trainguy77
Nov 23, 09:45 PM
Nope, I haven't either :mad:
yeah, but i still haven't gotten my points back yet
I think they will come either this last update or the next one. As if you look at the hourly graphs for any team a huge spike existed for the last hour. This is probably stanford processing log files. It may take time for them all to be processed.
yeah, but i still haven't gotten my points back yet
I think they will come either this last update or the next one. As if you look at the hourly graphs for any team a huge spike existed for the last hour. This is probably stanford processing log files. It may take time for them all to be processed.
WildCowboy
Oct 18, 04:35 PM
Having looked at the numbers in more detail it is interesting that compared to the year ago quarter desktop sales are relatively static and pretty much all the growth in mac shipments is in the portable lines. Good to see Apple add 1bn to revenue anyhow.
I'd imagine that it's partly due to the long-term industry-wide shift toward portables.
I'd imagine that it's partly due to the long-term industry-wide shift toward portables.
Snowy_River
Jul 12, 01:07 AM
At $79 a year it will probably be 5 years before the program moves to a commonly useful level where it may have the ability to replace MS Office. The very casual Word Processor user will not have to wait very long, maybe Pages 3 or Pages 4. With the 5 X $79 = $395 we move into the price range of the non-educational price of MS Office. But for the heavy Office user, 5 years may not be long enough...
Hmm... Let's start with the idea of present value. $79 spent a year from now isn't worth $79 today. So, $79 a year for the next five years is actually only worth $300-$361 (assuming a possible APR of between 3% and 10%). Now, that's compared with $399.95 for Office. Hmm. But there's another factor here. If a given upgrade doesn't have any features that are compelling to you, you don't have to get it. Wow! That would mean that iWork would be even less!
Now, all of that being said, of course if iWork isn't functional for you now you shouldn't get it. But if it is, as this thread has shown that there are a lot of us out here for whom it, in fact, is, then there's no reason for us not to get it. So, all around, I'd argue that iWork is a cost savings over MS Office, even if you upgrade every time.
Plus, if all you need to make it a worthwhile office suite is a spreadsheet, then there are a variety of options at various price points. These include OpenOffice Calc, KOffice KSpread (both free), Mariner Calc, etc.
Hmm... Let's start with the idea of present value. $79 spent a year from now isn't worth $79 today. So, $79 a year for the next five years is actually only worth $300-$361 (assuming a possible APR of between 3% and 10%). Now, that's compared with $399.95 for Office. Hmm. But there's another factor here. If a given upgrade doesn't have any features that are compelling to you, you don't have to get it. Wow! That would mean that iWork would be even less!
Now, all of that being said, of course if iWork isn't functional for you now you shouldn't get it. But if it is, as this thread has shown that there are a lot of us out here for whom it, in fact, is, then there's no reason for us not to get it. So, all around, I'd argue that iWork is a cost savings over MS Office, even if you upgrade every time.
Plus, if all you need to make it a worthwhile office suite is a spreadsheet, then there are a variety of options at various price points. These include OpenOffice Calc, KOffice KSpread (both free), Mariner Calc, etc.
Bampei
May 3, 08:39 AM
Does anyone know where to find the specs for the iMac that will list whether or not the new models have SATA III connections internally? Not interested if they didn't upgrade to 6gbps. (SATA II is 3gbps).
If SATA III, then I'll order with just 2TB and add a Vertex 3 SSD later, but if they're still SATA II, then may be a deal buster.
If SATA III, then I'll order with just 2TB and add a Vertex 3 SSD later, but if they're still SATA II, then may be a deal buster.
more...
aswitcher
Oct 24, 08:36 AM
Great -- that was my only holdout. Where did you see the info about 802.11n being included?
Just an educated guess.
Just an educated guess.
iStefmac
Jan 30, 09:08 AM
One word. Macworld.
I sold half of my shares in the company the day before Macworld at an astounding price. I personally feel for whoever the buyer was, as they paid well over what my shares were worth that day (wrongly anticipating a spike after Macworld). I, however, have had a close eye on the rumors and Apple's business model as of late. I anticipated several elements that came to frutition, and now still having half of my Apple stock, I about broke even. Until Apple soars high again :). First really insightful stock market decision I've ever made.
