oliversl
Mar 28, 09:04 AM
ok, that confirm no iOS5 in June. The iPhone 5 is re-scheduled for september? Could it be?
ejfontenot
Mar 11, 09:58 PM
Word at best buy Stonebriar was sellout. BUT, they were letting people that would sign up for a credit card skip ahead in the line. This from a guy that was line with me at stonebriar mall while his wife ran over there after apple ran out of 3G models.
OllyW
Apr 5, 07:53 AM
That must mean I'm not normal. :D
canada eh
Mar 18, 04:05 PM
I think it was at about 1.16/litre yesterday just north of Toronto
more...
gugy
Sep 27, 11:29 AM
yeah, bring it on.
10.4.7 is a total crap.
It caused kernel panic in my computer and made it behave totally erratic. I had to uninstall back to 10.4.6
I hope the new upgrade will solve many issues that were created by 10.4.7:mad:
10.4.7 is a total crap.
It caused kernel panic in my computer and made it behave totally erratic. I had to uninstall back to 10.4.6
I hope the new upgrade will solve many issues that were created by 10.4.7:mad:
AvSRoCkCO1067
Aug 14, 03:11 PM
Nonsense. Apple is selling a lot of computers right now because Jobs Osbourned the entire PowerPC range just over a year ago by announcing the switch to Intel. For each model of Mac, sales were artificially low before the Intel version was launched, and artificially higher after.
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
They sold how many macs last quarter? Over a million, right? How many boot camp downloads have they had....?
Of course the ads have helped sales - the question is, how much. Are you seriously implying that no advertising WHATSOEVER would increase sales...? :rolleyes:
Additionally, people are happer buying Macs if they know they can switch back to Windows if it doesn't work out. One of the major barriers to owning a Mac has been removed by the Intel switch (whatever my misgivings on the subject.)
It's simply ridiculous to argue that the ads have helped sales. Sales would be much higher now than they would have been six months ago even if Apple had stopped advertising completely. The question is whether they would be even higher if they weren't insulting their target audience. The answer, of course, is yes.
They sold how many macs last quarter? Over a million, right? How many boot camp downloads have they had....?
Of course the ads have helped sales - the question is, how much. Are you seriously implying that no advertising WHATSOEVER would increase sales...? :rolleyes:
more...
Mebsat
Apr 12, 02:27 PM
Office for Mac or Office for Windows? Easy decision.
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
After dealing with the bugs in Excel 2011 for Mac, I have been running the PC version of Excel 2010 in Fusion ever since...it runs far faster on the VM than Excel for the Mac runs. There is no comparison.
I'll see if the update helps but I'm not expecting much.
Plus a lot of add-ins aren't available, but you can get Solver for Mac now.
To each his own, I just use the PC version because I can build large worksheets much faster in it. (using Fusion 3, Win7Pro, Excel 2010)
I haven't opened VMWare Fusion for months, since I installed Office for Mac.
YMMV.
After dealing with the bugs in Excel 2011 for Mac, I have been running the PC version of Excel 2010 in Fusion ever since...it runs far faster on the VM than Excel for the Mac runs. There is no comparison.
I'll see if the update helps but I'm not expecting much.
Plus a lot of add-ins aren't available, but you can get Solver for Mac now.
To each his own, I just use the PC version because I can build large worksheets much faster in it. (using Fusion 3, Win7Pro, Excel 2010)
MacBoobsPro
Nov 11, 05:59 AM
Wow they are actually painful to watch!
more...
jtopp
Oct 8, 09:10 AM
I disagree. Apple doesn't need to compete with that at all. Android is not taking iPhone sales as long as Apple is selling them as fast as they can make them. In fact, the smaller droids are too small and the larger droids are too large..
The whole idea of business is to sell. Why not try to outsell and take business from other companies? Android is taking sales away from Apple because they are selling a competing product.
The whole idea of business is to sell. Why not try to outsell and take business from other companies? Android is taking sales away from Apple because they are selling a competing product.
