henrikrox
Mar 25, 05:49 PM
Wow amazing I just hope more debs gets creative with this.
I love people say that this is the future of gaming. I agree with that.
Then stupid people say we have ps2 graphics. They said future of gaming. Not now. Just look at the jump from iPad 1 to 2. Think 3 years from now when we have CPUs with quad cores and even better graphics.
Amazing by the devs that created real racing 2. Looks fantastic
I love people say that this is the future of gaming. I agree with that.
Then stupid people say we have ps2 graphics. They said future of gaming. Not now. Just look at the jump from iPad 1 to 2. Think 3 years from now when we have CPUs with quad cores and even better graphics.
Amazing by the devs that created real racing 2. Looks fantastic
SeaFox
Aug 18, 03:34 AM
I don't know how credible this particular Digitimes story is...
You must be new here.
[ducking]
I couldn't resist the old joke.
You must be new here.
[ducking]
I couldn't resist the old joke.
islanders
Dec 27, 10:33 PM
I'm waiting for one format or the other to win, and I don't have an HD set anyway.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
You're comparing apples to oranges now. A cable box is a tuner and a self-contained unit. As far as we know, iTV will not have a tuner. Its only known function at this time is to stream content from a Mac, so that makes iTV like a Slingbox, not a cableco DVR. And Slingboxes don't have hard drives.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the word processing and web surfing. WebTV showed surfing the internet on a TV sucked because trying to read normal-sized text from six feet away was hard, and bumping the text size up would goof up the page layout generally. Same reason word processing would be silly.
I'm predicting a price around $400, but I'm also expecting a streaming device.
What bandwidth? The stuff you watch is downloaded to your Mac first, or even the iTV itself. They don't stream it every time you want to watch it. The iTunes Store is open for business for movies. The bandwidth problem has already been addressed.
That's lack of competition caused by effects of previous government sanctioned monopolies. And some "cooperation" by the different players in the industry. Kinda like how airline tickets and auto insurance are all pretty much the same.
Ok, I don�t know what a slingbox is� and I thought it was going to stream or operate like a TiVo, where it downloads while you are asleep, so it would need a harddrive.
Also, I�m not sure what you mean by TV? Do you mean a CRT with an aspect of 4:3? And, I would assume you don�t mean a flat panel LCD or Plasma, which now outsells tube tvs? A small HD plasma is 42�� and cost about $1000. I just got a Panny 9UK HD Plasma and it works quite will with a mac mini.
And when you download from the iTunes store this does go to a harddrive? So you think I�m going to buy both a new computer and the iTV, and pay $20 to download a few movies?
I already know I�m an idiot, thanks, but this still doesn�t make sense to me.
My point about price fixing was a wild hope that Apple might step in with iDish and offer a service without all the commercials, but I also said that I think this will be a HD movie download service, and web serfer, video server... like a mac mini, TiVo with streaming abilities from iTV.
The bandwidth limitation will be an issue if iTV wants to go past a download service.
fedex1993
Jan 8, 07:31 PM
My car (well, when I finally pass my test) is below, the blue Nissan Micra on the far left. Not a very impressive car at all by any means, but it was seen on Top Gear a few years back (http://i53.tinypic.com/33mv0yb.png) when the boys made their electric car and took it to Oxford.
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
*offtopic* where are you watching that at?
http://i54.tinypic.com/99hvma.jpg
*offtopic* where are you watching that at?
twoodcc
Sep 6, 12:01 PM
Remind me to never ask you for computer advice.
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
The parents bought a top of the line g4 iMac back when superdrives were 2x.
They still haven't used the superdrive to burn a dvd.
fine by me.....do what you will. that's them, but what about their kids? or anyone else who ever uses it? what about backing up their data?*
say what you will, but a dvd burner is always worth it
peapody
Nov 28, 09:20 AM
Well that MBA didn't last too long. How come you're bailing on it?
I didn't even open the MBA to be honest. Bailing because it was $1500 haha. And I just couldn't bring myself to have a second computer that is that price with those specs. And I have a feeling in my bones that the resale value will suck on the first gen 11.6".
I didn't even open the MBA to be honest. Bailing because it was $1500 haha. And I just couldn't bring myself to have a second computer that is that price with those specs. And I have a feeling in my bones that the resale value will suck on the first gen 11.6".