Buy now :-) Thats my $0.02
I sold half of my shares in the company the day before Macworld at an astounding price. I personally feel for whoever the buyer was, as they paid well over what my shares were worth that day (wrongly anticipating a spike after Macworld). I, however, have had a close eye on the rumors and Apple's business model as of late. I anticipated several elements that came to frutition, and now still having half of my Apple stock, I about broke even. Until Apple soars high again :). First really insightful stock market decision I've ever made.
Buy now :-) Thats my $0.02
more...
heisetax
Jul 10, 10:34 AM
Lets hope it doesnt end up costing as much as MS Office....:eek:
At $79 a year it will probably be 5 years before the program moves to a commonly useful level where it may have the ability to replace MS Office. The very casual Word Processor user will not have to wait very long, maybe Pages 3 or Pages 4. With the 5 X $79 = $395 we move into the price range of the non-educational price of MS Office. But for the heavy Office user, 5 years may not be long enough.
Apple would used to calculate the Real Total Cost of Ownership for Macs. They would include after purchase service & support costs. We need to do the same for iWork. iWork is not a simple $79 program useless you wait for the version you want, purchase it & then add no updates that have a purchase price. If you want a slimmed down program purchase now, but have few features to give few benefits. If you want a more complete program just wait for the 5th or 6th upgrade. But this way you have no program to use for another 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 years. Anything else requires multiplying the $79 by by a 2, 4, 5 or even larger number to get the true cost of iWork.
Bill the TaxMan
At $79 a year it will probably be 5 years before the program moves to a commonly useful level where it may have the ability to replace MS Office. The very casual Word Processor user will not have to wait very long, maybe Pages 3 or Pages 4. With the 5 X $79 = $395 we move into the price range of the non-educational price of MS Office. But for the heavy Office user, 5 years may not be long enough.
Apple would used to calculate the Real Total Cost of Ownership for Macs. They would include after purchase service & support costs. We need to do the same for iWork. iWork is not a simple $79 program useless you wait for the version you want, purchase it & then add no updates that have a purchase price. If you want a slimmed down program purchase now, but have few features to give few benefits. If you want a more complete program just wait for the 5th or 6th upgrade. But this way you have no program to use for another 2 1/2 to 3 1/2 years. Anything else requires multiplying the $79 by by a 2, 4, 5 or even larger number to get the true cost of iWork.
Bill the TaxMan
MacRumoron
Aug 16, 12:11 AM
i'm liking the new mail features :D
I don't mind the "bubbles" in concept. What I think is hideous is the ovalness of them and the coloring. I'd prefer something lighter and beveled.
i happen to like the ovalness and coloring :P
I don't mind the "bubbles" in concept. What I think is hideous is the ovalness of them and the coloring. I'd prefer something lighter and beveled.
i happen to like the ovalness and coloring :P
more...
Surely
Mar 1, 11:37 AM
I heard some radio jocks this morning say that they think this whole Charlie Sheen thing is a bit. Kinda like the whole Joaquin Phoenix thing or a radio shock jock who just goes way over the top. Of course the partying and lifestyle is real, but they were talking about this present media tour and the crazy talk he's spouting. It all equals more publicity for him, the network, and the show.
After thinking about it this explanation sounds pretty reasonable. If it's not that, then as many have said he's had a break with reality of some sort and the eventual end is not going to be pretty.
I watched the Piers Morgan interview......I still think he's ****ing with people.
I've met a bunch of Hollywood types, and for some of them, their reality is not the same as our reality.
After thinking about it this explanation sounds pretty reasonable. If it's not that, then as many have said he's had a break with reality of some sort and the eventual end is not going to be pretty.
I watched the Piers Morgan interview......I still think he's ****ing with people.
I've met a bunch of Hollywood types, and for some of them, their reality is not the same as our reality.
SpaceKyd
Apr 14, 12:35 AM
Fail apple!! Faiiillllllll!
▄██████████████▄▐█▄▄▄▄█▌
██████▌▄▌▄▐▐▌███▌▀▀██▀▀
████▄█▌▄▌▄▐▐▌▀███▄▄█▌
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████▀
▄██████████████▄▐█▄▄▄▄█▌
██████▌▄▌▄▐▐▌███▌▀▀██▀▀
████▄█▌▄▌▄▐▐▌▀███▄▄█▌
▄▄▄▄▄██████████████▀
more...
Razeus
Apr 12, 08:48 AM
I like what you have going on here. Great detail on the girl / hair too, bokeh is pleasing and vibrant. Epic shoot locale. Tell her to stand up straighter next time and I think it would be flawless. Fill light could go one notch down too.