Frobozz
Apr 5, 09:59 AM
I have used a Moto Xoom. Honeycomb requires you learn a new user interface. Instead of a nice seamless experience where you can get right in to using apps, you have to learn about the literally 3 or 4 different ways to trigger, dismiss, and access apps. If they're utilities, they're accessed one way. If they're apps, you've got an app menu and a desktop-style metaphor to try-- either works. It's confusing as hell. I mean, you can LEARN anything, but why would you want to.
Bottom line-- a Xoom is $800, it's far less functional, and it's far more confusing to use.
Bottom line-- a Xoom is $800, it's far less functional, and it's far more confusing to use.
more...
mrsir2009
Apr 30, 03:56 PM
If you need any kind of savvy to effectively and productively use an operating system, the operating system is poorly designed.
Sorry, guys. New rules for the post-PC era. Complexity is OUT. Get with the game. Forget conventional IT logic. It no longer applies.
Anyone who chooses the simplest operating system (like OS X and iOS, obviously) to accomplish the same tasks *is* savvy.
Gotta remember that those to OSes are locked down to certain hardware. Not so much Macs, as there is quite a big selection of Macs you can buy... But as for phones, you have a choice out of 1 phone.
Sorry, guys. New rules for the post-PC era. Complexity is OUT. Get with the game. Forget conventional IT logic. It no longer applies.
Anyone who chooses the simplest operating system (like OS X and iOS, obviously) to accomplish the same tasks *is* savvy.
Gotta remember that those to OSes are locked down to certain hardware. Not so much Macs, as there is quite a big selection of Macs you can buy... But as for phones, you have a choice out of 1 phone.
mizzytheboy
May 3, 08:21 AM
I would like to become an ordinary man ... Can I get an iPad as a gift?
:rolleyes: :apple:
:rolleyes: :apple:
more...
dgalvan123
Mar 23, 08:31 PM
This would greatly improve the usability of airplay, in my opinion.
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
This.
I like Airplay, but the added step of having to change inputs to apple tv, while admittedly minimal, is still enough of an inconvenience to keep my wife from using it very often.
Also, I notice that airplay doesn't seem to work when I'm playing internet radio on my apple tv 2G. I have to stop the radio from playing and back out to the main menu on the apple tv before it will accept an airplayed photo from my iphone 4, for example. Anyone else notice this behavior?
Imagine you had your TV on some random channel, while surfing the internet on your iPad. If your TV supported AirPlay, then you could just click the Airplay button on your iPad, and the random channel would be changed to the Airplay content. You wouldn't have to change the tuners over to Apple TV. Much more convenient.
This.
I like Airplay, but the added step of having to change inputs to apple tv, while admittedly minimal, is still enough of an inconvenience to keep my wife from using it very often.
Also, I notice that airplay doesn't seem to work when I'm playing internet radio on my apple tv 2G. I have to stop the radio from playing and back out to the main menu on the apple tv before it will accept an airplayed photo from my iphone 4, for example. Anyone else notice this behavior?
cfitz7111
Mar 24, 09:10 PM
Saw the story about the price cut, while on break (ironically I work at Target, where we have been receiving a lot of the IPad 1 16/wifi's lately, and selling them as fast as we were getting them in at $399.99) and got out of work at 8:30 went straight to the Verizon store, and bought the last 16 they had.
They of course tried to up sell me cases, mifi,keyboards, applecare, and I said no, and the rep went to page two of the handbook, meanwhile she did not even know the price was cut, until I informed her, as she told me there is not much price difference between the 1 and the 2, I consider $200 a lot. :p
They of course tried to up sell me cases, mifi,keyboards, applecare, and I said no, and the rep went to page two of the handbook, meanwhile she did not even know the price was cut, until I informed her, as she told me there is not much price difference between the 1 and the 2, I consider $200 a lot. :p
more...
platypus63
Oct 26, 12:54 PM
Wow, I expected PPC support to drop in a few years, not a few months. Sucks for anyone with the Quad G5s. Sucks for me with my dual G5. :(
I hope this won't be a common trend.
I hope this won't be a common trend.
Mac-Addict
Oct 24, 05:47 PM
going to get there at about 1730; coming to london from uni by train, lectures finish at 4ish, just want to get a tshirt; already ordered lepoard online.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
doubt there's going to be a massive queue, and its closed between 4 and 6pm, so 5:30 sounds like a sensible time to me.
how about meet by the computer with macrumors up on the screen?? preferably on the dual 30" ones.
