IMPMAC
May 4, 02:53 PM
I dont think its going to be though the App Store. The only reason its thought he app store now is the minimise abuse.
Anyway, what happens if you whole hard drive dies?
What if you want to reinstall everything from scratch?
There is just too many what ifs
I think the should use USB flash drives rather then DVDs IF the flash drives are faster then the DVD
The app store is for apps and not for a whole OS
Anyway, what happens if you whole hard drive dies?
What if you want to reinstall everything from scratch?
There is just too many what ifs
I think the should use USB flash drives rather then DVDs IF the flash drives are faster then the DVD
The app store is for apps and not for a whole OS
ivladster
Apr 18, 04:15 PM
I guess I can see Apple's point. But, aren't all tablets going to have a similar style and interface? It would seem like there can be only marginal differences in a touch screen interface.
Not really. Google is actually pretty different from iOS. It's Samsung who chose to edit the interface and all those icons to look like iPhone. That's why Apple is going straight after Samsung. Android OS has some similarities but overall they are pretty different.
Not really. Google is actually pretty different from iOS. It's Samsung who chose to edit the interface and all those icons to look like iPhone. That's why Apple is going straight after Samsung. Android OS has some similarities but overall they are pretty different.
AppleDroid
Apr 21, 04:00 PM
Make it thinner, smaller, rounder whatever just make sure you squeeze 6/12 ram slots in there for the redesign thanks!
anomie
Mar 28, 11:26 AM
Good thing since smartphones are fast enough already and the environmental impact of short cycles for electronics is immense.
Hope they find even better ways of recycling in the meantime.
Hope they find even better ways of recycling in the meantime.
Saladinos
Apr 26, 02:45 PM
Apple needs to respond. I would prefer them to do it with an iOS overhaul and some diversification of their product line. Apple won't sacrifice margins significantly, so to expand market share they should appeal to more people and step up advertising on the cheaper previous-gen models.
Apple will still rule the tablet space though.
Apple will still rule the tablet space though.
Frogurt
Sep 16, 12:53 PM
They released the C2D iMACS altogether. I would be really surprised if they didn't do AT LEAST the same to their pro line-ups.
Except that Apple has typically released only the 15 inch model before later introducing the 17 (and 12 when they existed) when they do major updates. Witness the introduction of the Al case and the Intel switch. Of course it matters whether this is a major update. If, like the iMacs, there is not a major case redesign and it is just a processor bump then expect them to be released simultaneously. But if there is a change in case, I would be surprised (pleasantly though) if the 17 came out at the same time.
Except that Apple has typically released only the 15 inch model before later introducing the 17 (and 12 when they existed) when they do major updates. Witness the introduction of the Al case and the Intel switch. Of course it matters whether this is a major update. If, like the iMacs, there is not a major case redesign and it is just a processor bump then expect them to be released simultaneously. But if there is a change in case, I would be surprised (pleasantly though) if the 17 came out at the same time.
charlituna
Apr 7, 01:09 PM
For some strange reason you think monopolies are good for consumers.
And for some reason you think that monopolies are bad for consumers.
They are not. At least not 100%. Just like they are not 100% good.
What is good or bad is how the companies got to that monopoly and what they do with it.
Apple has a monopoly on consumer tablets simply because they are the only ones to release a tablet that folks want to buy. Nothing bad about that.
Now if it is found that they are using that monopoly to strong arm component suppliers with tactics like demanding they accept way under value prices or can't ever do business with other companies, then you have a 'bad' monopoly. Or say they decide to hell with any support for non Mac computers and if you want to use an iOS device you must get a Mac computer, that's a 'bad' monopoly. And so on
And for some reason you think that monopolies are bad for consumers.
They are not. At least not 100%. Just like they are not 100% good.
What is good or bad is how the companies got to that monopoly and what they do with it.
Apple has a monopoly on consumer tablets simply because they are the only ones to release a tablet that folks want to buy. Nothing bad about that.
Now if it is found that they are using that monopoly to strong arm component suppliers with tactics like demanding they accept way under value prices or can't ever do business with other companies, then you have a 'bad' monopoly. Or say they decide to hell with any support for non Mac computers and if you want to use an iOS device you must get a Mac computer, that's a 'bad' monopoly. And so on
sidb
Apr 21, 04:49 PM
If it doesn't have Lights Out Management, it isn't a server. Our datacenter doesn't even allow servers without LOM into the building, and I agree with that policy. There's more to making a server than turning it sideways and bolting it to a rack.
ciTiger
May 6, 07:44 AM
Ant there you have it folks! A new rumor theme that will last forever or until Apple changes architecture... lol
I do think that the battery would be the most to benefit from this but I don't think that it will happen any day soon. Even 13 is soon... But there might be one "new" product with it.. Maybe just one Macbook Air or something...
