sigamy
Jul 25, 08:26 AM
I've wanted hyperlinks and a touch screen on the iPod since forever. Many times I do "shuffle songs", then it lands on an artist or album that I'd like to hear more of. It would be great to be able to click on the artist name or the album and then jump right there.
swingerofbirch
Dec 1, 02:03 PM
I'll say it before, and I'll say it again, this is a critical time for Apple and it's no time to be an Apple apologist. It's time to hold Apple's feet to the fire. Being soft on them isn't helping them. It's just enabling them not to realize their full potential.
thadoggfather
Apr 28, 05:37 PM
I think getting a white backplate and keeping the black front is the best of both worlds. That white front looks ugly and disoriented with an obvious front cam and that black PS (looks like sharpie has been applied to the mesh grill original design), and when the screens off, looks even worse.
I'll stick with mine :)
I'll stick with mine :)
Digital Skunk
May 3, 09:15 AM
It annoys me too but it works out pretty well for Apple and I'd much rather pay extra for the i7 than not have the option at all. Look at the latest MBPs compared to the previous ones, Apple bumped the GPUs up significantly but charged $200 more and yet everyone is happy.
True, but I've always had the sense that MBP owners are just used to paying a lot more for a machine than most everyone else.
I strongly suggest against a refurbished model of older revisions. It is similar to purchasing a Core 2 model. The base 21.5" Sandy Bridge once it hits refurb would be tempting at ~$999.
Agreed about the Core2 models, but I still think it would depend on the price of the refurbed. There's a 3.33GHz core 2 duo on there for $1040, and a 3.06GHz Core i3 for $930; same GPU different HDD size. The i3 would be the better choice if one weren't able to get the extra $200 or so for a new model.
This is the first worthwhile iMac solely based on the stillborn potential of Thunderbolt and the quad on the base models. It only took 5 years.
QFT. My initial post in this thread mentioned the Old Skool Apple because at the very least we've got iMacs that don't offer 80% laptop parts with a nice screen. I'd say we are at 40% laptop parts now.
True, but I've always had the sense that MBP owners are just used to paying a lot more for a machine than most everyone else.
I strongly suggest against a refurbished model of older revisions. It is similar to purchasing a Core 2 model. The base 21.5" Sandy Bridge once it hits refurb would be tempting at ~$999.
Agreed about the Core2 models, but I still think it would depend on the price of the refurbed. There's a 3.33GHz core 2 duo on there for $1040, and a 3.06GHz Core i3 for $930; same GPU different HDD size. The i3 would be the better choice if one weren't able to get the extra $200 or so for a new model.
This is the first worthwhile iMac solely based on the stillborn potential of Thunderbolt and the quad on the base models. It only took 5 years.
QFT. My initial post in this thread mentioned the Old Skool Apple because at the very least we've got iMacs that don't offer 80% laptop parts with a nice screen. I'd say we are at 40% laptop parts now.
more...
br0adband
Nov 7, 04:04 AM
To be honest, I've had more application crashes and restarts on OSX than I have under XP/Windows in the past 3 years. So much for "crash resistant" - and yes, I've had 4 kernel panics since I got this iMac home; that's more than the number of BSODs I've had under XP in 4 years.
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
Which means -- as everyone is saying -- that there is something wrong with your computer. I have a MacBook, two Intel iMacs, and a Mac Pro in my house, and they do not crash despite heavy daily use. My poor Mac Pro is running three different operating systems right now using Parallels, with nary a complaint. If you are getting unexplained kernel panics on a clean install of Mac OS X, then you have a hardware problem.
Hardware problems can affect any OS -- I've seen Windows systems that get daily BSODs. It's not because "Windows sucks", it's because there was a sub-par memory chip or somesuch in the system. Likewise Mac OS X crashes, when nobody else is experiencing a problem, are not an indication of the stability of the OS but rather of your hardware.
You're quoting me back to me when all of us (including me) were talking about that other guy that is having hardware problems because his Parallels "sucks." Parallels kicks ass on my C2D 20" iMac - hence the reason I piped up to be the first to say something is wrong with the other guy's machine if he can't get it working right.
