adbe
Apr 5, 02:40 PM
While I agree in a sense, it's commonly known that there's no way to plug every hole, so you're scooping out water from a sinking ship with a cup. Every iOS device has been jailbroken since release, many several times using several exploits. There will never be a day when a software company will be smarter than the hacking community... software companies can't afford to buy them all :-)
The hacking community isn't any smarter than the people at Apple. The tools used by the jailbreak community, and by Charlie Miller are standard tools that Apple developers have access to as well. For some reason Apple don't seem to be making great use of those tools.
MS started running fuzzing tools and auditing for buffer overflows aggressively around the time of XP SP2. It's taken some years but the payoff has been huge and obvious.
Apple need to up their game. iOS and OSX are seriously in need of major security improvements. If/when Apple quit treating security as MSs problem, jail breaking will become extremely hard. That's a good thing.
Now, will the jail break community just bugger off to Android? Most likely. Are there enough of them that Apple will care? I couldn't say. If there are, then maybe that'll be a useful lesson for Apple, and a bit more effort will be put into allowing users to tweak their phone natively.
The hacking community isn't any smarter than the people at Apple. The tools used by the jailbreak community, and by Charlie Miller are standard tools that Apple developers have access to as well. For some reason Apple don't seem to be making great use of those tools.
MS started running fuzzing tools and auditing for buffer overflows aggressively around the time of XP SP2. It's taken some years but the payoff has been huge and obvious.
Apple need to up their game. iOS and OSX are seriously in need of major security improvements. If/when Apple quit treating security as MSs problem, jail breaking will become extremely hard. That's a good thing.
Now, will the jail break community just bugger off to Android? Most likely. Are there enough of them that Apple will care? I couldn't say. If there are, then maybe that'll be a useful lesson for Apple, and a bit more effort will be put into allowing users to tweak their phone natively.
ickies
Aug 7, 05:06 PM
I absolutely cannot believe airport and bluetooth are still options on the Pros. They are standard on EVERY other model. What the hell, Apple?
I am very much a pro user and I very much have no use for airport or bluetooth. So I'm glad that it's not being forced on me.
I am very much a pro user and I very much have no use for airport or bluetooth. So I'm glad that it's not being forced on me.
Peace
Jul 30, 12:23 PM
The latest iPod firmware has references to phone signal strength etc.
Apple purchased a very large data center capable of uplink/downlink communications a few months ago.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1557
Oppenheimer alluded to Apple working on a cell phone in the Q3 conference call.
I'd say the evidence is there for a "type" of cell phone coming soon from Apple.
Apple purchased a very large data center capable of uplink/downlink communications a few months ago.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=1557
Oppenheimer alluded to Apple working on a cell phone in the Q3 conference call.
I'd say the evidence is there for a "type" of cell phone coming soon from Apple.
bwillwall
Apr 24, 08:09 AM
That one hell of an icon lol
shawnce
Jul 21, 03:45 PM
* Compiler optimizations to take full advantage of multi-core processors.
You don't know much about this topic do ya :p
You don't know much about this topic do ya :p
Mike Oxard
Mar 29, 09:24 AM
For $1000 you would go a long way to getting a mac mini with a 1TB drive and get it hosted at macminicolo (http://www.macminicolo.net/). Send them a secod hand mini and it'd be cheaper. Not sure how nice the experience would be streaming stuff to your phone over 3G though :o
mcrain
Apr 18, 11:59 AM
Firstly, your perspective would change completely if you ever decide to invest or trade. I don't want hedge funds going for more risk. That is what contributed to the housing bust and mortgage backed securities. I am completely self taught as a trader and investor. In fact, I don't know a single other person who does what I do. And when I do meet someone who works in finance, they are usually just a cog, and I have nothing in common with them.
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
Of course people don't "want" risk. But, again, you MISSED THE POINT. Let's try again. People want to take their savings and invest it in the safest investment with the return they desire. If US treasuries beat the stock market, no one would trade stocks If trading in established fortune 500 companies beat out riskier investments, would anyone trade riskier stocks? The answer is probably someone foolish would, but the majority will invest in the safest investment that will provide the rate of return desired. If taxes reduce the rate of return of the safer investments, people naturally begin investing in riskier propositions that have the potential to generate higher rates of return.