I do think that the battery would be the most to benefit from this but I don't think that it will happen any day soon. Even 13 is soon... But there might be one "new" product with it.. Maybe just one Macbook Air or something...
SandynJosh
Nov 23, 12:57 PM
In looking over all the ideas generated in this thread and all the trends going on in the world, I'm lead to wonder if a consumer iPhone makes as much sense as it would seem to at first blush. Sure, the numbers can be great, but the profit potential is nearly nil.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
Hasn't the consumer iPhone by now become a commodity product? More features are being tucked in rather then reducing the cost further and the base cost of contracts are at an all time low. I don't think it would be wise for Apple or anyone else to enter a relatively mature commodity market.
RIM has mapped out a good chunk of the business market, but it still is vulnerable. But is the business market alone worth the risk at this point?
I suspect that Apple's stragegy is to leverage off the iPod market base in such a way that it becomes an easy choice to buy the new iPhone. For example, many of the newest cars will have a place to integrate the iPod into the sound system. Aircraft companies are making a similar provision for the audio AND the video. Tons of other manufacturers have made in-home equipment to hold and access the information stored in the iPod.
Imagine, if you will, the new iPhone nesting in all them iPod-friendly ports. In the car, it becomes a hands free cell phone with voice recognition dialing and a high-quality speakerphone (aka, the car's sound system). Now imagine either a business person using the system as he cruises between appointments, or a group of teens using it as they cruise the streets on a Friday night. Both productive for one and way cool for the other group.
All of the above done without adding much at all to a basic phone/iPod, just the pure iPod base being leveraged. Now add a few user interface features and a couple of bells and whistles to appeal to a broad range of users and you hit the ground running.
It's the more specific user related want list that next needs to be addressed and that's where it gets dicey. That might be best marketed as additional features that could be added as needed.
For example, not everyone needs GPS. However, let's go back to the automobile with the iPod port in the dash. Now using the new iPhone with the GPS option, a person can travel to an unfamiliar place with ease. They may not have bought the GPS option in the beginning, but they bought the ability to add the option when they made their decision. It's similar to computers in this regard. Oftem a computer isn't purchased with the full load of RAM but a computer that can't be expanded has a harder go of it even if it is superior... i.e. the history of the early Mac.
A good camera phone with some image stabilization would serve a lot of people. Would it be better as an option that might bulk up the phone a little but could be slipped on and off as needed?
However apple does the iPhone it will need to integrate it into the existing iPod port structure for maximum penetration right out of the gate. And then, let's not forget the soon-to-be-released iTV. How might that integrate a phone's utility?
I hinestly can't imagine a good answer to that last question, but my mind is still reeling with the unanswered question of why Steve would pre-announce a product after not doing so since 1983.
ezekielrage_99
Jul 23, 10:12 PM
Why not? Conroe will have availability by WWDC, IIRC, and Merom won't be far behind- they could announce a MBP with Merom, shipping in two weeks after WWDC.
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pro's with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBook's with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
It sounds very plausible plus didn't Apple say with the introduction of Intel Processers there would be more hardware updates through the year?
Even so I'm up for the entire line update :D :cool:
MBP with Merom, iMac with Conroe, Mac Pro's with either Conroe and a Woodcrest quad or all Woodcrest, MacBook's with Merom or Yonah w/price drop, and Mac Mini price drop back to $499.
It sounds very plausible plus didn't Apple say with the introduction of Intel Processers there would be more hardware updates through the year?
Even so I'm up for the entire line update :D :cool:
KnightWRX
Apr 24, 10:42 AM
Currently, roughly how much would a display that meets retina specs cost?
Depends. What size display and what is the normal viewing distance for that type of display ? With both those, we can calculate the required PPI and see if something already exists in that size or not.
You might be surprised to find out it's already out there and quite competitively priced in some cases.
Depends. What size display and what is the normal viewing distance for that type of display ? With both those, we can calculate the required PPI and see if something already exists in that size or not.
You might be surprised to find out it's already out there and quite competitively priced in some cases.
isomorphic
May 6, 12:32 AM
Can always have a system with ARM AND x86 CPUs.
You beat my post by mere moments. ;)
You beat my post by mere moments. ;)
Liam8
May 9, 12:30 PM
That would be great! Think of how useful it is! :rolleyes:
muffinss
May 4, 05:02 PM
I dont think its going to be though the App Store. The only reason its thought he app store now is the minimise abuse.
