yg17
Apr 9, 04:49 PM
Yup, my car's a manual.
yukyuklee
Feb 24, 07:54 PM
here's another...
azentropy
Sep 15, 08:34 AM
Right, and what Apple has proposed doing is very reasonable. They have a product that works well for the majority of users.
CR disagrees. So if a product works most of the time for most people that is good enough to recommend? They are saying they don't recommend it.
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
Which does not affect this model, so they should change their recommendation based on what future models may or may not fix?
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
In order for them to recommend it, yes. Or at least include the case at time of purchase. They have stated this.
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
No, you are missing the point. Yes auto manufactures have recalls all the time and yes the customer has to come in to get it fixed on previous purchases. HOWEVER, they also fix all NEW automobiles before continue to sell to new customers. Apple isn't doing that, and that is CR's complaint.
CR disagrees. So if a product works most of the time for most people that is good enough to recommend? They are saying they don't recommend it.
Meanwhile they are going to alter the design of the phone so that even this issue will go away for future models.
Which does not affect this model, so they should change their recommendation based on what future models may or may not fix?
What does CR want? A total recall? For what? Most people have no issue, there is no danger, the few people who have the issue get a free solution, what would be the point of doing it any other way?
In order for them to recommend it, yes. Or at least include the case at time of purchase. They have stated this.
Auto manufacturers publicize the issue, make a solution possible, but it's up to the car's owner to approach the dealership to get that free solution. CR sez this is a good thing.
Apple publicizes the issue, makes a solution possible, but it's up to the phone's owner to approach Apple to get that free solution. CR sez this is unacceptable.
No, you are missing the point. Yes auto manufactures have recalls all the time and yes the customer has to come in to get it fixed on previous purchases. HOWEVER, they also fix all NEW automobiles before continue to sell to new customers. Apple isn't doing that, and that is CR's complaint.
TheBobcat
Nov 29, 03:32 PM
I don't know, I would have to think Apple has some ace up its sleeve with iTV, since streaming music and video to televisions really isn't all that new or interesting. Tivo does it, Xbox does it, Media Center PC's do it. Apple has to be bringing something pretty compelling and different to the table. I know that their software experience will be superior than to anything current, but I would hope that Apple can offer significantly more reason to buy one than what we've seen offered in the same sector.
1984
Aug 29, 12:30 PM
World Class CLIO Material? It's just another iPod/iTunes ad.
Eduardo1971
Mar 22, 05:00 PM
Do people seriously have that many songs?!!! seriously?!!!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
135 GB and not a single pirated song/album in there!
Some people really, really, love music!
220gb = 50,000 songs?!!!!! That is totally not necessary.
Apple discontinue that dinosaur! It makes you look bad to just have it on your website.
135 GB and not a single pirated song/album in there!
Some people really, really, love music!
mac1984user
Mar 22, 04:08 PM
Not that I'd want this, BUT why doesn't Apple make the iPod Classic a multi-touch device? The Mac proves that you don't need to have flash memory in order for multi-touch to work. Is the HDD in the Classic too slow or unresponsive to work with iOS? The could call it the iPod Touch Classic or something. Then you could have the best of both worlds, large capacity and a touch screen. If they did that, though, there's no way I'd buy an iPod Touch (not that I have a desire for one as I've go the iPhone4).
kftrainer
Apr 3, 06:17 PM
I see how some might not like how it is handled. I guess my point was it was by design and is not a bug.
Ok gotcha I guess it is not bad in that respect
Ok gotcha I guess it is not bad in that respect
Leet Apple
Feb 28, 12:37 PM
http://i884.photobucket.com/albums/ac50/tadziodlu/IMG_1442.jpg
How do i get that screensaver on my MBP
How do i get that screensaver on my MBP
Tmelon
Apr 2, 04:31 PM
Is anyone else losing their toolbar buttons and address bars in the toolbar when they enter Safari into fullscreen mode? I'm getting just a solid graphite bar at the top of the screen when I go into fullscreen. Tabs aren't showing in fullscreen either. This wasn't happening in DP 1.
I've been using a keyboard shortcut to remove the toolbar altogether when I don't need it, but that doesn't affect the solid graphite bar. Right now I need to exit fullscreen if I need to use the toolbar at all, and either way I still have the hardly-useful block of graphite at the top taking up some of the screen.
That block of graphite at the top should contain your Address bar, Back/Forward and search bar. DP2 autohides the tab bar and the favorites bar until you bring your mouse to the top of the screen. There's a screenshot of it earlier in the thread.