That is actually a good idea make sure people can see the screen :P Somewhere near the top of the stairs.
more...
.jpg "Beautiful Black White Stripe")
ftaok
Apr 1, 01:34 PM
You clearly haven't left the US much. MOST other countries offer programming ala carte, and it works fine and is almost always about a buck a channel. It basically turns into you getting a bunch of the nonsense like home shopping free with subscription of 10 channels... television in the US is so regulated, taxes, and expensive because of things like ESPN and Disney having such a dominance on the providers, this country is f'd...What they do in other countries has nothing to do with how they would do it in the USA. Do you seriously think the cable companies would introduce a choice where they stand to lose money? There's no way, unless the FCC forced them, that this would happen.
Also, $1/channel is way too low. Just because you can get 10 channels for $60, doesn't mean each channel would be priced at 60 cents. IIRC, a popular channel like ESPN costs the cable provider $4/subscriber ... and that's with Disney forcing the whole ABC/ESPN/Disney package of channels onto the cable co.
If ALC does happen, I would guess that most people would pay the same or more than they currently do. A small percentage may pay less, but it really depends on what channels they pick (and whether those channels survive).
And how is that a con? The reason cable companies say they charge so much is because they give 100s of channels. If there were only 40, they couldn't hide behind that.It's a con when channels that focus on specific programming are forced to close up or offer the same old crap that everyone else does. For instance, a channel like BET may not survive to provide focused programming to the African American community because they would likely lose over half their subscriber base.
And since when is the goal of business to protect the undesirable? If 10 chain restaurants open in your town and nobody eats at 2 of them, should the other 8 raise their prices and give the overage to the 2 nobody likes? No, the 2 should shut down. No sense in having a business if nobody wants the business. Cable channels are a business.This isn't the goal of diverse television programming. Take a look at Obama's position on ALC. This is what I'm referring to.
As for letting the less popular networks whither, I do see this as a con. Networks will need to appeal to a broader audience in order to compete. Get ready for 15 channels showing the same formuliac sitcom. 20 channels of reality TV shows. 10 channels of daytime/social talk shows. 15 channels of sports. And 13 channels of news. No room for channels like History Channel or Discovery Health ... as they'll morph into a TNT or SpikeTV.
Also, $1/channel is way too low. Just because you can get 10 channels for $60, doesn't mean each channel would be priced at 60 cents. IIRC, a popular channel like ESPN costs the cable provider $4/subscriber ... and that's with Disney forcing the whole ABC/ESPN/Disney package of channels onto the cable co.
If ALC does happen, I would guess that most people would pay the same or more than they currently do. A small percentage may pay less, but it really depends on what channels they pick (and whether those channels survive).
And how is that a con? The reason cable companies say they charge so much is because they give 100s of channels. If there were only 40, they couldn't hide behind that.It's a con when channels that focus on specific programming are forced to close up or offer the same old crap that everyone else does. For instance, a channel like BET may not survive to provide focused programming to the African American community because they would likely lose over half their subscriber base.
And since when is the goal of business to protect the undesirable? If 10 chain restaurants open in your town and nobody eats at 2 of them, should the other 8 raise their prices and give the overage to the 2 nobody likes? No, the 2 should shut down. No sense in having a business if nobody wants the business. Cable channels are a business.This isn't the goal of diverse television programming. Take a look at Obama's position on ALC. This is what I'm referring to.
As for letting the less popular networks whither, I do see this as a con. Networks will need to appeal to a broader audience in order to compete. Get ready for 15 channels showing the same formuliac sitcom. 20 channels of reality TV shows. 10 channels of daytime/social talk shows. 15 channels of sports. And 13 channels of news. No room for channels like History Channel or Discovery Health ... as they'll morph into a TNT or SpikeTV.
ethical
Dec 16, 06:01 PM
I think your missing the point.
Some of us are bored of the X factor and Simon Cowell. This is some fun to put a bit of unpredictability in to something that was almost certainty.
