybe, but I doubt it. Not SOON at least. Conroes then? You guys are forgetting... Apple doesn't NEED to use it. Just because it's AVAILABLE means almost nothing. Why would they use Conroe when they simply don't need to. I don't think we'll see Conroes at all in Macs quite honestly, and I don't see any problem with that. Maybe in Intel-based Power Macs, but there's ALOT of speculation about that.Nope. The entire line will be Core 2 Duo by Thanksgiving. MBP will get speed bump to 2.33GHz for further differentiation while MB will remain 2GHz. No logic to keep buying Core Duo processors for the same money as Core 2 or less than they bought Yonah to begin with. They are already making record profits. I doubt they will deliberately cripple mini, iMac and MB when everything is selling like hot cakes anyway. There are plenty of other ways each line differentiates from the other. To leave any line in Core Duo would be outright greedy and I dont' see Apple as having that personality trait.
I fugure it's a 50-50 chance Steve tells the developers next week they can start thinking about 64-bit optimization due to the Core 2 shift that will be complete this year.
MacQuest
Nov 22, 03:24 PM
Wasn't it exactly the same story with the iPod?
Exactly. :rolleyes:
How are Rio, Creative, and all the other "iPod Killer" product manufacturers like Sony doing nowadays in the digital music player market? :p
Rio's out of business and Creative is now part of the "Made For iPod" accessory community? :eek: Walkman? what the H*LL is that?! :confused:
Take notes Palm. History repeats itself. :cool:
Exactly. :rolleyes:
How are Rio, Creative, and all the other "iPod Killer" product manufacturers like Sony doing nowadays in the digital music player market? :p
Rio's out of business and Creative is now part of the "Made For iPod" accessory community? :eek: Walkman? what the H*LL is that?! :confused:
Take notes Palm. History repeats itself. :cool:
Cavepainter
Mar 30, 02:36 PM
I hardly think $1 for 20 gigabytes of available anywhere storage is very unreasonable.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
Maybe that rate wouldn't be bad, but if you read the article, that's not what they're charging. Beyond the initial free amount, its $1 per 1 gig, not $1 per 20 gigs. A terabyte per year is a thousand dollars a year. That's not too cheap. And this isn't including bandwidth usage, which is gonna cost money too, of course. Plus, what do you think, are these rates and bandwidth usage costs gonna be higher or lower in the future?
They (banks) aren't storing physical cash somewhere anymore, it's all just a line of electronic code that states what your balance is.
Well, it actually it still exists as money, but of course banks aren't storing it all in a vault- they're loaning it out to other people, at rates 10 to 100 times greater than the interest rate they are offering you for using that money- and they're using your money to make them money. I'm sure they could loan out money at much lower rates and still do fine, but that's what we're used to paying, so there you go. But anyway, back on track-
If you want premium content, you pay for it.
That premium content you're happy to be paying lots of money for is actually making the provider plenty of money on the back end too- remember cable and satellite television still has plenty of advertisements. Again, they could probably charge you a third of what you currently pay and it would still be profitable. (I'm just sayin'...)
People just think it's ridiculous to spend money on music because avenues have popped up where you can get it for free.
True, but for me, no, I actually buy my music and support the artists- I just think its ridiculous to buy my music and pay someone else over and over and over again, forever, just to be able listen to it.
I have 2 computers at home, a laptop, a phone that has storage, a DVR, even my Xbox can store music files..... How nice to be able to visit my parents, or go on vacation, or be at a friend's house, log on to their computer, and have my entire music library instantly available at my fingertips.
80 gigs of music in a computer's memory doesn't actually "weigh" all that much. You can have all those files right there on your devices right now, unless you have terabytes of things to store. As storage continues to grow on computers, I think you'll find that the prices will be more and more appealing for larger and larger amounts of storage.
Look, I understand your points, and if you have multiple platforms that need to share and sync enormous amounts of files, that can be a challenge and the cloud would be convenient. But for the amount of music and photography and other files I have and the way I would store it and access it, I personally would rather just have all the files I need right there on my computer at my fingertips without having to pay someone to access it from a remote location. You're certainly free to spend money to access things you already purchased, but its not for me. To each their own.