I've been using a keyboard shortcut to remove the toolbar altogether when I don't need it, but that doesn't affect the solid graphite bar. Right now I need to exit fullscreen if I need to use the toolbar at all, and either way I still have the hardly-useful block of graphite at the top taking up some of the screen.
That block of graphite at the top should contain your Address bar, Back/Forward and search bar. DP2 autohides the tab bar and the favorites bar until you bring your mouse to the top of the screen. There's a screenshot of it earlier in the thread.
JoEw
Jun 22, 05:20 PM
Touch interfaces don't NECESSARILY mean touchscreen interfaces.
The Magic Trackpad � http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ � would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
Touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever at the same time � which you can't do with a mouse.
There are lots of ways this could be useful.
but a replacement of keyboard and mice don't think so...
The Magic Trackpad � http://www.macrumors.com/2010/06/07/apples-magic-trackpad-or-magic-slate-revealed/ � would allow for multi-touch on desktops, enabling many iOS applications to be used on a desktop computer (and obviously laptops could do the same thing with their trackpads).
Touch input in a desktop environment could be useful for manipulating or selecting MULTIPLE buttons/sliders/whatever at the same time � which you can't do with a mouse.
There are lots of ways this could be useful.
but a replacement of keyboard and mice don't think so...
shawnce
Nov 16, 12:06 PM
Personally, I would want all my RAM to be consistant... Agreed.
Personally my Mac Pro has 1 GB DIMMs in A1, A2, B1, and B2, and 512 MB DIMMs in A3, A4, B3, B4 (since the model I picked up from Apple had the four 512 MB DIMMs in it)... yields a total of 6 GB of RAM.
This result in each channel connecting to a matching DIMM mix in a matching progression... ideally allowing the memory controller to have an easier time of muxing access to the RAM (in terms of a more optimal interleaving configuration).
Of course if 512 modules only can feed the AMB at half bandwidth relative to 1 GB (or greater modules) then removing them from the system could improve overall throughput (assuming they get hit) ... however latency difference may mitigate that ... hard to answer without real-world profiling with the tasks you most often do.
...off to find docs on Intel memory controller for information on how it handles things...
Personally my Mac Pro has 1 GB DIMMs in A1, A2, B1, and B2, and 512 MB DIMMs in A3, A4, B3, B4 (since the model I picked up from Apple had the four 512 MB DIMMs in it)... yields a total of 6 GB of RAM.
This result in each channel connecting to a matching DIMM mix in a matching progression... ideally allowing the memory controller to have an easier time of muxing access to the RAM (in terms of a more optimal interleaving configuration).
Of course if 512 modules only can feed the AMB at half bandwidth relative to 1 GB (or greater modules) then removing them from the system could improve overall throughput (assuming they get hit) ... however latency difference may mitigate that ... hard to answer without real-world profiling with the tasks you most often do.
...off to find docs on Intel memory controller for information on how it handles things...
mKTank
Nov 30, 12:04 PM
The only thing that bugs me, is that I quite believe that iOS fakes cell reception. For example, having a FULL 3G signal could be anywhere from 500k-2mbps, where my old phone, aircard, others peoples phones, show 1-2 bars, maybe 3. I get the same speeds with it as I do with my aircard in particular places, but the iPhone shows a stronger signal?
So while it appears to have better reception, I don't think it actually does.
That said, I've never dropped a call. It's definitely no worse than any other device, I just don't think it reports accurately.
Pre-Antennagate it used to fake the signal a lot.
But as of current firmware, it's probably one of the most honest indicators out there.
The iPhone 4's antenna does provide stronger signals than most other phones. It just drops the signal when held a certain way, but generally it gives a stronger signal than other antennas.
So while it appears to have better reception, I don't think it actually does.
That said, I've never dropped a call. It's definitely no worse than any other device, I just don't think it reports accurately.
Pre-Antennagate it used to fake the signal a lot.
But as of current firmware, it's probably one of the most honest indicators out there.
The iPhone 4's antenna does provide stronger signals than most other phones. It just drops the signal when held a certain way, but generally it gives a stronger signal than other antennas.
brianus
Sep 1, 01:05 PM
Most of the posts in this thread are about the 23" screen. Yes, I think it will happen to allow the imac to play 1080i/1080p HD.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
But, how about the processors? Apple needs to have a Core 2 (Conroe not Merom) inside the imac. The imac is not a conventionally size desktop (not as much room inside as a tower) but Apple can not continue to use a laptop processor in the imac. If they do, then how will the Conroe be used in Apple's line up? In a Mac tower? I don't think so. Surely, a 23" iMac could house the Conroe suitably?