Have you ever represented a company so that it can sell its ownership interests to the public, or have you ever represented the investors in an IPO? Your perspective would change if you ever had. Your assumption that I don't invest is pretty silly considering just about anyone can do it.
Secondly, and more importantly, I don't think a person should have to give a good reason to be able to do anything. Unless you can prove that a person's actions causes harm to others, why attack it? How is taxing something at the same rate as other income an attack? Oh no, you're treating my capital gains income the same as everyone elses income! I'm under attack! Poor me! The government is no longer going to subsidize my gambling on the success or failure of someone else's established business. Boo hoo.
Our legal system works that way; the burden of proof is always on the accuser not the accused. Really? That's not true. What about administrative hearings where the burden is on the accused to overcome a prima facie case? (FYI, for a good example of this concept, look at the situation with the proposed rules regarding copyright owners and the presumption that you are pirating if you receive a letter from them accusing you).
twoodcc
Mar 27, 12:22 PM
all i can say is that it better be good! apple really has to play it's cards right to stay near the top with android. they have a better product really, but android is still overtaking from the sheer number of devices and carriers.
tuna
Mar 29, 09:23 AM
You can't even begin to compare this service to MobileMe's current offerings. This is just space. (And a music player.) MobileMe offers address book, calendar, photo browsing, and other features.
Those services are readily available for free elsewhere. I used to subscribe to MobileMe back when it was the only reliable way to get push email, calendar, and contacts on my iPhone. Since then Google services have been allowed to be compatible and work about as well. I let my MobileMe subscription lapse. Towards the end, the only thing I was using my MobileMe for was the iDisk.
Huh? :confused: I think redundancy is the only valid argument here. What do you mean by bandwidth? Transfer speeds uploading to the cloud are hideous compared to USB 2.0. Syncing tools are also readily available for any external drive. External drives barely use any power, 20W during access. Processing power? You're not compressing or analyzing data. Just transferring and storing it. :confused:
Those are the costs associated with the cloud. You have to send the data over the internet and you have to build servers to support the storage space. In return you get unlimited access anywhere. My dropbox folder syncs across 3 computers and is easily accessible by my iPhone, plus I have shared folders with other users that sync across all my computers plus all the computers of my friends. That is value-added over simply buying an external hard drive.
Those services are readily available for free elsewhere. I used to subscribe to MobileMe back when it was the only reliable way to get push email, calendar, and contacts on my iPhone. Since then Google services have been allowed to be compatible and work about as well. I let my MobileMe subscription lapse. Towards the end, the only thing I was using my MobileMe for was the iDisk.
Huh? :confused: I think redundancy is the only valid argument here. What do you mean by bandwidth? Transfer speeds uploading to the cloud are hideous compared to USB 2.0. Syncing tools are also readily available for any external drive. External drives barely use any power, 20W during access. Processing power? You're not compressing or analyzing data. Just transferring and storing it. :confused:
Those are the costs associated with the cloud. You have to send the data over the internet and you have to build servers to support the storage space. In return you get unlimited access anywhere. My dropbox folder syncs across 3 computers and is easily accessible by my iPhone, plus I have shared folders with other users that sync across all my computers plus all the computers of my friends. That is value-added over simply buying an external hard drive.
marksman
Apr 20, 01:11 AM
If you can have a bigger screen without a physically larger device size and weight, then yes, it is necessarily better.
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
iPhone 4 with 3.5" screen: 115.2mm x 58.6mm x 9.3mm
weight: 137 grams
HTC Thunderbolt with 4" screen: 122mm x 66mm x 13mm
weight: 164 grams
I am not sure about you, but on composite that HTC with a 4" screen is noticeably larger in every possible way over the iPhone 4.
Sure it is only 5% taller, but 12% wider and almost 50% thicker as well as 15% heavier.
Perhaps you don't know anything about Apple, but they take the size of their devices very seriously.
