StinktOldC
Oct 15, 03:22 PM
"That's like saying you don't want to kiss your lover's lips because everyone has lips".
Steady on Steve!
Steady on Steve!
iMeowbot
Nov 27, 10:13 AM
Lets hope they remaster them - the stereo effects on the original versions can be really painful on a pair of headphones.
Apple Corps did say (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aFXMHi1sm_p8&refer=us) that the Beatles tracks would be cleaned up before download releases were made.
The cheesy stereo on some of the early tracks may seem odd to current-day listeners, but on the other hand, mashup hobbyists must love it :)
Apple Corps did say (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000103&sid=aFXMHi1sm_p8&refer=us) that the Beatles tracks would be cleaned up before download releases were made.
The cheesy stereo on some of the early tracks may seem odd to current-day listeners, but on the other hand, mashup hobbyists must love it :)
Speedracer04
Sep 12, 02:19 PM
Just checked with the store and the only new iPod available with the promotion is the 30GB video, cant get the new nanos or the 80GB
goosnarrggh
Nov 7, 09:08 AM
hmm... but shouldn't they wait until 802.11n becomes more than just a draft of a format?
Other products, including a few from Apple, are using draft-n hardware already.
Maybe they won't be 100% compliant, but unless something earth shattering happens before 802.11n is finalized, I'd expect that many draft-n products could be made compatible with equipment using the the final standard, with little more than a firmware change.
And wasn't 802.11g still in the draft stage when it was introduced in the AirPort Extreme? (Extreme was introduced on January 7, but 802.11g was not ratified until June 2003.)
Other products, including a few from Apple, are using draft-n hardware already.
Maybe they won't be 100% compliant, but unless something earth shattering happens before 802.11n is finalized, I'd expect that many draft-n products could be made compatible with equipment using the the final standard, with little more than a firmware change.
And wasn't 802.11g still in the draft stage when it was introduced in the AirPort Extreme? (Extreme was introduced on January 7, but 802.11g was not ratified until June 2003.)
Designer Dale
Mar 7, 02:48 PM
University Place and the Chambers Creek area as seen from a park near where I live. The train in the distance was involved in a wreck shortly after I packed up. No injuries.
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5252/5506742653_a55144001b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43162691@N04/)
Dale
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5252/5506742653_a55144001b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/43162691@N04/)
Dale
EasyB
Oct 31, 06:17 PM
This firmware update seems like a good thing, but I'm just afraid of the computer shutting down even though it supposedly ignores temp readings. I tried running the hardware diagnostic, and guess what. The MacBook still shut down- multiple times while trying to run the test. I was unable to get the diagnostic to run at all. Should I just call Apple up and start demanding answers and taking no prisoners? Or should I be more sly about it? I'm just starting to get pissed off at what I thought was a great computer company.
Just do it, have some faith. It is the best update I ever did. My mac does not shut down anymore and it works better. And the firmware update only takes a few seconds, i too was worried about it shutting down during the firmware update, but do you think apple would put out a update like that. Could you imagine the mess if half of the macbooks died during the update and would not boot anymore? They would not take that chance.
So just do it, it will work for you, and maybe restore some faith in apple.
-B
Just do it, have some faith. It is the best update I ever did. My mac does not shut down anymore and it works better. And the firmware update only takes a few seconds, i too was worried about it shutting down during the firmware update, but do you think apple would put out a update like that. Could you imagine the mess if half of the macbooks died during the update and would not boot anymore? They would not take that chance.
So just do it, it will work for you, and maybe restore some faith in apple.
-B
mikes63737
Jul 24, 07:38 AM
Throw in a spanish-english dictionary with either voice recognition or the ability to spell out the word to find the meaning and I am there.
For students taking Spanish in the US this would be really good. It would really help with some people's grades. Maybe people would learn that "No havo my homeworko" doesn't mean anything.
I also like that newspaper idea - it would be really nice if it came from an RSS feed so you can pick any source, not only Apple's sources.
For students taking Spanish in the US this would be really good. It would really help with some people's grades. Maybe people would learn that "No havo my homeworko" doesn't mean anything.
I also like that newspaper idea - it would be really nice if it came from an RSS feed so you can pick any source, not only Apple's sources.
powermac_daddy
Nov 6, 10:48 PM
waiting for my OX 10.5 macbook pro.
when is that gonna be? what is the configuration gonna be like?
when is that gonna be? what is the configuration gonna be like?