So I would say that the 23" iMac would kill 2 birds - Conroe and HD for the home user. :)
I completely agree with you that using Conroe would make more sense (the casing for the 17" and 20" models was originally designer for a G5, for pete's sake), but I disagree with the assumption that Conroe will *have* to be used in some way in Apple's lineup. Nobody's putting a gun to their head; they may well skip that processor entirely, as AppleInsider has suggested.
They may be responding to positive reviews and customer satisfaction with the relative silence of the Yonah iMacs compared to their G5 predecessors. I don't know how much hotter and louder an iMac would run with Conroe, but if it was noisy it would be a disappointment, as all the other desktop models they've released this year have been noticeably quieter.
Of course they won't offer it in aluminum, sheesh. Aluminum is the "pro" color, white and black are the "consumer" colors. Sheesh! Thought you people followed Apple.. anybody think they'll offer a "premium" black 23", same as they did for the higher-end MacBook? They are after all "siblings" in the product lineup.
Lastly I don't see them getting rid of the "chin" unless they come out with the rumored touch-screen, widescreen video iPods on the 12th too. I think the visual similarity between the iPod and iMac is quite intentional and not something they're likely to change unless the iPod itself changes.
sandro21
Nov 5, 04:05 AM
They are just doing it for publicity I bet...
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
I've only had one dropped call with my iPhone 4
spcdust
Apr 20, 07:08 AM
Sold my late 2009 iMac yesterday in anticipation of the iMac refresh so this is positive news for me. However, I may hold off until the end of May and hopefully pick myself up an iPod Touch using my education discount and the iPod Rebate Back-To-School Promo (that's if Apple are true to form and run this promo again).
Regarding GPU - prepare to be disappointed as Apple always seem to under deliver in this respect with regards to the iMac - form over performance dictates this i'm afraid. Has anyone considered they may even stick with the current iMac GPU offering - disappointing I know but still possible. If we see an upgrade (and I sincerely hope we do) I guess we're, at best, looking at a 6950 which I'd be happy with, I guess a very unlikely outside chance would be the 6970 (Pipe dream me thinks)?
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
Regarding GPU - prepare to be disappointed as Apple always seem to under deliver in this respect with regards to the iMac - form over performance dictates this i'm afraid. Has anyone considered they may even stick with the current iMac GPU offering - disappointing I know but still possible. If we see an upgrade (and I sincerely hope we do) I guess we're, at best, looking at a 6950 which I'd be happy with, I guess a very unlikely outside chance would be the 6970 (Pipe dream me thinks)?
I'd welcome HellHammer's thoughts on this as he generally has a well informed perspective on these things.
guzhogi
Jul 14, 11:01 AM
I went to my local MicroCenter a few days ago & saw BluRay movies (XXX, Underworld: Evolution, Hitch, and 1 or 2 more) so there ARE movies out for it. Each was worth $29.99 USD so they're gonna be expensive.
I'm just going to wait a while until either BluRay or HD-DVD win out. I'm sure this is going to be like the VHS vs. Betamax thing. I remember hearing that while BluRay can hold more data, movie studios would have to buy totally new equipment to burn them. HD-DVD, however, while having a lower capacity, the studios would only have to make minor adjustments. But don't quote me on that.
If I had the money (which I don't), I'd really like to get the top of the line Mac Pro w/ all the bells & whistles when Apple ships Leopard and build my own windows computer when (if?) Windows Xista ships. I saw a full tower case w/ 5 external 5.25" bays, 2 3.5" external & 5 internal bays. I'd like to get a DVD-burner, a BluRay burner, an HD-DVD burner and a CD-RW. Probably an Nvidia mobo, 2 ATI high-end workstation graphics card (if they work w/ nvidia's sli), a Soundblaster X-Fi w/ the 3.5" bay thing, a memory card reader for the other external 3.5" bay. Then a Western Digital Raptor 10,000 RPM 150GB drive and 4 Seagate 750 GB drives and as many of Apple's 30" displays it can handle (or whatever the biggest, fastest stuff is out then). :D
I'm just going to wait a while until either BluRay or HD-DVD win out. I'm sure this is going to be like the VHS vs. Betamax thing. I remember hearing that while BluRay can hold more data, movie studios would have to buy totally new equipment to burn them. HD-DVD, however, while having a lower capacity, the studios would only have to make minor adjustments. But don't quote me on that.