I also don't understand how some of you think it is possible to have a significantly larger screen without making the phone bigger. It is not like the current iPhone has a lot of space. Again it seems people just read a bigger number and think it must be better. If we left it up to other companies smartphones would all be twice as thick and weigh twice as much as they do now, while being massively unwieldy. Apple actually has an aesthetic set of benchmarks that are important to them as anything else. It is not only aesthetic either, but actually using the device and carrying it around, the size makes a big difference.
My 3.5" iPhone 4 screen is pretty amazing, especially considering the size and weight of the device. Much more impressive than any 4" screened device I have seen.
Edit: In case anyone is wondering the 4" Samsung Galaxy S specs: 122.4mm x 64.2mm x 9.9mm weight 118 grams. It weighs less, but the physical dimensions are larger in ever way.
MorphingDragon
May 6, 06:07 AM
Well, Xeons are closely related to their consumer counterparts. If Xeons can go dual-CPU, then it wouldn't be such a leap for an i7, even if it isn't possible yet. Most consumers most likely wouldn't even saturate a 4-core mac though. Eh, just food for thought I guess.
The only thing you would get out of a dual socket laptop is bragging and circle jerking rights.
The only thing you would get out of a dual socket laptop is bragging and circle jerking rights.
mr.barkan
Aug 12, 10:31 AM
I think we will see the upgrade the Tuesday after they have enough supply to meet the demand. These laptops are selling great and they don't want to have to interrupt the supply. I think this is especially true at the stores.
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
Are they really selling that great??
Is there anyway to know??
I wonder how much people is waiting for the Merom MBP's.
I mean, in general like a couple o guys said here the ones available today are great. But I use Final Cut Pro ALOT, and I'm sure the 64bit will be VERY useful on that. So for me is worth the wait... as for alot of other Final Cut, Logic Pro, Aperture users...
I'm quite curious about those MBP sales... :rolleyes:
nelmat
Apr 20, 06:53 AM
Lets see:
Faster CPU = Shorter battery life
Let's see - the iPad 2 had a faster CPU and has the same/better battery life. So where is your logic?
Faster CPU = Shorter battery life
Let's see - the iPad 2 had a faster CPU and has the same/better battery life. So where is your logic?
Multimedia
Aug 7, 06:24 PM
The G5 is almost as fast per clock cycle.
Apple COULD have released quad G5 3ghz instead, but they want us to use Intel.
The whole Intel project is beacuse of no G5 laptop.
Stupid IBM. I do not like X86, the play plattform.
But, I have changed all my PPC macs to Intel now.
Macbook pro, Macbook, macmini and today a Macpro.Congrats on making the shift. I will probably wait for 8 cores. But I am tempted because of the 6 Bays and the additional front ports. Maybe I'll get a refurb in the Fall. Still want a Core 2 MBP more I guess. Really want 8 cores. Might just hold out until Spring so Leopard is inside 8 cores. Love Leopard features. :)
Stupid IBM...
Apple COULD have released quad G5 3ghz instead, but they want us to use Intel.
The whole Intel project is beacuse of no G5 laptop.
Stupid IBM. I do not like X86, the play plattform.
But, I have changed all my PPC macs to Intel now.
Macbook pro, Macbook, macmini and today a Macpro.Congrats on making the shift. I will probably wait for 8 cores. But I am tempted because of the 6 Bays and the additional front ports. Maybe I'll get a refurb in the Fall. Still want a Core 2 MBP more I guess. Really want 8 cores. Might just hold out until Spring so Leopard is inside 8 cores. Love Leopard features. :)
Stupid IBM...
Cougarcat
Apr 23, 04:43 PM
I'm not impressed if this is where the iMac display is potentially going , the current GPUs can barely drive the resolutions they have now in anything other than simple desktop apps . , can you imagine what video card you would need to drive a game (say portal 2 which has low to modest requirements) at 30fps + on a screen with 3200 or higher resloution ?
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
I think Apple is simply futureproofing here, and we won't see Retina displays for 3+ years, when it would be more feasible.
I agree with you, though, it would be nice if Apple was more serious about their GPUs. Maybe the switch to retina will force them to be.
RollTide1017
Mar 29, 01:35 PM
And if you stop subscribing?...What happens to your music files stored in the cloud?
One would be an idiot to not have a local backup of stuff they store in the "cloud."