I love this photo you know. Very good color harmony with the dress too!
Thanks. I need to warm up her skin tone as I made her too pale. The way she stands is the way she stands. She has poor posture, but next shoot I'll have her stand straight. As for the clothing, I wanted her to wear something to match the environment and I think it worked well.
I love this photo you know. Very good color harmony with the dress too!
Thanks. I need to warm up her skin tone as I made her too pale. The way she stands is the way she stands. She has poor posture, but next shoot I'll have her stand straight. As for the clothing, I wanted her to wear something to match the environment and I think it worked well.
ezekielrage_99
Jul 29, 04:45 AM
It will suck like all Microsoft products except for the MS Mouse that is good.
How come pretty much everthing Apple makes is good except for the Mouse :confused:
How come pretty much everthing Apple makes is good except for the Mouse :confused:
more...
CFreymarc
Apr 13, 10:36 PM
Big deal.
I swear Apple got more market share over the publicity about the delay than the actual delivery of the product. Remind me to delay a custom color of a new product so the press can bitch about it too. Well played in The Loop, well played!
I swear Apple got more market share over the publicity about the delay than the actual delivery of the product. Remind me to delay a custom color of a new product so the press can bitch about it too. Well played in The Loop, well played!
nagromme
Jul 24, 10:22 PM
Some Apple patents are just "out there" and don't sound useful in practice. I never expect to see them in a product.
But THIS sounds actually very useful--the problem of whether a keyboard hogs the screen or not is solved, etc. etc.
Apple's hiring says they're serious about touch computing. For an iPod? For a Mac? And when? I can't wait to find out!
But THIS sounds actually very useful--the problem of whether a keyboard hogs the screen or not is solved, etc. etc.
Apple's hiring says they're serious about touch computing. For an iPod? For a Mac? And when? I can't wait to find out!
more...
vnowarita
Apr 13, 09:50 PM
Meh. Too late.
right on...why don't they just call this iPhone 5 and release it at WWDC. Still looks best in black
right on...why don't they just call this iPhone 5 and release it at WWDC. Still looks best in black
mdntcallr
Oct 23, 10:23 AM
This is incorrect.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the "licensed device".
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform. If that instance of Vista is not installed anywhere else, there is no preexisting "licensed device".
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
WELL, if it will work.... maybe this is just some people worrying aloud ahead of time so MS doesnt pull any funny business.
my bet is MS will have windows packages for mac.
Microsoft's Vista EULA says:
4. USE WITH VIRTUALIZATION TECHNOLOGIES. You may not use the software installed on the licensed device within a virtual (or otherwise emulated) hardware system.
This means you can't use the *same* installation of Vista Home inside a virtualization technology on the "licensed device".
This DOES NOT mean you can't use it by itself in a virtualization product on any platform. If that instance of Vista is not installed anywhere else, there is no preexisting "licensed device".
The reason this is included in the EULA is because Vista Business and Ultimate actually include additional licenses specifically so the same license can be used to also run in a virtualization environment on the same device where Vista is already installed.
So, the higher end versions of Vista actually include more in terms of virtualization licensing than any other commercial OS.
In any case, all versions of Vista can be legally used standalone in a virtualized environment, such as Parallels or VMWare.
WELL, if it will work.... maybe this is just some people worrying aloud ahead of time so MS doesnt pull any funny business.
my bet is MS will have windows packages for mac.
more...
Gasu E.
Jul 24, 01:58 PM
As a Mac fan-boy I'd love to think Apple actually picked up sustainable market share, but as an actual technology product manager who does forecasts for a living, I've got to look askew at the data:
* Mac market share was DOWN the previous quarter
* The attributed cause of the share drop the previous quarter was the transition to Intel
* Therefore the previous quarter share drop represented pent-up demand that would rematerialize once the Intel transition stabilized
* Therefore one would expect a corresponding one-time blip UP in the corresponding quarter to resolve the pent-up demand
* And low and behold, the marketshare "increase" just about corresponds to the resolution of the previous quarter's pent-up demand.
In other words, to keep the same long-term share, the current quarter's share would have to temporarily rise to make-up for last quarter's drop.
Sorry, amigos, I'll wait to see next quarter's data before I pop the cork...