If I had the money (which I don't), I'd really like to get the top of the line Mac Pro w/ all the bells & whistles when Apple ships Leopard and build my own windows computer when (if?) Windows Xista ships. I saw a full tower case w/ 5 external 5.25" bays, 2 3.5" external & 5 internal bays. I'd like to get a DVD-burner, a BluRay burner, an HD-DVD burner and a CD-RW. Probably an Nvidia mobo, 2 ATI high-end workstation graphics card (if they work w/ nvidia's sli), a Soundblaster X-Fi w/ the 3.5" bay thing, a memory card reader for the other external 3.5" bay. Then a Western Digital Raptor 10,000 RPM 150GB drive and 4 Seagate 750 GB drives and as many of Apple's 30" displays it can handle (or whatever the biggest, fastest stuff is out then). :D
dave-tx
Mar 23, 09:15 AM
My 60GB iPod is beat to hell; buttons barely work, display has breaks in it, battery barely holds a charge anymore. Plus it only holds about 25% of my music collection. I'll buy a 220GB iPod the day it comes out.
ErikCLDR
Feb 7, 04:32 PM
2005 LR3 SE, mountain road in Northern New Hampshire
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
Very nice, how's yours holding up?
My parents have '07 LR3 and an '07 Range Rover sport. Both have been very reliable aside from some software issues in the RRS that were quickly sorted out. There have been a couple little things but overall they have been much more reliable than our previous Discoveries.
We had an LR4 as a loaner and it's like night and day over the LR3. The interior is significantly nicer and the ride is smoother.
iMikeT
Sep 6, 04:12 PM
Better than nothing.
thejadedmonkey
Jul 18, 09:03 AM
[Fast downloads] would only be viable via streaming, and that won't happen because you can't stream to an iPod.
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. . .
Not ture. Apple could do a movie stream per rental, and let the CPU capture and convert it into a high-res iPod playable file. This way, after an hour or so you'll have a file playable on your iPod's lower res screen, or you can choose to watch it on the computer with a higher quality right away.
Therefore, we can expect a big download. I imagine the movies will be the same quality as can be found currently in the store. . .
Not ture. Apple could do a movie stream per rental, and let the CPU capture and convert it into a high-res iPod playable file. This way, after an hour or so you'll have a file playable on your iPod's lower res screen, or you can choose to watch it on the computer with a higher quality right away.
Nym
Nov 30, 10:31 AM
Microsoft owns nothing of Apple, just to make that clear, and of course they don't Apple to succeed... they want it to sink. :)
The fact that M$ owns a portion of Apple is a myth, not true.
The fact that M$ owns a portion of Apple is a myth, not true.
Millah
Apr 27, 02:57 AM
I think that's the point MS was making with it's objection, citing that Eastern Airlines had tried to trademark "Shuttle", and even though people associated Shuttle with Eastern, because the word was used so often, "shuttle" had (or became?) a "de-facto secondary" meaning. The courts ruled against Eastern and all the other airlines (New York airlines shuttle, Delta shuttle, etc) were allowed to use the word. MS then pointed out a list of examples of how 'app store' is used and has now attained a "de-facto secondary' meaning too. (I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just pointing out the Microsoft's case)
But did Eastern successfully trademark it? I dont know if they did, but it sounds like they didn't. That's the difference here. Apple was granted the trademark. The only reason it's become a de-facto meaning is because ALL of apples competitors have piggybacked off what Apple created. If "app stores" had existed the way they do now before the iPhone, and it was a de-facto meaning back then, then this would be different. But that's not the case. The term app store was clearly created by Apple, marketed by Apple, and most importantly turned into a success by Apple. No one but Apple. Consumers are aware of app stores and apps because of Apples work. And now the competition just piggybacks off Apples work and reaps the rewards off it. But that's a fact of life anytime someone invents something great.
But did Eastern successfully trademark it? I dont know if they did, but it sounds like they didn't. That's the difference here. Apple was granted the trademark. The only reason it's become a de-facto meaning is because ALL of apples competitors have piggybacked off what Apple created. If "app stores" had existed the way they do now before the iPhone, and it was a de-facto meaning back then, then this would be different. But that's not the case. The term app store was clearly created by Apple, marketed by Apple, and most importantly turned into a success by Apple. No one but Apple. Consumers are aware of app stores and apps because of Apples work. And now the competition just piggybacks off Apples work and reaps the rewards off it. But that's a fact of life anytime someone invents something great.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 01:08 PM
(Emphasis added.)
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
Got to love auto spell check. Nuisance sorry.
I reiterate my suggestion you take advantage of the educational opportunities available to you. Your nascent reasoning ability might benefit. ;)
Got to love auto spell check. Nuisance sorry.