Pandaboots
Jan 11, 05:04 PM
Wimax in Apple machines?
That's what I'm thinking. With Intel backing Clearwire and Apple and Intel are in love, I bet Apple will announce Wimax support on all new computers and devices. Ater all 2008 is the roll out for Wimax. Glad I own shares of Clearwire and Apple.
That's what I'm thinking. With Intel backing Clearwire and Apple and Intel are in love, I bet Apple will announce Wimax support on all new computers and devices. Ater all 2008 is the roll out for Wimax. Glad I own shares of Clearwire and Apple.
szsiddiq
Nov 7, 07:34 PM
SZ--please explain. It seems that even a small increase in the mainstream would overshadow a large gain in niche markets. If Apple increases mainstream market share why do they need the niche markets?
I guess i was wrong with said niche markets.
what i mean is that as they expand their market share, they'll need to expand their product line, in order to entice customers toward their products. basically, if they have a product for every corner of their market, they'll likely increase their market share.
I guess i was wrong with said niche markets.
what i mean is that as they expand their market share, they'll need to expand their product line, in order to entice customers toward their products. basically, if they have a product for every corner of their market, they'll likely increase their market share.
Nipsy
Oct 14, 03:09 PM
Originally posted by Source
Nipsy, you seem to be in a world of your own here. You're not paying attention to what people are saying and doing on this board and simply believing that you're right because you're a shareholder. I could buy a single share in Apple, but it doesn't mean that i'm going to be right about everything i think Apple should do.
At no point did I say that Apple (and AAPL) would not benefit greatly from faster hardware.
I'm simply stating that talking about it here won't change the path that Apple is on.
Perhaps you may want to direct your concerns to Apple, Moto Semiconductor, IBM, etc.
This is a rumors site occasionally perused by Apple legal, and maybe some employees looking for a laugh.
If you want Apple to continue to be "behind" (is that a gentle enough word for you?) in the hardware sector, then that's fine.
I don't, no one here does, but I could type 'til I'm blue in the face here, and it wouldn't change the course that Apple is on.
Oddly enough, The Steve is not sitting in his office, with a bunch of processor designers, eagerly awaiting your (or my) next post.
But the FACT is that most Apple users, DON'T. They want to see Apple competing with PC hardware properly. Apple is already such a small part of the market and IMO, they need to increase speed to
Agreed, speed would help gain new market share. Never said anything to the contrary.
Have you ever heard of the phrase "Give the people what they want" ? Well most people want speed and numbers.
Most people want cheap computers too. Most people want a lot of things. I'm all for better numbers, as long as they are performance and not GHz based.
If we artificailly inflate numbers at the cost of performance (PIV) we have more GHz doing the same amount of work. If we lower margins and Apple quits being a botique company, quality will suffer, profits will suffer, and the overall effect won't be good.
If Apple has a 30% share in the future, do you think we'll remain virus free? Do you think we'll get more attention from the pop-up spyware writers? Do you think the hardware will still be built to as high of a spec?
And anyone who has said "I like your style, Nipsy" in this thread, no you don't, you just like the fact that he's defending your precious Macs. You guys whine and complain about what Apple's needs to do right, but as soon as someone points out that Apple is doing something wrong, you suddenly completely disagree with the very points that you yourselves were making. It's pretty pathetic.
Actually, I beleive I may be getting kudos for writing clear responses, provinding links, admitting I'm wrong when I make a mistake, and speaking with a modicum of business acumen. I'm intelligent enough to know that Apple does not have the market cap to fully control their chip evolution, and you, it seems, are not.
In case you still believe that it is Apple's fault, I will make an offer right now.
Call Motorola, order 2000 2.4GHz G5s (you can order IBM 970s if you'd like). Send me the bill, and I'll upgrade eveyone's machine for free.
Nipsy, you seem to be in a world of your own here. You're not paying attention to what people are saying and doing on this board and simply believing that you're right because you're a shareholder. I could buy a single share in Apple, but it doesn't mean that i'm going to be right about everything i think Apple should do.
At no point did I say that Apple (and AAPL) would not benefit greatly from faster hardware.
I'm simply stating that talking about it here won't change the path that Apple is on.
Perhaps you may want to direct your concerns to Apple, Moto Semiconductor, IBM, etc.
This is a rumors site occasionally perused by Apple legal, and maybe some employees looking for a laugh.