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 09:37 AM
Yes, an iMac needs to have a 7xxx Display to be retina...as it's viewing distance shouldn't be what the iP4 is.
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
Is 25,600,000 bytes (25.6 MB) x 60 Hz not equal to 1,536,000,000 bytes.
Correct me if I am wrong.
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
I look forward to the day that Apple releases retina displays for the MBP. Something else that would set :apple: apart.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
You contradict yourself here. A 27" iMac is probably already retina, considering the viewing distance should be around 30" away.
As the distance grows, the PPI treshold to achieve the "retina" effect of "Eye can't distinguish the individual pixels" becomes lower. Given enough distance, 48 PPI can be enough to be dubbed "retina display" (your standard 50" 1080p TV).
Is 25,600,000 bytes (25.6 MB) x 60 Hz not equal to 1,536,000,000 bytes.
Correct me if I am wrong.
No, you're not wrong. But I'm not either. I'll let you figure out why (think about the lower case b in Mbps vs MB of RAM ;) ). Unless I'm misinterpreting something, I doubt DP 1.2 can push out 21 gigaBYTES of data per second...
As for the 6990 listing that as max resolution, I'm betting that has more to do with current LCD display limitation (that is the max resolutions you'll find on an LCD monitor) than with actual hardware limitation. The hardware is capable of more than that. Some of these cards with a single GPU have 2-4 DP outputs capable of driving 2-4 of these 2560x1600 monitors. The GPU itself doesn't a problem pushing out these pixels and DP 1.2 makes it so they can push it over a single connection.
I look forward to the day that Apple releases retina displays for the MBP. Something else that would set :apple: apart.
Sony was there first with the Vaio Z. 13.3", 1920x1080 baby. If it weren't so expensive it would be mine and I'd be back to running Linux.
HecubusPro
Sep 16, 11:53 AM
Congratulations! You have just provided a second independent source of unnatural delay proving Apple is already manufacturing Merom C2D MBPs and that 17" models will ship behind 15" models by a week Monday October 2.
As long as they at least announce the 17" MBP C2D, I'll be happy, even if it isn't immediately available.
As long as they at least announce the 17" MBP C2D, I'll be happy, even if it isn't immediately available.
pcharles
Apr 25, 09:29 AM
So much excitement over yet another fake email from Steve Jobs!
markcres
Apr 25, 11:13 AM
Jobs is spinning his BS again as usual. Even when there is overwheming evidence to the contrary...he still insults the intelligence of his customers who he clearly regards as beneath him.
Apple is:
http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg
Apple is:
http://www.ukscience.org/BB.jpg
Jorojr
Apr 18, 03:18 PM
I did not know that TSMC produces LCD panels, RAM, SSD drives or flash memory. If Samsung stops supplying those to Apple, Apple is dead.
Apple would probably find other suppliers of those components, so I doubt not having Samsung as a supplier would kill Apple.
On the other hand, if they have to go to multiple manufacturers for the components instead of one big supplier (like Samsung), I would expect them to pay higher costs for parts. This would result in the costs being passed down the consumer.
Apple would probably find other suppliers of those components, so I doubt not having Samsung as a supplier would kill Apple.
On the other hand, if they have to go to multiple manufacturers for the components instead of one big supplier (like Samsung), I would expect them to pay higher costs for parts. This would result in the costs being passed down the consumer.
w_parietti22
Jul 30, 01:17 AM
I don't think I've hated any company so passionately as I hate Verizon. I have not one positive word to say about them. If/when Apple announces a phone, I'll pay the early termination fee on my Verizon contract and jump to the carrier with Apple's phone. Hopefully that'll be Cingular.
Hopefully it doesnt have a carrier. Just a sim card slot. (which = no verizon ;))
Hopefully it doesnt have a carrier. Just a sim card slot. (which = no verizon ;))
guitarman777
May 8, 09:52 AM
This is easy to see
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
I agree with that.
MobilMe Becomes Free
MobilMe gets laden with 1Ads
All part of the Apple strategy
I would be happy to keep paying $99/year for adfree Mobilme
I agree with that.
coder12
Mar 26, 11:05 PM
I'm not really sure Apple cares about your school district.
