jettredmont
May 2, 04:56 PM
This concept might seem alien to a lot of MacRumours users, but being a 'switcher', the method of deleting any app on OS X currently seems very ad hoc. I've been a mac user now for about 4 years and yet the idea of having to delete an app by dragging it to the trash seems very... strange. You never know if you've deleted ALL of that program.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
When I switched (back in 2002), the hardest thing in this respect was getting it through my head that that one icon sitting in the /Applications folder really is the whole app (*for well-behaved drag-install apps). Yes, you have "tools" like AppCleaner which delete all the prefs and user files for an app as well, obliterating any trace that the app was ver on your system, but those are just prefs. If the app itself is removed, the prefs are just text (or sometimes binary compressed) files sitting on the hard drive. They don't matter.
This is in absolute contrast to Windows where any app worth its salt comes with an installer, which spreads unknowable components throughout the hard drive and changes various settings everywhere in the system. Of course you need another automated tool to (sometimes) undo all those changes.
Since the trend in Mac software has been a lot of large installers (the majority are well-behaved drag-install apps, but I see installers on apps which really shouldn't need an opaque installer at all). OS X doesn't have a good answer for those kinds of apps, and it is indeed messy.
The App Store, however, essentially moves us back to a compartmentalized app workspace which can be removed as automatically as it is laid down.
Microsoft have managed to get one thing right in Windows. A specific tool (Add/Remove Programs) to delete a program. That's something that I genuinely feel is lacking in OS X and this idea of clicking and holding in LaunchPad makes sense. It's imple enough: most users who own an iPhone will have no trouble in adopting this method. And what's more, it makes it instantly accessible to anyone who uses a mac. In addition, it goes a step further than Microsoft. It avoids making more novice users from having to delve in to a complex window of settings. A step in the right direction? I think so!
So personally, I think this is a very simple yet very effective change to make to OS X and should be a welcome sign of the things to come in Lion!
When I switched (back in 2002), the hardest thing in this respect was getting it through my head that that one icon sitting in the /Applications folder really is the whole app (*for well-behaved drag-install apps). Yes, you have "tools" like AppCleaner which delete all the prefs and user files for an app as well, obliterating any trace that the app was ver on your system, but those are just prefs. If the app itself is removed, the prefs are just text (or sometimes binary compressed) files sitting on the hard drive. They don't matter.
This is in absolute contrast to Windows where any app worth its salt comes with an installer, which spreads unknowable components throughout the hard drive and changes various settings everywhere in the system. Of course you need another automated tool to (sometimes) undo all those changes.
Since the trend in Mac software has been a lot of large installers (the majority are well-behaved drag-install apps, but I see installers on apps which really shouldn't need an opaque installer at all). OS X doesn't have a good answer for those kinds of apps, and it is indeed messy.
The App Store, however, essentially moves us back to a compartmentalized app workspace which can be removed as automatically as it is laid down.
Multimedia
Aug 31, 12:32 PM
What about this report of a silent mini update already in the pipeline on the French HardMac website? (http://www.hardmac.com/news/2006-08-31/#5869) :)
"I have ordered a Mac mini Core solo with 1GB of RAM last Saturday to use it as a server, and what a surprise when I received the box!
My Mac mini has been upgraded:
- Core Duo 1.66GHz instead of Core Solo 1.5GHz
- HD 100GB instead of 60GB
- and a SuperDrive instead of a Combo!
Thanks Apple !
On the box, the specifications are those of a Mac mini Core Solo..."Wow! Fantastic for $599. Awesome! Exactly what I was hoping for - esp the 100GB HD. Looking great. I wonder why the Apple Website Store hasn't been updated to reflect this change? :confused: Surely all in the pipeline that were 1.5 solo are now 1.66 duo. Perhaps Apple doesn't want Joe Blow to know so the rest of the solos can GO with the Blows? :D
That's gotta be the biggest increase in power in recent Apple history for no additional cost - twice the cores running faster than the previous one. Maybe back in the G4 days something like this happened. But it wasn't at the bottom of the line for $599. And it CERTAINLY wasn't unannounced and not even on the packaging!
I'm very excited for all the mini buyers out there. Congrats if you get one like this before Apple admits they are in the pipeline.
"I have ordered a Mac mini Core solo with 1GB of RAM last Saturday to use it as a server, and what a surprise when I received the box!
My Mac mini has been upgraded:
- Core Duo 1.66GHz instead of Core Solo 1.5GHz
- HD 100GB instead of 60GB
- and a SuperDrive instead of a Combo!
Thanks Apple !