If you want Apple to continue to be "behind" (is that a gentle enough word for you?) in the hardware sector, then that's fine.
I don't, no one here does, but I could type 'til I'm blue in the face here, and it wouldn't change the course that Apple is on.
Oddly enough, The Steve is not sitting in his office, with a bunch of processor designers, eagerly awaiting your (or my) next post.
But the FACT is that most Apple users, DON'T. They want to see Apple competing with PC hardware properly. Apple is already such a small part of the market and IMO, they need to increase speed to
Agreed, speed would help gain new market share. Never said anything to the contrary.
Have you ever heard of the phrase "Give the people what they want" ? Well most people want speed and numbers.
Most people want cheap computers too. Most people want a lot of things. I'm all for better numbers, as long as they are performance and not GHz based.
If we artificailly inflate numbers at the cost of performance (PIV) we have more GHz doing the same amount of work. If we lower margins and Apple quits being a botique company, quality will suffer, profits will suffer, and the overall effect won't be good.
If Apple has a 30% share in the future, do you think we'll remain virus free? Do you think we'll get more attention from the pop-up spyware writers? Do you think the hardware will still be built to as high of a spec?
And anyone who has said "I like your style, Nipsy" in this thread, no you don't, you just like the fact that he's defending your precious Macs. You guys whine and complain about what Apple's needs to do right, but as soon as someone points out that Apple is doing something wrong, you suddenly completely disagree with the very points that you yourselves were making. It's pretty pathetic.
Actually, I beleive I may be getting kudos for writing clear responses, provinding links, admitting I'm wrong when I make a mistake, and speaking with a modicum of business acumen. I'm intelligent enough to know that Apple does not have the market cap to fully control their chip evolution, and you, it seems, are not.
In case you still believe that it is Apple's fault, I will make an offer right now.
Call Motorola, order 2000 2.4GHz G5s (you can order IBM 970s if you'd like). Send me the bill, and I'll upgrade eveyone's machine for free.
DotCom2
Mar 29, 09:37 AM
I'm eligible for an upgrade in September, so... :D
If you read between the lines, it looks more like January than September.:eek:
If you read between the lines, it looks more like January than September.:eek:
know-it-all5
Jul 23, 01:15 AM
As we all have seen over the past few months, there have been loads of rumors going around about these new TRUE video, Gaming, Ebooking, Bluetooth, Internet Capable, Large screened, touch screen, non-touch IPODS.
Honestly, only an idiot would believe each and every rumor. One reason for this is they can't all work together. The other is just reality. Apple prolly could make a productt like this. Some day this super POD may come. Not now. As someone who has followed apple closely for years, here is my opinion on what you will see in new Ipods...
Widescreen (good resolution<not super>)
One form of wireless capabilty (this could be bluetooth, or this could be wireless internet capability to get more music) Im betting bluetooth.
Some form of touchscreen ( there will have to be some special casing, as to prevent scratches)
No REAL games, just stuff that is cooler to play than the crap thats on ipods now (thats not too tough to come up with)
I dont think apple will go into the ebook buisness however i do believe ipods will be pdf capable (likely other formats). This won't be no ipodEBOOK. It will be more of an oppurtunity to have written document easily on an ipod. Personally, I use my ipod hard for important documents. Lets be able to view them.
Honestly, only an idiot would believe each and every rumor. One reason for this is they can't all work together. The other is just reality. Apple prolly could make a productt like this. Some day this super POD may come. Not now. As someone who has followed apple closely for years, here is my opinion on what you will see in new Ipods...
Widescreen (good resolution<not super>)
One form of wireless capabilty (this could be bluetooth, or this could be wireless internet capability to get more music) Im betting bluetooth.
Some form of touchscreen ( there will have to be some special casing, as to prevent scratches)
No REAL games, just stuff that is cooler to play than the crap thats on ipods now (thats not too tough to come up with)
I dont think apple will go into the ebook buisness however i do believe ipods will be pdf capable (likely other formats). This won't be no ipodEBOOK. It will be more of an oppurtunity to have written document easily on an ipod. Personally, I use my ipod hard for important documents. Lets be able to view them.