ZebraineZ
Jun 22, 03:37 PM
I wouldn't mind an iOS-type OS on an iMac as long as it had some more features of a full-fledged desktop OS. As in:
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
You just described a touchless OS X. It does exactly that...
-Multiple Users
-Printing
-Some kind of file system
-More apps of a creative side (ie movie editing, word processing, programming, etc.) instead of just media consuming apps
Note: this list is not exhaustive; there are many more features I'd like that I just can't think of at the moment.
Plus, some games/apps will need to be done, specifically those that need the accelerometers. I don't think people would want to swing around a 20/30 pound computer. But that would be a good way to make more money; people keep breaking them so they'll have to pay for repairs/new ones.
I doubt 10.7 will be such an overhaul. Probably more like Mac OS X 11.0 or a totally new naming scheme.
You just described a touchless OS X. It does exactly that...
lordonuthin
Feb 10, 04:47 PM
On a side note, I have reached #977 overall with 6.4 mio units! I didn't think it was possible before the bigadv units...
Speaking of bigadv units, I haven't gotten any in the last 2 or 3 days, just regular units on my mac pro?
Speaking of bigadv units, I haven't gotten any in the last 2 or 3 days, just regular units on my mac pro?
kas23
Jun 23, 08:55 AM
What a horrible idea.
FireStar
Oct 2, 10:40 AM
I intended to wait for the belkin's clear hard case to come out...
Griffin has a clear polycarbonate case. Black.... Sides, and clear back. Durability of a case, customizable like a skin. Griffin Reveal.
Griffin has a clear polycarbonate case. Black.... Sides, and clear back. Durability of a case, customizable like a skin. Griffin Reveal.
skunk
Mar 28, 02:49 AM
So now that I pwned you you still try to twist words to get weasle your way out.That'll be the day.
WilliamG
Sep 14, 02:20 PM
Does Consumer Reports stop recommending automobile purchases? Because you know if there is an issue with a car, the manufacturer will issue a recall. If you are affected, you have to take it into a dealer where it will be fixed. The onus is on the owner of the car, for crying out loud! The auto manufacturers should go house to house providing the fix for free to all cars, whether their owners report a problem or not!
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
Well, if a car made phone calls and was... you know... a phone, that would be different.
I think Consumer Reports are dead on in not recommending the iPhone 4. And take that from someone who loves his iPhone 4.
Wait, you mean Consumer Reports does not hold the auto manufacturers to the same artificial standard they hold Apple to? How amazing...
Well, if a car made phone calls and was... you know... a phone, that would be different.
I think Consumer Reports are dead on in not recommending the iPhone 4. And take that from someone who loves his iPhone 4.
islanders
Dec 27, 11:35 PM
TiVo doesn't download your shows over the internet, it records them off the cable TV or satellite receiver. The only reason it requires an internet connection is to get programming schedules and verify you're paying your monthly fee.
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
Do you have a source for that statement?
Apple thinks you are.
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Thanks for responding to some of my points, but I�m really curious where this is going.
I think I'm just going to wait and see.
Why not? They are all TV's. There is nothing about the term television that confines it to analog tube sets. If your Plasma/LCD has an over the air tuner or any sort, it is a TV. If it doesn't, it's a monitor.
Do you have a source for that statement?
Apple thinks you are.
Nobody is going to offer TV without commercials. People seriously underestimate the cost of production and distribution of content.
Remember that songs/movies you buy from Apple are supposed to be yours, if they go to a streaming media service they become like a rental service in effect, as you have to maintain your relationship with Apple to keep viewing the content.
Your the one who said a TV wouldn�t even work as a monitor.
You consistently rearrange some of my post where I�m just speculating. And at the same time you avoid my main points.
I also realize by streaming a movie we would just be renting it, but as a BluRay cost $1000, and if iTV is significantly less to watch the same movie in HD, this would be a reasonable solution. You also said you were waiting for the battle to be settled and that�s consistent to what I was pointing out that HD iTV would have a niche.
Thanks for responding to some of my points, but I�m really curious where this is going.
I think I'm just going to wait and see.
Mike84
Apr 26, 02:29 PM
You make it sound as though this is such an obvious distinction that Apple could never get a trademark for "app store". But apparently this argument is not so strong in trademark law as Apple actually has the trademark already. If that were not the case how could they sue another entity for trademark infringement?
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
I think all of you who believe you have trademark law all figured out should keep this in mind. Apple has a trademark for app store. Previously another company had a trademark for "appstore" which is very similar.