On the box, the specifications are those of a Mac mini Core Solo..."Wow! Fantastic for $599. Awesome! Exactly what I was hoping for - esp the 100GB HD. Looking great. I wonder why the Apple Website Store hasn't been updated to reflect this change? :confused: Surely all in the pipeline that were 1.5 solo are now 1.66 duo. Perhaps Apple doesn't want Joe Blow to know so the rest of the solos can GO with the Blows? :D
That's gotta be the biggest increase in power in recent Apple history for no additional cost - twice the cores running faster than the previous one. Maybe back in the G4 days something like this happened. But it wasn't at the bottom of the line for $599. And it CERTAINLY wasn't unannounced and not even on the packaging!
I'm very excited for all the mini buyers out there. Congrats if you get one like this before Apple admits they are in the pipeline.
Maldini
Jan 12, 12:04 AM
I don't see the benefit of a MacBook Slim.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Exactly, it doesn't make any sense.
Can someone pursued me or tell me why it would be better then just having a MacBook?
Exactly, it doesn't make any sense.
AFPoster
Mar 22, 12:50 PM
Nope. Not everyone. I am quite happy where I am… thanks.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
Quite frankly after a few visits I am happy never to return to the Land of the super-sized, home of the intolerant.
HAHA, if I lived in Europe I wouldn't want to leave that place, not to say that's where you are, but Europe is great. Not everyone is true, but a big understatement thus the millions of illegal immigrants and people constantly being killed trying to get here. Ahem, Mexico for one.
reel2reel
Apr 12, 10:01 PM
Jeez, I can't even get photography bay to load anymore and Rob Imbs' photos are getting 700 views in a matter of minutes. :eek:
KnightWRX
Apr 11, 12:47 PM
I'd be interested in a more complete explanation. CVT is what the particular manufacturer I'm considering calls their transmission. And, yes, you can get paddle shifters if you want.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
A CVT is simply a transmission with no fixed gear ratios. It can have any gear ratio between a set minimum and maximum, it has no "steps" like "1st gear, 2nd gear". In other words, it's a transmission type where you could theoretically have the engine spin where it produces the most power (let's say at 5000 rpm) all the time while accelerating. In reality, car CVTs do still have gears, like the Honda Fit which is a 7 gear automatic CVT transmission.
CVT, DSG or the traditional fluid type are all automatics. They just differ in their inner workings. What you're talking about has nothing to do with the inner-working, the paddle like shifters or + - gates on the shifter is simply an interface that lets you override any of the automatic transmissions and select your own gear.
A distinction to make. You could technically have a CVT transmission that you put in "drive" and drive off and you could have a traditional automatic with paddle shifters. Both are unrelated in their function.
socamx
Jan 12, 10:46 AM
Take a look at this:
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
http://flickr.com/photos/peteryan/2187596838/
Personaly i think it's fake, because of the non-capital letter on the begining of the second sentence... but who knows it could be true the disposition of the this so called macbook air is quite original and not in the tradicional way laptop upside down opened a little...
It looks exactly like the 15 inch Macbook Pro. You can clearly make out the cd drive, the IR port for the remote and the button to release the screen.
MacFan782040
Nov 27, 03:28 PM
Well think about it...all Apple's consumer products have iSights built in for "video-confrencing out of the box". If they want to push the MacMini, they will need a low-end display with a built-in iSight for this.
Sell it seperately at $249.
Maybe bundle a MacMini/display together?
MacMini- $599
bundled display- $200
$799 for a computer/display + mouse/keyboard
...your talking less than $900 for a full Apple system-not bad!
*And for everyone saying 17" is too small... Think of all the people who bought MacBooks at 13.3"! Nobody I know that has one uses an external display.
Sell it seperately at $249.
Maybe bundle a MacMini/display together?
MacMini- $599
bundled display- $200
$799 for a computer/display + mouse/keyboard
...your talking less than $900 for a full Apple system-not bad!
*And for everyone saying 17" is too small... Think of all the people who bought MacBooks at 13.3"! Nobody I know that has one uses an external display.
BJB Productions
Apr 12, 09:48 PM
Uh...so just being black and green means 'consumer' now? :confused:
Haha. You're right. No, but I sure hope there's more customization of screens, timeline size, windows, etc. Not like iMovie; which is one huge block.
But it's def looking nice. The UI of FCP7 is so old looking. I just hope they don't lose simple things like blade, hotkeys, etc... So it's not a total new learning curve.
Haha. You're right. No, but I sure hope there's more customization of screens, timeline size, windows, etc. Not like iMovie; which is one huge block.