On mine, which is stock hardware except for the 2GB of RAM I have in it, Parallels starts up in 4 seconds, boots my XP VM in 9-10, shuts down in 3-4, restarts the same VM in under 5 seconds (have yet to figure that one out, probably because of caching someplace; I don't even see the XP splash screen when it reboots/restarts because it's so fast), suspends in 22-25 seconds, resumes in 30-34, and I have no issues with any hardware at all in my XP VM. I even burn CDs and DVDs from the XP VM over FireWire/USB without hassles (Plextor FireWire/USB external).
So, on a similarly configured piece of hardware, if he's having suspend/resume times that seem to be 4-6x longer than others then, as you said, there is something wrong with the hardware. If none of the rest of us are having said issues, your line of logic would follow and apply to his machine since he's the only one reporting such ridiculously long suspend/resume times among other things.
Parallels works for me. Since I can't post specific benchmark data for Parallels and that other new-on-the-scene virtualization software for Macs <hint, hint> I'll just say this:
I completed the testing I said I was going to do, and Parallels simply lays the smackdown across that other software. And yes I'm well aware that other software is in beta - or pre-beta late alpha as one person put it - and that's fine. But I paid for Parallels, and to use that most famous line about Macs:
It just works.
Oh yeah, it beats that other software even with multi-core CPU support enabled. Go figure.
bb
Parallels sucks but until now its been the only REAL game in town.
Ah... the clarion call of lamers. Might as well bash Windows since it's so pervasive while you're at it. And it's still no excuse for stealing the software and breaking the faith. Bleh...
eddx
Jul 25, 05:00 AM
i hope it comes in white/black/aluminium (silver plastic?) variations.
I totally agree!
I want to see pro keyboard / mice combos (in silver / aluminium) - back light keyboard, thinner - matches the pro laptops and desktops. And then black / white versions for the consumer range. It would look professional to have a cinema display with my macbook pro and have a bluetooth keyboard & mighty mouse set that for once matched the design in terms of colour at least.
I totally agree!
I want to see pro keyboard / mice combos (in silver / aluminium) - back light keyboard, thinner - matches the pro laptops and desktops. And then black / white versions for the consumer range. It would look professional to have a cinema display with my macbook pro and have a bluetooth keyboard & mighty mouse set that for once matched the design in terms of colour at least.
more...
840quadra
Dec 1, 07:31 PM
Okay, now I might end up being branded as an Apple apologist for this, but this thread is bugging me.
Really, people, lighten up! It's like the corner of the carpet is smoking a little bit and people start shouting about how the whole house is about to burn down.
Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence. But do you honestly think that Apple isn't? Do you honestly think that Apple has simple ignored security all this time? Certainly not. The fact that OS X is as secure as it is clearly shows that Apple has done a good job so far. Now, maybe we've crossed an invisible barrier on the scale of the visibility of the platform, and now a lot more people are trying to target OS X, so more vulnerabilities are being found. But, there really is a big difference between a vulnerability and an exploit in the wild. iAdware is the closest thing to a true exploit I've heard of to date, and we don't even know what kind of vector it uses to get itself installed.
So, really, lay off the heavy handed "Apple has to start paying attention to security" nonsense. The implication that Apple hasn't been paying attention to security is just irritating, to say the least.
Good points,
I agree with some of your points. Apple has done a good job historically, and currently with regards to security. I am not worried that my system is going to be taken over, or hacked the moment I go onto the internet, or sign into a public WIFI.
I do not agree that lower our demands for Apple with regards to security expectations. Now is Apple's chance to prevent getting an image that their competition has, with regards to holes in security. Apple themselves have advertised that Spyware, viruses, etc, are not part of the OS X experience (http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov). In my opinion, that may be received as a challenge, or incentive for someone to make that argument a fallacy.
Really, people, lighten up! It's like the corner of the carpet is smoking a little bit and people start shouting about how the whole house is about to burn down.
Now, certainly, these issues should be looked at with all due diligence. But do you honestly think that Apple isn't? Do you honestly think that Apple has simple ignored security all this time? Certainly not. The fact that OS X is as secure as it is clearly shows that Apple has done a good job so far. Now, maybe we've crossed an invisible barrier on the scale of the visibility of the platform, and now a lot more people are trying to target OS X, so more vulnerabilities are being found. But, there really is a big difference between a vulnerability and an exploit in the wild. iAdware is the closest thing to a true exploit I've heard of to date, and we don't even know what kind of vector it uses to get itself installed.