Aztechian
Aug 3, 12:41 PM
The same washington post blog mentions in the next article that the default ("built-in") wireless cards in the macbook have the same flaw. So this is a bit bigger deal than a few odd people using external cards...
zigziggityzoo
Nov 6, 11:28 PM
Does anyone in Australia (or anywhere else similar) know exactly when your education discount no longer applies for uni? Your last day of classes? Your last exam? Graduation day 2-3 months later? Because I should be finishing in February and I wanted to know how long to hold out. Will Leopard be out by Jan/Feb? Or at least a free upgrade for laptops purchased late Jan/early Feb?
The day of your last Exam. Or, your last day of classes, whichever is last.
The day of your last Exam. Or, your last day of classes, whichever is last.
MrsNO
Mar 21, 03:39 PM
thank you for doing informatics a boy's thing.
Transeau
Nov 12, 03:56 PM
Apple's approval process aside - he was doing a pretty second rate job.
I read it as... "I want to do a crappy job and not be called on it"
I read it as... "I want to do a crappy job and not be called on it"
lapeno
Mar 25, 01:26 PM
hope to see the jailbreak soon
toddybody
Apr 14, 09:08 AM
More great news. I wonder where the limit on this growth will be?
I'm not trying to pee in Apple's Cheerios at all...but i do wonder at what point will they reach a plateau in sales growth. That said, I don't think they're close to it yet...China is becoming a great new market for them...
I'm not trying to pee in Apple's Cheerios at all...but i do wonder at what point will they reach a plateau in sales growth. That said, I don't think they're close to it yet...China is becoming a great new market for them...
ipoppy
Mar 29, 03:27 PM
Ok..all cool here...but they need to push REALLY hard with speech recognition software in order to be successful. At least some some possibility for software to learn your accent etc.
Snowy_River
Aug 4, 08:33 PM
Here ya go, I did a little updating ;)
Nice job, but you needed to get the color casting a little better of the Leopard disk. How about this:
http://www.ghwphoto.com/roadmap.jpg
Nice job, but you needed to get the color casting a little better of the Leopard disk. How about this:
http://www.ghwphoto.com/roadmap.jpg
rezenclowd3
Oct 10, 04:53 PM
I miss the days of holovids:D I sure didn't miss much of the story then, unless of course I decided to get the hell out of a level vs reading the 'vids.
I will say, I quite enjoy co-op multiplayer even though I much dislike the story and lack of emotion.
The data pads have me much intrigued, but I, unlike some of you, but like most of the halo population, will not torture myself with Reaches legendary. (where half of the datapads can be found)
I will say, I quite enjoy co-op multiplayer even though I much dislike the story and lack of emotion.
The data pads have me much intrigued, but I, unlike some of you, but like most of the halo population, will not torture myself with Reaches legendary. (where half of the datapads can be found)
mscriv
Apr 7, 07:07 PM
This is not true. There is no specific assertion in the Old Testament of any triune nature of god.
I could type up a bunch of stuff, but this website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/triunity.html) does a good job of covering all the bases regarding our difference of opinion on this matter. Here's two quick excerpts:
Jews say that the Shema (pronounced Shmah), "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord"1 contradicts the Christian doctrine that Jesus is God. In addition, there are a number of other verses that proclaim that God is one (see God is One). However, the triunity of God is taught throughout the Old Testament, including the Shema! How can a statement of oneness imply plurality? The word translated "one" from the Hebrew is echad, which demonstrates compound unity of oneness.
and
Some of the verses above include all members of the triunity (Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 48:16, and Isaiah 61:1). Therefore, the Old Testament does reveal the Christian concept of the Godhead, with God being one God, consisting of three persons.
Remember what I said in the beginning. Complete understanding of the old testament comes through knowledge gained by the revelation of the new testament. They really can't be separated in terms of understanding the whole of God's message and work throughout history. Additionally, for the average person (who cannot read Hebrew and is not familiar with Jewish history and doctrine) it could be difficult to see the trinity in the old testament. That's why I suggest to people that they invest in a study Bible, possibly a Bible Encyclopedia, and some commentaries. These additional tools can help bring out the contextual clues provided by the original languages, the historical context, and the skill of cross referencing within the Bible.
Of course not any interpretation is valid; however, the Bible is very complex and contradicts itself in places. There is no set interpretation that can said to be right, rather a spectrum that can be justified. "Clear" is not a word I would use.
Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Bible does not contradict itself in it's overall message of God's revelation of himself and plan for restoring the relationship with man that was destroyed by sin. Sure there are differences of application and interpretation regarding secondary matters (food laws, sexuality, alcohol, etc. etc.) and that is why we have different denominations within the Christian faith. However, the primary matter of who God is, how he dealt with the problem of sin, and how he we are to treat one another is clear and without contradiction. That is why I feel confident in telling you that Westboro is "off the mark" because they are not following Christ's example with how they treat their fellow man and how they represent God to others.
I realize that, to you, what I'm about to say might be viewed as an issue of semantics or "word manipulation", but to a genuine follower of Christ there is no such thing as "my interpretation". I believe what God says in his word and if I am confused about something I look to other parts of scripture to help me get at the correct interpretation of what is confusing me. You see it doesn't matter what I think or what I wish it would say, I come to the Bible with no preconceived notions and let it stand on it's own.
This is obviously where we part ways. For me the Bible is the product of man. Nothing more.
I understand. In most, if not all, of these discussions the eventual impasse that arises is centered on the issue of faith. Some choose to believe, some don't. Some are open to putting God to the test, some are not.
I could type up a bunch of stuff, but this website (http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/triunity.html) does a good job of covering all the bases regarding our difference of opinion on this matter. Here's two quick excerpts:
Jews say that the Shema (pronounced Shmah), "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God is one Lord"1 contradicts the Christian doctrine that Jesus is God. In addition, there are a number of other verses that proclaim that God is one (see God is One). However, the triunity of God is taught throughout the Old Testament, including the Shema! How can a statement of oneness imply plurality? The word translated "one" from the Hebrew is echad, which demonstrates compound unity of oneness.
and
Some of the verses above include all members of the triunity (Isaiah 42:1, Isaiah 48:16, and Isaiah 61:1). Therefore, the Old Testament does reveal the Christian concept of the Godhead, with God being one God, consisting of three persons.
Remember what I said in the beginning. Complete understanding of the old testament comes through knowledge gained by the revelation of the new testament. They really can't be separated in terms of understanding the whole of God's message and work throughout history. Additionally, for the average person (who cannot read Hebrew and is not familiar with Jewish history and doctrine) it could be difficult to see the trinity in the old testament. That's why I suggest to people that they invest in a study Bible, possibly a Bible Encyclopedia, and some commentaries. These additional tools can help bring out the contextual clues provided by the original languages, the historical context, and the skill of cross referencing within the Bible.
Of course not any interpretation is valid; however, the Bible is very complex and contradicts itself in places. There is no set interpretation that can said to be right, rather a spectrum that can be justified. "Clear" is not a word I would use.
Again, we'll just have to agree to disagree. The Bible does not contradict itself in it's overall message of God's revelation of himself and plan for restoring the relationship with man that was destroyed by sin. Sure there are differences of application and interpretation regarding secondary matters (food laws, sexuality, alcohol, etc. etc.) and that is why we have different denominations within the Christian faith. However, the primary matter of who God is, how he dealt with the problem of sin, and how he we are to treat one another is clear and without contradiction. That is why I feel confident in telling you that Westboro is "off the mark" because they are not following Christ's example with how they treat their fellow man and how they represent God to others.
I realize that, to you, what I'm about to say might be viewed as an issue of semantics or "word manipulation", but to a genuine follower of Christ there is no such thing as "my interpretation". I believe what God says in his word and if I am confused about something I look to other parts of scripture to help me get at the correct interpretation of what is confusing me. You see it doesn't matter what I think or what I wish it would say, I come to the Bible with no preconceived notions and let it stand on it's own.
This is obviously where we part ways. For me the Bible is the product of man. Nothing more.
I understand. In most, if not all, of these discussions the eventual impasse that arises is centered on the issue of faith. Some choose to believe, some don't. Some are open to putting God to the test, some are not.
tjwaido
Apr 13, 10:12 PM
"However, this does not mean these other applications are dead - simply that Apple is not talking about them... yet."
So maybe this explains the low price point. $299 for Final Cut Pro X and $999 for the full suite? I hope not. All looks amazing though!
I love the new Final Cut Pro X. I don't feel I need to upgrade unless it comes in the suite. $999.00 would be a great price for the suite, considering I paid that price for FCP alone, no suite, in 2001.
So maybe this explains the low price point. $299 for Final Cut Pro X and $999 for the full suite? I hope not. All looks amazing though!
I love the new Final Cut Pro X. I don't feel I need to upgrade unless it comes in the suite. $999.00 would be a great price for the suite, considering I paid that price for FCP alone, no suite, in 2001.