But it's def looking nice. The UI of FCP7 is so old looking. I just hope they don't lose simple things like blade, hotkeys, etc... So it's not a total new learning curve.
netdog
Aug 29, 01:09 PM
Think Secret say no Merom in the Mini so you guys believe it?
It makes little sense to continue with the Yonah.
I am suspect of this rumour.
It makes little sense to continue with the Yonah.
I am suspect of this rumour.
MattInOz
Jun 23, 05:35 AM
The form factor of an iMac just doesn't work nicely with the general way iOS is meant to be used. As mentioned by moneyman, there seems to be a rough adaptation for it if it's used in conjunction with a touch pad, but this still doesn't seem very likely. The only platform that would benefit largely with an iOS layer would be the MacBook line, which could easily enough use a touch-screen interface directly on the existing display without worrying about tired arms. However, this brings up another issue: It would cannibalize iPad sales and blur the defining line for that "intermediate" category of devices between iPhone and Mac that Jobs just finished touting about.
So in summation, my opinion is that it's highly unlikely.
I could see Two reference designs for this idea.
One the iMac 3G
Screen on floating arm is a Standalone iOS device that is the interface to the OS X device in the dome.
But that is really a MacMini in a stand and Biggier iPad or a range of bigger iPads to work with in.This would work better with say Lightpeak for the connection.
Not sure it would be an iMac in that I can't see them jumping the iPad up to 20inch range screens or dropping the iMac back to 15inch range screens.
A new product maybe.
So reference design two would be a wedge so it could also stand up or lie sloped on the table with the thicker part of the wedge for the x86 processor and power supply.
They do need to offer a station wagon or a ute before some people are going to give up their trucks for cars.
So in summation, my opinion is that it's highly unlikely.
I could see Two reference designs for this idea.
One the iMac 3G
Screen on floating arm is a Standalone iOS device that is the interface to the OS X device in the dome.
But that is really a MacMini in a stand and Biggier iPad or a range of bigger iPads to work with in.This would work better with say Lightpeak for the connection.
Not sure it would be an iMac in that I can't see them jumping the iPad up to 20inch range screens or dropping the iMac back to 15inch range screens.
A new product maybe.
So reference design two would be a wedge so it could also stand up or lie sloped on the table with the thicker part of the wedge for the x86 processor and power supply.
They do need to offer a station wagon or a ute before some people are going to give up their trucks for cars.
tokevino
Aug 7, 12:24 AM
I am buying an iMac very soon, and I just want a 64-bit intel core in it. Cmon merom!
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
IMHO, only Mac Pro and MacBook Pro will get the chance for Core 2s. Intel simply doesn't have the production, yet.
Do you have a particular need for 64 bit computing?
Spoony
Apr 26, 02:07 PM
apple created a storefront they called "app store"
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
I can't call my store Target or Walmart. The names are already taken and famous. It's like cyber squatting on Madonna.com. you can't b/c madonna is already mega famous. She could just take it from you.
McDonalds can't sue Burger King for the name b/c they are way different but sell similar products.
If Burger Kind called their Store Mcdonalds but put in a lowercase D now I think McDonalds would and should sue the crap out of them.
Reminds me of coming to america. they've got the Big Mac, We've got the big Mic.
amazon creates a store front that does the same t hing called the "appstore"
apple wins in this situation.
ding ding ding. I agree.
The store is called the App Store. You can't copy someones store name.
I can't call my store Target or Walmart. The names are already taken and famous. It's like cyber squatting on Madonna.com. you can't b/c madonna is already mega famous. She could just take it from you.
McDonalds can't sue Burger King for the name b/c they are way different but sell similar products.
If Burger Kind called their Store Mcdonalds but put in a lowercase D now I think McDonalds would and should sue the crap out of them.
Reminds me of coming to america. they've got the Big Mac, We've got the big Mic.
jb1280
Apr 3, 06:12 AM
Very powerful ad.
macgeek18
Feb 20, 11:49 PM
It is time to drink the intel Kool-aid my friend
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
Lol I again drank it 2 days ago by buying a Intel MacBook. Sorry G4's, looks like retirement is looming again. ;)
JoeG4
Feb 27, 04:24 PM
Yeeup sounds about right.
Digging that Mac Pro though! :D
Digging that Mac Pro though! :D
vand0576
Sep 1, 01:29 PM
What is this chin on the iMac that everybody is talking about?
You. Have. Never. Seen. An. iMac. Have you?
You. Have. Never. Seen. An. iMac. Have you?
TangoCharlie
Sep 1, 12:05 PM
I couldn't disagree with you more.