* Mac market share was DOWN the previous quarter
* The attributed cause of the share drop the previous quarter was the transition to Intel
* Therefore the previous quarter share drop represented pent-up demand that would rematerialize once the Intel transition stabilized
* Therefore one would expect a corresponding one-time blip UP in the corresponding quarter to resolve the pent-up demand
* And low and behold, the marketshare "increase" just about corresponds to the resolution of the previous quarter's pent-up demand.
In other words, to keep the same long-term share, the current quarter's share would have to temporarily rise to make-up for last quarter's drop.
Sorry, amigos, I'll wait to see next quarter's data before I pop the cork...
pmullins11
Jan 28, 11:57 AM
Finally got my HiFiMAN EF2A amp. :) Now I need to track down some Hytron JHY-6AK5 tubes.
269149
269149
wtfk
Dec 1, 07:59 PM
I'm still waiting to hear that someone--anyone--has actually been exploited by one of these "exploits."
kalafalas
Sep 30, 11:43 PM
Having worked very closely with the head engineers of AT&T, I do feel sorry for them. As someone stated earlier, that are spending billions to upgrade the network, but all that money will only meet current demand in some areas. The iPhone is such an incredible success that AT&T never had a chance. The same would be said about Verizon had they got the exclusive contract. If you want to lay the blame at anyones feet, it should be Apple. They should have made a CDMA version and split the load between the networks.
actually, you are 100% wrong, if you read your history, you would know that apple did everything in there power to get it on as many carriers as possible for this exact reason. and the only company that would take the phone and give 100% control of the operating system was AT&T, and that was under the circumstances of a exclusive contract. And apple did the correct thing, because can you imagine what a iPhone would be if it was tightly controlled by the carrier? i can. its called a LG dare. and every other ****** touch screen phone out there.
Apple had the correct idea, split the load onto as many carriers as possible. but that couldn't happen, because the carriers are bitched greedy bastards, all of them, AT&T being the least bad of all of them, letting apple have control in the first place.
And as for making a CDMA version, thats pure stupid. because thats a dead technology that very few companies use, and only in one country. everywhere else, they use HSDPA, example europe, where the iPhone is available on many carriers, all using HSDPA standard, and there having 0 problems.
So no, Apple is not to blame, they did everything in there power to make it as perfect as possible, and they did. AT&T is to blame, for being greedy and only wanting this phone on there network only.
actually, you are 100% wrong, if you read your history, you would know that apple did everything in there power to get it on as many carriers as possible for this exact reason. and the only company that would take the phone and give 100% control of the operating system was AT&T, and that was under the circumstances of a exclusive contract. And apple did the correct thing, because can you imagine what a iPhone would be if it was tightly controlled by the carrier? i can. its called a LG dare. and every other ****** touch screen phone out there.
Apple had the correct idea, split the load onto as many carriers as possible. but that couldn't happen, because the carriers are bitched greedy bastards, all of them, AT&T being the least bad of all of them, letting apple have control in the first place.
And as for making a CDMA version, thats pure stupid. because thats a dead technology that very few companies use, and only in one country. everywhere else, they use HSDPA, example europe, where the iPhone is available on many carriers, all using HSDPA standard, and there having 0 problems.
So no, Apple is not to blame, they did everything in there power to make it as perfect as possible, and they did. AT&T is to blame, for being greedy and only wanting this phone on there network only.
sam10685
Jul 25, 09:58 AM
one battery? how does that work?
mdntcallr
Apr 23, 08:38 PM
This is a great thing. Now I wonder if this will support tmobile calls over wifi.
And I hope they sell the phone for higher fee upfront, and lower monthly fees.
That would rock
And I hope they sell the phone for higher fee upfront, and lower monthly fees.
That would rock
Makosuke
Jul 24, 02:26 PM
Interesting, and good news--surprised it took this long. Although the quoted article seems to show a bit of a misunderstanding about how the mouse actually works--yes, some people aren't comfortable with the way it detects clicks, but it has to do with the touch sensors, not "fat buttons".
santaliqueur
Apr 22, 09:28 AM
Corporations are evil.
Evil? Corporations are the only reason we are able to have the internet, computers, cars, phones, televisions, movies, frozen food, high quality clothing, life saving medication, and countless other things you take for granted.
But yeah, screw those guys.
Evil? Corporations are the only reason we are able to have the internet, computers, cars, phones, televisions, movies, frozen food, high quality clothing, life saving medication, and countless other things you take for granted.
But yeah, screw those guys.
0 comments:
Post a Comment