You can write about the topic as though you have it all figured out but clearly your interpretation is not definitive as Apple was awarded the trademark.
Now perhaps eventually apple will lose it or have to modify it but the fact that they got the trademark and a legal battle would need to be waged for them to lose proves that your opinion of trademark law in this case is oversimplified.
It was.
Can you please show me the trademark that was granted to Apple for App Store by the USPTO? You won't be able to find it because their trademark has not been approved. An opposition to their application was filed, if you didn't catch that from the text.
Trademark is having property rights in a trade name. Apple, or any other company, can file to protect a trademark they have been using and the USPTO decides if it is too generic to be an actual trademark. I suggest you learn about the process of how trademarks.
"How does a mark qualify for federal registration?
To register a trademark with the PTO, the mark's owner first must put it into use " in commerce that Congress may regulate." This means the mark must be used on a product or service that crosses state, national or territorial lines or that affects commerce crossing such lines--for example, a catalog business or a restaurant or motel that caters to interstate or international customers. Even if the owner files an intent-to-use (ITU) trademark application (ITU applications are discussed in the previous set of questions), the mark will not actually be registered until it is used in commerce."
Source: http://www.inc.com/articles/1999/10/14646.html
Also, take a look at the Lanham Act, which is pretty important when it comes to trademark law ;)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lanham_Act <-- particularly Subchapters I and II.
Just because you use a mark does not mean you have been granted the trademark rights in it.
So, as you can see Apple does not have the trademark to App Store. Therefore, your argument fails on that premise alone.
Marx55
Sep 6, 11:09 AM
Whre is FireWire 800?
At least two FireWire ports, please.
And a true 7200 rpm fast drive.
Thanks.
At least two FireWire ports, please.
And a true 7200 rpm fast drive.
Thanks.
zorinlynx
Mar 24, 02:26 PM
I wonder if this may imply the coming of that unicorn rider we all know and love, the 'headless mac" (aka xMac).
Removable drives, no screen, more powerful than an iMac, 1499.99.
Dream on. Just like unicorns, such a Mac will never exist unless it's hacked together frankenstein mess (aka Hackintosh).
The best you can hope for is a price drop on the Mac Pro, and I see that as being unlikely. Apple overall has been moving away from the "enthusiast" computer market, sadly. In fact, I think their hands-off nature of dealing with the Hackintosh community is their way of giving us a bone since they won't fill that market area and we're a small percentage of the market.
Removable drives, no screen, more powerful than an iMac, 1499.99.
Dream on. Just like unicorns, such a Mac will never exist unless it's hacked together frankenstein mess (aka Hackintosh).
The best you can hope for is a price drop on the Mac Pro, and I see that as being unlikely. Apple overall has been moving away from the "enthusiast" computer market, sadly. In fact, I think their hands-off nature of dealing with the Hackintosh community is their way of giving us a bone since they won't fill that market area and we're a small percentage of the market.
Alpinism
Nov 16, 10:54 AM
either way, its both a win-win situation
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
a) you dont need 8 cores?? see the 4 cores Mac pro goes down in retail price
b) you want 8 cores? Great !! here it is
case close.
Stridder44
Apr 19, 01:15 PM
Yay, news that's something other than iOS related.
Now hopefully the Mac Mini will get updated as well.
Now hopefully the Mac Mini will get updated as well.
spencers
Jan 2, 05:42 PM
My daily driver
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/7117/img713imageshack.jpg (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/img713imageshack.jpg/)
the cockpit
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/9210/img0712h.jpg (http://img205.imageshack.us/i/img0712h.jpg/)
http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/7117/img713imageshack.jpg (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/img713imageshack.jpg/)
the cockpit
http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/9210/img0712h.jpg (http://img205.imageshack.us/i/img0712h.jpg/)
czardmitri
Nov 28, 02:16 PM
one of the key differences between the xbox and zune. is that microsoft only had to contend with 2 other players in the video game indistry. the ipod maybe top. but there are hundred of other companies to battle first just to reach second place. and also phone companies. spending money maynot help them like in the case of the xbox.
The main difference (as I understand it) is that MS can at least attempt to make up for their losses on the sales of xBoxes from the games that are licensed for xBox. They can't do the same with music for the money they're losing on each Zune sold. Apple's margin on music is slim; they make money on the iPods.