I haven't bought the single, though do like Rage Against the Machine but can understand why they want to do this.
Explain how it's adding unpredictability if we're being told what song to buy, to get to No.1? By my definition that's the complete opposite of unpredictable.
If it's "just some fun" then that's a different story...but it's not. It's about people getting all whinny because they think Simon Cowell is taking over the music industry, and leading us like sheep to make his song's No.1. If you don't like the damn XFactor songs then quite rightly don't buy them! Buy what you want to become No.1. But when when people deliberately try and manipulate the results, thinking it will "teach that man a lesson", it becomes less about the music and more about some stupid battle with Simon Cowell!
The song I want to see at No.1 is the song that I like most at that particular time, not the song that I think will give the best metaphorical finger to Mr. Cowell.
Some of us are bored of the X factor and Simon Cowell. This is some fun to put a bit of unpredictability in to something that was almost certainty.
I haven't bought the single, though do like Rage Against the Machine but can understand why they want to do this.
Explain how it's adding unpredictability if we're being told what song to buy, to get to No.1? By my definition that's the complete opposite of unpredictable.
If it's "just some fun" then that's a different story...but it's not. It's about people getting all whinny because they think Simon Cowell is taking over the music industry, and leading us like sheep to make his song's No.1. If you don't like the damn XFactor songs then quite rightly don't buy them! Buy what you want to become No.1. But when when people deliberately try and manipulate the results, thinking it will "teach that man a lesson", it becomes less about the music and more about some stupid battle with Simon Cowell!
The song I want to see at No.1 is the song that I like most at that particular time, not the song that I think will give the best metaphorical finger to Mr. Cowell.
mrholder
Apr 5, 09:04 AM
Picked up a 32 gig last night for $399. I had a choice between a 16 gig and the 32 gig. Those were the only two they had left in inventory. I figured since I'm going to be using this for quite a while, I'd go ahead and get the 32. I was glad they had a couple left. :D
Surely
May 6, 10:02 AM
Canada was well aware of who they were voting for. It's not like the conservatives are a new party gaining power. Harper has been there for a while.
I'm sorry, but no they weren't. People have very short memories and they forgot that the Conservatives really have a much more extreme right view on things. All they remember is what has been going on during these minority Conservative governments, which was a very muted version of what the Conservatives are all about/aboot. You weren't living in Canada prior to their first minority government (IIRC, you moved there sometime last year), so I don't really think you can have a true feel for what was going on back then. Reading stuff online now doesn't really give you a sense for what was up back then either. I was living there during that time, and I remember.
The Conservatives decided to tone down their platform in order to gain power. This was their strategy (and IMO, not a very honest one). They maintained that toned down platform during their minority governments because they knew full well that if they attempted to make and major policy changes, the government would fall. They were very patient, and they were waiting for this: a majority government so that they could do what they want.
All the small businesses I know in my area voted conservative because they knew the liberals and NDP were going to attempt gutting them.
All of the small businesses? Every single one? Did you go around and poll them? Did they all mark their door-frames in blood or something? Surely some (or even one) of them voted Liberal/PC/NDP/Green. Toronto isn't much of a Conservative stronghold.......
284308
Blue= Conservative
Red= Liberal
Orange= NDP
(obviously, these are the colors of the winners. It doesn't mean that every single person in each riding voted for the winning party)
====================
And this is just ridiculous:
NDP shifts to damage control over ‘Vegas’ MP Ruth Ellen Brosseau (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/986662--ndp-shifts-to-damage-control-over-vegas-mp-ruth-ellen-brosseau?bn=1)
I'm sorry, but no they weren't. People have very short memories and they forgot that the Conservatives really have a much more extreme right view on things. All they remember is what has been going on during these minority Conservative governments, which was a very muted version of what the Conservatives are all about/aboot. You weren't living in Canada prior to their first minority government (IIRC, you moved there sometime last year), so I don't really think you can have a true feel for what was going on back then. Reading stuff online now doesn't really give you a sense for what was up back then either. I was living there during that time, and I remember.