Anyway, what happens if you whole hard drive dies?
What if you want to reinstall everything from scratch?
There is just too many what ifs
I think the should use USB flash drives rather then DVDs IF the flash drives are faster then the DVD
The app store is for apps and not for a whole OS
They're probably make it that if your hard drive dies, you need to go to the Apple store and have them do it. If you don't have Apple care, or if ran out, lol enjoy their high prices.
Seriously, it would suck if they didn't allow you to burn your own copy to a disk. Even Microsoft allows you to do that if you buy Windows online as a digital download. They allow you to actually backup all your media from them to an external drive / disk, including Office. They recommend it.
If they wont allow us to burn a copy, I will be ordering a physical disk copy off of Amazon.
Anyway, what happens if you whole hard drive dies?
What if you want to reinstall everything from scratch?
There is just too many what ifs
I think the should use USB flash drives rather then DVDs IF the flash drives are faster then the DVD
The app store is for apps and not for a whole OS
They're probably make it that if your hard drive dies, you need to go to the Apple store and have them do it. If you don't have Apple care, or if ran out, lol enjoy their high prices.
Seriously, it would suck if they didn't allow you to burn your own copy to a disk. Even Microsoft allows you to do that if you buy Windows online as a digital download. They allow you to actually backup all your media from them to an external drive / disk, including Office. They recommend it.
If they wont allow us to burn a copy, I will be ordering a physical disk copy off of Amazon.
alvindarkness
Apr 10, 12:02 PM
I'm not saying that 2 is an incorrect answer, the equation is ambiguous. However, I assume the equation is written that way because it is done on a forum without formula writing ability and writing-
48(9+3) = 288
%IMG_DESC_17%
%IMG_DESC_18%
%IMG_DESC_19%
48(9+3) = 288
ppc_michael
May 6, 03:35 AM
...and I think that will be the time to free myself from Apple bondage and return to the Windows fold. Especially if this is a sign that Apple are moving away from "proper" computers and pouring everything into iOS. :(
I jumped back to Windows recently after being Apple-exclusive since 1997 precisely because of the iOS direction everything is taking. Honestly? Not that hard of a transition. :P
As for the ARM thing, Apple has proved its mastery of the architecture with its mobile devices, so however radical it may be, the migration it seems plausible to me. Considering I'm just getting comfortable with x64 Assembly I wish it didn't. ;)
Might piss off the developer base though.
I jumped back to Windows recently after being Apple-exclusive since 1997 precisely because of the iOS direction everything is taking. Honestly? Not that hard of a transition. :P
As for the ARM thing, Apple has proved its mastery of the architecture with its mobile devices, so however radical it may be, the migration it seems plausible to me. Considering I'm just getting comfortable with x64 Assembly I wish it didn't. ;)
Might piss off the developer base though.
destroyboredom
Apr 20, 07:53 AM
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; U; CPU iPhone OS 3_1_3 like Mac OS X; en-us) AppleWebKit/528.18 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile/7E18 Safari/528.16)
I'm still left wondering, why the delay if it's only a minor spec bump? I don't doubt the sept. release it just doesn't add up. Rumors of a later release started well before the quake in Japan so I don't think you can justify that as the cause.
I'm still left wondering, why the delay if it's only a minor spec bump? I don't doubt the sept. release it just doesn't add up. Rumors of a later release started well before the quake in Japan so I don't think you can justify that as the cause.
old-school
Apr 25, 05:59 AM
This isn't surprising news considering that Lion will be running on a new 27-inch iMac screen.
ChrisA
May 4, 05:13 PM
If they are using the App Store for distribution then I'd assume a new feature of Lion is "Build a Recovery DVD". That means you can write your own install DVD to be used after a crash.
HecubusPro
Sep 15, 09:03 PM
Btw, how many days does it take for the new MBPs to arrive in the Apple showrooms from the time they are announced?
Ideally, Apple likes to have them in stores, ready to buy as soon as they announce them. But that's rarely the case. Sometimes they get them in right away, sometimes they don't.
Ideally, Apple likes to have them in stores, ready to buy as soon as they announce them. But that's rarely the case. Sometimes they get them in right away, sometimes they don't.
DrDomVonDoom
Apr 6, 06:15 PM
-Sync wirelessly (No more messing with that iTunes syncing madness)
-SD Card (Expandable storage)
-File manager (Operates more like a PC)
-Can actually attach files in the stock E-Mail app (IPad cannot)
-Photo file management in stock photo app (Not possible in iPad without iTunes syncing madness)
-USB Port (This is HUGE)
-HDMI (Also pretty huge)
-Decent cameras
-Flash
-UI looks very cool.