One would be an idiot to not have a local backup of stuff they store in the "cloud."
okboy
Apr 23, 06:08 PM
We should stop using this as proof. Remember the iPad 2 was supposed to have a Retina display because of this? To make it worse, it's a beta. Slow news day I guess, but look how worked up people get about it. Just stop.
Moyank24
May 3, 05:46 PM
We may need a woman in charge, because Lord knows none of the men will ask for directions. ;)
But, yeah, I'm for exploring the room we are in.
But, yeah, I'm for exploring the room we are in.
Multimedia
Aug 2, 05:47 PM
How can we get a hold of that keynote that Macrummors said will cover?If history is any reliable bellwether, Apple Will Post a QT Video Stream of the entire SteveNote By 6PM, Probably Sooner. :)
QuarterSwede
Apr 18, 02:58 PM
Looking at the TouchWiz UI, I see your point.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be copied for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
Apple had the same problem with the original LISA UI. It was so simplistic that they lost the lawsuits. Same may happen here.
But, at what point does an interface become too generic? For example, the concept of pages of icons in a grid isn't really new or innovative. The concept of swiping across screens is simple and intuitive and should be copied for that exact reason. Should other phone makers put the icons in a circle, "just because" they need to be different? Should they force you to do something differently just because the best and most intuitive way was "already taken"?
Everyone loves car analogies, so: what if Ford decided to sue other carmakers because they copied their steering wheel design? Would other companies have been forced to adopt other types of controls -- joysticks or dials or foot pedals, perhaps -- "just because"? And would that have been good for the auto industry?
Apple had the same problem with the original LISA UI. It was so simplistic that they lost the lawsuits. Same may happen here.
Pixel35
Sep 16, 10:34 AM
Give us back the 12". It�s all I'm asking.
Bonte
Nov 22, 07:03 AM
Video iChat on your phone? Internet services? Email? Address? Calendar? Have you used a Palm or Blackberry? They are OK for what they do, but they could be so much better...a lot better. What they are missing is exactly what Apple has to offer -- and it isn't music.
iChat is definitely going to be hugely important for Apple but so is letting all these features work seamlessly together with Windows users. The few options Apple has in this regard is making the iPhone Mac only or with Windows compatible apps or just bring osX to PC and be done with it.
If we look at all the devices we want from Apple, they all need tight integration with the OS. An Apple branded iPod, iPhone, iTV, iSmart, iCamera, etc.. will be on the market sooner or later, so Apple will make and support countless Windows Apps or be osX only. I strongly believe that opening up osX will be easier to do and has a higher long term potential.
iChat is definitely going to be hugely important for Apple but so is letting all these features work seamlessly together with Windows users. The few options Apple has in this regard is making the iPhone Mac only or with Windows compatible apps or just bring osX to PC and be done with it.
If we look at all the devices we want from Apple, they all need tight integration with the OS. An Apple branded iPod, iPhone, iTV, iSmart, iCamera, etc.. will be on the market sooner or later, so Apple will make and support countless Windows Apps or be osX only. I strongly believe that opening up osX will be easier to do and has a higher long term potential.
syklee26
Sep 15, 06:54 PM
just remember everyone...
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
if you want a completely new MBP, then i don't think u would want that to be released on next Tuesday because if they do quiet update, u won't see changes.
all the rumor sits speculated the 23" imac (really 24") would be revealed at the "Showtime" event. apple fooled them all and released it a week early!
let's hope the same thing happens for our mbp's. here's to next tuesday! :D
if you want a completely new MBP, then i don't think u would want that to be released on next Tuesday because if they do quiet update, u won't see changes.
FakeStveWosniak
Mar 29, 03:54 PM
Globalization is a race to the bottom, and nobody seems to understand that while the 3rd world rises up, the 1st world inevitably must slide down.
It's not a zero sum game. Western economies will increasingly shift toward higher skilled professions as the BRIC countries take over manufacturing and mid level white collar work. The U.S. must step up its educational training in order for its many low paid service workers to move up the ladder, though.
It's not a zero sum game. Western economies will increasingly shift toward higher skilled professions as the BRIC countries take over manufacturing and mid level white collar work. The U.S. must step up its educational training in order for its many low paid service workers to move up the ladder, though.