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
This size represents the iMac that can display Full resolution 1080p HD content. If they introduce this and then eventually throw a Blu-ray in there they've got the killer combination. Front Row is already setup to be a home-theatre replacement. I mean come on, it's basically an HDTV...it's 1080p, it's got a remote, and it's got front row... This will sell like crack... Digital crack...
I think you're absolutely right!! They need to stick in a couple of digial tuners in it too tho.....
ryannel2003
Feb 22, 10:34 PM
http://i109.photobucket.com/albums/n46/ryannel2003/IMAG0168.jpg
My new addition, a white MacBook. It's a mid-2007 model I picked up for $400. Not a bad deal at all, considering many of these computers are still going for $550. Apple installed a new top case and display bezel for free, picked up a used Combo drive for $40 (old one was kaput) and a fresh install of Snow Leopard and I'm ready to go. Really enjoying it.
My new addition, a white MacBook. It's a mid-2007 model I picked up for $400. Not a bad deal at all, considering many of these computers are still going for $550. Apple installed a new top case and display bezel for free, picked up a used Combo drive for $40 (old one was kaput) and a fresh install of Snow Leopard and I'm ready to go. Really enjoying it.
backsidetailsli
Nov 24, 07:31 AM
add Shnitzlizr lets race!
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/gt5rd.jpg
http://www.crunchgear.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/gt5rd.jpg
Benguitar
Nov 23, 02:42 PM
Small Pelican case for my Oakley Glasses, (as seen on the last page of the XIV Purchases Thread)
Have room for another pair too, Maybe I'll find another pair that I like in the future.
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee180/Benguitar2/CameraRoll_1-3.jpg
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee180/Benguitar2/CameraRoll_2-1.jpg
:)
Have room for another pair too, Maybe I'll find another pair that I like in the future.
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee180/Benguitar2/CameraRoll_1-3.jpg
http://i229.photobucket.com/albums/ee180/Benguitar2/CameraRoll_2-1.jpg
:)
davidgrimm
Sep 23, 08:25 PM
"Influential"?
Consumer Reports used to influence my opinion, but when they actually rank things I know a little about, I always find fault with their methods and so they really aren't that influential to me anymore. I mean if their methods stink on the categories I know of, they probably stink for the categories I don't know about.
Consumer Reports used to influence my opinion, but when they actually rank things I know a little about, I always find fault with their methods and so they really aren't that influential to me anymore. I mean if their methods stink on the categories I know of, they probably stink for the categories I don't know about.
kelving525
Sep 19, 11:54 PM
I saw some of the pics and the buttons are covered. :)
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
The volume-rocker and hold buttons are both covered.
DrFrankTM
Aug 25, 09:23 AM
am I right in thinking that there is still no way to do extended desktop (two monitors displaying different stuff) on a Mini?
Hmmm... To cook an extended desktop on a Mini (sort of), you need:
1-) A Mac Mini
2-) An old Mac with a screen - mine is an old iBook G3
3-) A router
4-) Synergy
5-) Some kind of script - Automator does the job - to turn Synergy into a start-up item on both computers
Ok, it obviously doesn't give you two screens on your Mini, but you can cut and paste between screens, and use only one keyboard and mouse to control both, which is pretty sweet. Personally, I use my Mini for any kind of heavy workloads and the iBook for the small stuff. The lack of extended desktop was almost a show-stopper for me but, in the end, Synergy provides me with all the screen space I need. If you really need more than that though, maybe the Mini isn't the right machine.
EDIT: For example, I run Skype on my iBook. There is no difference whatsoever to me whether it is on my iBook or my Mini. You can use the secondary screen for a bunch of apps like those that do not really need to run on your Mini.
Hmmm... To cook an extended desktop on a Mini (sort of), you need:
1-) A Mac Mini
2-) An old Mac with a screen - mine is an old iBook G3
3-) A router
4-) Synergy
5-) Some kind of script - Automator does the job - to turn Synergy into a start-up item on both computers
Ok, it obviously doesn't give you two screens on your Mini, but you can cut and paste between screens, and use only one keyboard and mouse to control both, which is pretty sweet. Personally, I use my Mini for any kind of heavy workloads and the iBook for the small stuff. The lack of extended desktop was almost a show-stopper for me but, in the end, Synergy provides me with all the screen space I need. If you really need more than that though, maybe the Mini isn't the right machine.
EDIT: For example, I run Skype on my iBook. There is no difference whatsoever to me whether it is on my iBook or my Mini. You can use the secondary screen for a bunch of apps like those that do not really need to run on your Mini.