The main difference (as I understand it) is that MS can at least attempt to make up for their losses on the sales of xBoxes from the games that are licensed for xBox. They can't do the same with music for the money they're losing on each Zune sold. Apple's margin on music is slim; they make money on the iPods.
ipedro
Jan 3, 07:57 PM
do u consider the september update an update?
The September update was clearly a small boost to carry the iPod through Christmas without revealing the whole enchilada.
Apple has a whole strategy involving multimedia and communication and it shows in all their latest moves. I have no doubt that the iPod and an iPhone (maybe they're the same thing) along with iTV will play a major part in all that.
Just a few days to go.
The September update was clearly a small boost to carry the iPod through Christmas without revealing the whole enchilada.
Apple has a whole strategy involving multimedia and communication and it shows in all their latest moves. I have no doubt that the iPod and an iPhone (maybe they're the same thing) along with iTV will play a major part in all that.
Just a few days to go.
Astral Cars
Jan 12, 01:57 AM
There are a lot of interesting possibilities here.
The most obvious meaning of "air" is just some new movie rental iTunes service. Boring.
There is also some sort of possibility that it's related to AppleTV and iPhones or something and now we can wirelessly stream movies from an iPhones to a TV and maybe there's additional possibilities involving the phone.
The most interesting is that of an actually wireless laptop. The notion isn't too absurd and maybe I just have to think about it longer to come up with a solution. But in a way it goes against the elegance that Apple strives for. On one hand your laptop is not connected to anything, but on the other you probably end up with a giant dongle that connects to your outlet and has some USB ports etc. If they can come up with a way to make that look elegant I think it's a possibility. I don't know much about wireless power, but I do know that in general it's an extremely inefficient means of transmitting power.
Anyway, I would love to see some sort of wireless laptop, but I'd be pretty surprised if we did.
The most obvious meaning of "air" is just some new movie rental iTunes service. Boring.
There is also some sort of possibility that it's related to AppleTV and iPhones or something and now we can wirelessly stream movies from an iPhones to a TV and maybe there's additional possibilities involving the phone.
The most interesting is that of an actually wireless laptop. The notion isn't too absurd and maybe I just have to think about it longer to come up with a solution. But in a way it goes against the elegance that Apple strives for. On one hand your laptop is not connected to anything, but on the other you probably end up with a giant dongle that connects to your outlet and has some USB ports etc. If they can come up with a way to make that look elegant I think it's a possibility. I don't know much about wireless power, but I do know that in general it's an extremely inefficient means of transmitting power.
Anyway, I would love to see some sort of wireless laptop, but I'd be pretty surprised if we did.
Calbretto
Apr 20, 10:28 AM
I simply can't wait for the refresh. I am ready for my first iMac... and my first home Mac. :) I use a Mac Pro G5 at work that is a few years old but an awesome machine. My home use for a Mac is less demanding than at work so I figure an iMac would be fine for my needs.
paradox00
May 3, 01:12 PM
I think this is fair but let me bottom line it.
10 versions of Mac OS and no standard process for properly (and completely) removing apps?
and...If dragging to the trash can is effective why do so many cleaner applications exist?
Mac OS has some really cool features but also lack polish and refinement. This lack of refinement is based solely on apple's drive to not be like Windows.
The new iOS approach to removal does not seem effective as I doubt this is a complete uninstall...probably just an background move to the trashcan. How many times have you removed apps from your phone then reinstalled them to find you previous data intact?
Some windows uninstallers leave a ton of crap behind too, more that the library files that are left behind on a mac (which can easily be found and removed). I think you need to get over your concerns with the consequences of dragging something to the trash in OSX just because that won't work well on Windows.
PS: Why is leaving behind a text file so you can easily restore your settings a bad thing?
10 versions of Mac OS and no standard process for properly (and completely) removing apps?
and...If dragging to the trash can is effective why do so many cleaner applications exist?
Mac OS has some really cool features but also lack polish and refinement. This lack of refinement is based solely on apple's drive to not be like Windows.
The new iOS approach to removal does not seem effective as I doubt this is a complete uninstall...probably just an background move to the trashcan. How many times have you removed apps from your phone then reinstalled them to find you previous data intact?
Some windows uninstallers leave a ton of crap behind too, more that the library files that are left behind on a mac (which can easily be found and removed). I think you need to get over your concerns with the consequences of dragging something to the trash in OSX just because that won't work well on Windows.
PS: Why is leaving behind a text file so you can easily restore your settings a bad thing?