So, really, lay off the heavy handed "Apple has to start paying attention to security" nonsense. The implication that Apple hasn't been paying attention to security is just irritating, to say the least.
Good points,
I agree with some of your points. Apple has done a good job historically, and currently with regards to security. I am not worried that my system is going to be taken over, or hacked the moment I go onto the internet, or sign into a public WIFI.
I do not agree that lower our demands for Apple with regards to security expectations. Now is Apple's chance to prevent getting an image that their competition has, with regards to holes in security. Apple themselves have advertised that Spyware, viruses, etc, are not part of the OS X experience (http://movies.apple.com/movies/us/apple/getamac_ads1/viruses_480x376.mov). In my opinion, that may be received as a challenge, or incentive for someone to make that argument a fallacy.
Small White Car
Apr 11, 01:36 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway?
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
I haven't read for sure, but I'm guessing these products are RAIDed for speed, not redundancy.
How many drives are in there? It's possible they've got the speeds up pretty high on them.
more...
Paul Graham
Jan 31, 03:52 PM
Why have a Canon and a Nikon? Does that not mean you have to buy lenses for both?
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
Why not?
I have lenses for both, But I do have numerous adaptors that let me use my entire lens collection on all my cameras.
So I do save money in that sense.
Why do people have two or more computers, An xbox AND a ps3 etc etc etc.....
both cameras have their pros and cons, And I utilize both for their pros!
As I do with my film slr's.
Plus... I also collect cameras, Hense why i have more than one film cam.
ciTiger
Apr 13, 02:05 PM
any chance for apple shaped tv? ;)
right... lol
If an Apple display is 1000 $ i can only imagine how expensive this one will be...
right... lol
If an Apple display is 1000 $ i can only imagine how expensive this one will be...
more...
GuitarDTO
May 1, 02:43 PM
You can't beat it because it's a pirate site. NONE of the money from the site goes to the artists, songwriters, producers, labels, etc.
There's a reason it's based out of Russia. So I hope you're happy knowing your essentially buying stolen property.
Proof please. You have no idea what does or doesn't go to the artists, songwriters, producers, etc. You are speculating. The site has been up and running for years now, because noone has been able to prove in a court that they are doing anything illegal. If the courts decide otherwise and shut the site down, I'll move back to Amazon.
There's a reason it's based out of Russia. So I hope you're happy knowing your essentially buying stolen property.
Proof please. You have no idea what does or doesn't go to the artists, songwriters, producers, etc. You are speculating. The site has been up and running for years now, because noone has been able to prove in a court that they are doing anything illegal. If the courts decide otherwise and shut the site down, I'll move back to Amazon.
vnle
Nov 1, 07:51 PM
Finally figured out which bike I wanted - took it for a test ride today and it was fantastic :cool: I would change out some minor things though ... :o
GT GTR Series 4.0
GT GTR Series 4.0
more...
Tones2
Apr 22, 10:26 AM
No thanks.
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
Have you used a 4.3" phone. They don't seem that much physically bigger but the screen size is awesome! Apple keeps getting squeezed with adding new technology because of the size limitations of the phone. Giving us a slightly bigger size with the advantage of a bigger screen size AND more components seems like an excellent tradeoff.
Yeah - I know if will never happen because SJ is compulsive obsessive with never making things bigger.
Tony
4.0 max whilst retaining current size. It's a phone not a tablet.
Have you used a 4.3" phone. They don't seem that much physically bigger but the screen size is awesome! Apple keeps getting squeezed with adding new technology because of the size limitations of the phone. Giving us a slightly bigger size with the advantage of a bigger screen size AND more components seems like an excellent tradeoff.
Yeah - I know if will never happen because SJ is compulsive obsessive with never making things bigger.
Tony
knownikko
Apr 22, 05:45 PM
A phone shaped like the illustration would be an ergonomic disaster, in my opinion.
I heard a rumor it was designed by the guys that do the Mac mice.
I heard a rumor it was designed by the guys that do the Mac mice.
more...
42streetsdown
May 3, 09:09 AM
store's up - also - the macbook pro's are listed as new. Not sure if they were bumped recently, or if they slid them in with the imacs
the new sign is just still there from the February update
the new sign is just still there from the February update
baryon
Apr 11, 01:23 PM
Could someone clarify this for me: Aren't hard drives too slow to make use of Thunderbolt anyway? In a typical USB 2.0 external hard drive, what is the bottleneck in speed: The speed at which the hard drive spins, or the USB 2.0 connection? If it's the USB, then why do people even care about the RPM of a drive? If it's the RPM, then isn't USB 2.0 fast enough to run a hard drive at its native speed?
more...