The Conservatives decided to tone down their platform in order to gain power. This was their strategy (and IMO, not a very honest one). They maintained that toned down platform during their minority governments because they knew full well that if they attempted to make and major policy changes, the government would fall. They were very patient, and they were waiting for this: a majority government so that they could do what they want.
All the small businesses I know in my area voted conservative because they knew the liberals and NDP were going to attempt gutting them.
All of the small businesses? Every single one? Did you go around and poll them? Did they all mark their door-frames in blood or something? Surely some (or even one) of them voted Liberal/PC/NDP/Green. Toronto isn't much of a Conservative stronghold.......
284308
Blue= Conservative
Red= Liberal
Orange= NDP
(obviously, these are the colors of the winners. It doesn't mean that every single person in each riding voted for the winning party)
====================
And this is just ridiculous:
NDP shifts to damage control over ‘Vegas’ MP Ruth Ellen Brosseau (http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/986662--ndp-shifts-to-damage-control-over-vegas-mp-ruth-ellen-brosseau?bn=1)
NoSmokingBandit
Jun 20, 02:11 PM
All that matters is what games you like. Halo, Gears? Get a 360. inFamous, LBP? Get a ps3.
The 360 has tons more shooters, but the ps3 has it beat in variety, imo. With titles like the aforementioned inFamous, LBP, as well as The Last Guardian, Ratchet and Clank, God of War, etc theres a lot more variety than the 360 can offer. Of course none of that matters if you like what the 360 has more.
The 360 has tons more shooters, but the ps3 has it beat in variety, imo. With titles like the aforementioned inFamous, LBP, as well as The Last Guardian, Ratchet and Clank, God of War, etc theres a lot more variety than the 360 can offer. Of course none of that matters if you like what the 360 has more.
res1233
Apr 5, 11:00 AM
The point is that even cheap dumb-phones don't require a case to get better reception.
The iPhone may be the best smartphone overall, but it has a flaw when it comes to the most basic feature on a phone.
You are overstating it, just as the media had. Nobody who pays that much for a phone and values their money is going to walk around with a glass phone that is easy to break without a case. I probably should not have brought it up, but the point is that people will use cases for other reasons besides the reception. The case is required, not because of the reception, but because the phone is expensive. How someone will argue with that I don't know... I'm sure someone will figure out a way. ;) Also, the reception issue is only an issue in low-signal areas. But maybe you forgot that? idk...
The iPhone may be the best smartphone overall, but it has a flaw when it comes to the most basic feature on a phone.
You are overstating it, just as the media had. Nobody who pays that much for a phone and values their money is going to walk around with a glass phone that is easy to break without a case. I probably should not have brought it up, but the point is that people will use cases for other reasons besides the reception. The case is required, not because of the reception, but because the phone is expensive. How someone will argue with that I don't know... I'm sure someone will figure out a way. ;) Also, the reception issue is only an issue in low-signal areas. But maybe you forgot that? idk...
innominato5090
Mar 17, 05:00 AM
here in italy it costs 1.564�/l, which means 8.25$/US gallon. shocking, uh?
Rodimus Prime
May 5, 07:50 PM
The "Apple Tax" is largely just in the mind. PC Magazine, and several tech blogs, have had comparisons and found that a Mac is cheaper than machines from some Windows machines (I think Sony and Dell were more expensive but I could be wrong). Out of five tested, the Mac was in the middle.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
I did the math, and gave it up after I had consistently lousy experiences with every version of Windows I used, with hardware from a variety of well known manufacturers.
I will happily spend the imaginary premium if it provides with a stable operating system.
if maybe if you go spec for spec but often times you end up having to pay for a bunch of crap you do not need or want to get what you want from Apple.
Take this. I needed/wanted a 15in Laptop higher res screen and i7 processor. I bought it for around $1500. Same laptop from Apple over 2 grand. I was willing to give up the alumium body and battery life because they were not as high on my list.
Or try this one. Someone wants a 17 (hell even 15 in) screen but only really need a core duo or a i3 processor. If they went Apple they have to pay a huge tax to pay for all the extra crap they do not want/need just to get that 15 or 17 in screen they want/need.
Apple Tax is in the form of having to buy a bunch of extra crap you do not need/want to get the few items that you do need/want.
No comments:
Post a Comment