Considering that we're one of the first schools in MN to adopt the iPad as a learning tool, and that there are many other schools that are going to wait a year or so to do the same thing, Apple sure does care, they even send representatives and stuff like that from time to time, lucky for us ;)
They might not care enough to change launch dates, but they care somewhat.
Jesus, it's not like the iPads you bought suddenly stop working when a new model comes out.
No, but it would cause an uproar among our faculty. I know they'll keep working, as you do too, but the other students and staff only want the newest and best. We're on a 3 year contract for iPads, and if they announce new iPads the month school starts, the complaints will never end. One year into owning them is a bit more feasible, however.
WOAH.
that's a lot of iPads!
That'll take forever to deliver!
They start coming in next week, supposedly! :) I'm more concerned about how much time it will take to set them up, because we only have 5 technology people at our district, and after I go to college there will only be 4. Thank you economy for leaving us shorthanded :(
that would be your fault for not reading reports
^^^^^
The word report suggests it was well thought out and documented given actual sources. What you mean to say is rumor.
Thanks :)
Considering that we're one of the first schools in MN to adopt the iPad as a learning tool, and that there are many other schools that are going to wait a year or so to do the same thing, Apple sure does care, they even send representatives and stuff like that from time to time, lucky for us ;)
They might not care enough to change launch dates, but they care somewhat.
Jesus, it's not like the iPads you bought suddenly stop working when a new model comes out.
No, but it would cause an uproar among our faculty. I know they'll keep working, as you do too, but the other students and staff only want the newest and best. We're on a 3 year contract for iPads, and if they announce new iPads the month school starts, the complaints will never end. One year into owning them is a bit more feasible, however.
WOAH.
that's a lot of iPads!
That'll take forever to deliver!
They start coming in next week, supposedly! :) I'm more concerned about how much time it will take to set them up, because we only have 5 technology people at our district, and after I go to college there will only be 4. Thank you economy for leaving us shorthanded :(
that would be your fault for not reading reports
^^^^^
The word report suggests it was well thought out and documented given actual sources. What you mean to say is rumor.
Thanks :)
Susurs
May 6, 04:23 AM
My subjective view is that it's a 'special message' to the Intel as latter lately imposes it's rules on using cpu's ... no Nvidia chips for example ...
bella92108
Apr 5, 02:35 PM
Actually that's an ignorant and factually incorrect statement.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
How was my statement ignorant? Look up the word "ignorant" ... you're one of the people who think ignorant means mean. It doesn't. In fact, your response was ignorant in the webster's dictionary sense "lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated"... because your statement is correct, that Apple IS selling more iPhones daily, but incorrect as a response to my statement. Android is presently outselling iPhone 2 to 1. AND Android OS satisfaction has increased significantly. You're comparing Apple's unchanged-in-4-years OS to Androids 2 year old OS.
You may want to actually research something, regardless of your position in the matter, prior to arguing about it. You just sound like a fool when you argue based on opinion, not published statistic.
iPhone users are more satisfied with their devices than other smart phone owners AND they sell more iPhones everyday.
Hence the population is statistically growing.
How was my statement ignorant? Look up the word "ignorant" ... you're one of the people who think ignorant means mean. It doesn't. In fact, your response was ignorant in the webster's dictionary sense "lacking knowledge or awareness in general; uneducated"... because your statement is correct, that Apple IS selling more iPhones daily, but incorrect as a response to my statement. Android is presently outselling iPhone 2 to 1. AND Android OS satisfaction has increased significantly. You're comparing Apple's unchanged-in-4-years OS to Androids 2 year old OS.
You may want to actually research something, regardless of your position in the matter, prior to arguing about it. You just sound like a fool when you argue based on opinion, not published statistic.
applefanDrew
Apr 25, 08:57 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 4_3_2 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/533.17.9 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.0.2 Mobile/8H7 Safari/6533.18.5)
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
No. Re-read the three sentences he typed. He said that Apple is not tracking anyone. That infers that the database of locations is not being used to track a users location.
Which is obvious since it's not using the GPS.
So Steve is saying there is no database of locations? Thats just an outright lie.
No. Re-read the three sentences he typed. He said that Apple is not tracking anyone. That infers that the database of locations is not being used to track a users location.
Which is obvious since it's not using the GPS.