BeSweeet
Apr 28, 04:14 PM
iphone 4 white is so yesterdays news . i want to know when the humancentipad is coming out!!!!!
I LOLed. Episode was a bit too silly IMO.
I LOLed. Episode was a bit too silly IMO.
KnightWRX
Apr 22, 11:44 AM
I can read Wiki too...
GPL is a license. GNU is a foundation. The guy i quoted said about GNU - i corrected him as to the licensing terminology..
I didn't read any Wikis. None of my links are to wikis. And again, you're wrong. GPL is a license. GNU is a project. The Foundation behind this project is the FSF, the Free Software Foundation.
The guy you quoted was me. You didn't correct me at all, you posted a ton of wrong information.
And licensing terminology ? I didn't even get it wrong. I said Bash was part of the GNU project, you said "No, Bash isn't GNU, it's GPL", which is both very wrong and quite misunderstands the terminology used by the FSF.
Look, you were wrong, drop it, you're only digging yourself deeper into your hole here.
GPL is a license. GNU is a foundation. The guy i quoted said about GNU - i corrected him as to the licensing terminology..
I didn't read any Wikis. None of my links are to wikis. And again, you're wrong. GPL is a license. GNU is a project. The Foundation behind this project is the FSF, the Free Software Foundation.
The guy you quoted was me. You didn't correct me at all, you posted a ton of wrong information.
And licensing terminology ? I didn't even get it wrong. I said Bash was part of the GNU project, you said "No, Bash isn't GNU, it's GPL", which is both very wrong and quite misunderstands the terminology used by the FSF.
Look, you were wrong, drop it, you're only digging yourself deeper into your hole here.
spencers
Nov 15, 05:06 PM
OH MY GOD!!! :eek::eek::eek: That's ridiculous!
Did you google the Panerai?
Did you google the Panerai?
SevenInchScrew
Sep 14, 12:07 PM
Halo: Reach Legendary Edition
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
Halo: Reach Limited Edition Xbox 360 S
Replacing my old Xbox 360 Elite. Can't wait to get all this set up and play.
http://i51.tinypic.com/334uhbo.jpg
Uragon
Apr 25, 12:39 PM
I've got a 2.5 yr old MacBook that is feeling stretched with Aperture. I've been thinking that an iMac / iPad combination would be a good replacement.
Anyone with experience in getting iPads to work with iMacs (specifically remote access)?
I have been thinking same, new iMac and the iPad 2.
Anyone with experience in getting iPads to work with iMacs (specifically remote access)?
I have been thinking same, new iMac and the iPad 2.
wordoflife
Apr 13, 10:22 PM
Might get this, might not. Don't do contracts so it would be a simple case of buying and selling. Something most people I know do. You lot (Americans) should start doing the same and stop being beholden to 24 month contracts.
We pay the same monthly whether we pay $199 for the iPhone, or full price ($599)
We pay the same monthly whether we pay $199 for the iPhone, or full price ($599)
tigress666
Apr 22, 05:25 PM
No "AT&T" !
There's always hope!
Why would you want to limit the carriers? How would that make the experience of the phone better for you?
I mean even if you don't like AT&T and prefer Verizon, how does this affect you now that there is a Verizon phone that there is an AT&T one?
So you basically want those of us who actually like being on AT&T to be left without the choice for something that would not even benefit you? How frikkin selfish!
There's always hope!
Why would you want to limit the carriers? How would that make the experience of the phone better for you?
I mean even if you don't like AT&T and prefer Verizon, how does this affect you now that there is a Verizon phone that there is an AT&T one?
So you basically want those of us who actually like being on AT&T to be left without the choice for something that would not even benefit you? How frikkin selfish!
iLilana
Apr 25, 01:51 PM
bought the 27 inch quad i5 stock version last august just days after refresh. I loved it but due to wacky screen issue (dust or heat flaw) I got the apple store to just swap it out 3 months after I bought it. Second one had no issues and continues to perform flawlessly. I want to get a new macbookpro with thunderbolt but I think I'm going to hold off until Lion is released.
0 comments:
Post a Comment