Haven`t held a Xoom yet so just working from posted specs..
But I do have an iPad 1. Quite a disappointing experience for a power user.
The games rock though!!
Yet despite all this perfections over the iPad, it struggles to sell 100,000 units. Why? Why is this? Is it JUST the Apple on the back of it? Is it because iOS is so widely adopted, understood and familure? It shouldn't make sense, not to a power user. A power user is someone who deals with 1' and 0's every other, other every day. 1 +1 =2, thats true today, tomarrow and so on so forth. iPad is a anomoly, despite other higher powered, more flexable options its really the only name in the game. The human factor is what comes into factor, its a ameoba, a never ending algorithim of DNA that changes at will, and is persuaded just as easily. Its this Human factor that the iPad is what it is. Somehow Apple's best service is taming the human factor, its something in the DNA of the company that makes its products sell as they do. This annoys power users and lots of Apple Haters, it doesn't make sense, it shouldn't make sense. But outside of motherboards, 1+1=2 doesn't mean much when humans are involved.
-SD Card (Expandable storage)
-File manager (Operates more like a PC)
-Can actually attach files in the stock E-Mail app (IPad cannot)
-Photo file management in stock photo app (Not possible in iPad without iTunes syncing madness)
-USB Port (This is HUGE)
-HDMI (Also pretty huge)
-Decent cameras
-Flash
-UI looks very cool.
Haven`t held a Xoom yet so just working from posted specs..
But I do have an iPad 1. Quite a disappointing experience for a power user.
The games rock though!!
Yet despite all this perfections over the iPad, it struggles to sell 100,000 units. Why? Why is this? Is it JUST the Apple on the back of it? Is it because iOS is so widely adopted, understood and familure? It shouldn't make sense, not to a power user. A power user is someone who deals with 1' and 0's every other, other every day. 1 +1 =2, thats true today, tomarrow and so on so forth. iPad is a anomoly, despite other higher powered, more flexable options its really the only name in the game. The human factor is what comes into factor, its a ameoba, a never ending algorithim of DNA that changes at will, and is persuaded just as easily. Its this Human factor that the iPad is what it is. Somehow Apple's best service is taming the human factor, its something in the DNA of the company that makes its products sell as they do. This annoys power users and lots of Apple Haters, it doesn't make sense, it shouldn't make sense. But outside of motherboards, 1+1=2 doesn't mean much when humans are involved.
GGJstudios
Dec 29, 10:45 AM
For those who insist that Mac OS X needs not AV protection, I politely disagree .... Today we know her as "Typhoid Mary". Approximately 30 people died as a direct result of the Typhus virus she carried, but was apparently immune to.
Poor analogy. Mary was a source of the virus. Macs are not the source of Windows viruses. No Mac can have a file containing a Windows virus, unless it first receives that file from a Windows computer. Windows, not Mac, is the source for Windows viruses.
Yes, Macs may be largely immune in today's threat environment.
Macs are not immune. They are not affected in any way by Windows malware, but they are not immune to threats. The only malware threats in the wild that can affect current Mac OS X are those which can be avoided by prudent action on the part of the user.
But threats change.
Yes, they do change. If the situation changes and a virus is introduced in the wild that affects Mac OS X, it will make news headlines and anyone paying attention will be alerted. Until that time, no AV software can detect a threat that does not yet exist.
But we all communicate with the Windows world.
Not every Mac user shares files with Windows users. You can communicate with Windows users without sharing files that could pose a threat.
Please consider taking one for the team and getting some sort of AV.
Interesting you should choose that phrase:
1. take one for the team
The act of someone willingly making a sacrafice for the benefit of others.
The only ones who would benefit by Mac users making the sacrifice of system performance in running AV software are Windows users who don't run AV software. Even then, it would only protect them from infected files you might send them. It would not protect them from files sent from other computers, websites, emails, IMs, etc., which pose a far greater threat than any Mac.
If Windows users are properly protected, they have no need for Mac users to run AV, since they're protected from threats, no matter where they come from. If you want to do this, that's your choice, but I have no desire to take steps to try to protect any Windows users who don't care enough to protect themselves.
Poor analogy. Mary was a source of the virus. Macs are not the source of Windows viruses. No Mac can have a file containing a Windows virus, unless it first receives that file from a Windows computer. Windows, not Mac, is the source for Windows viruses.
Yes, Macs may be largely immune in today's threat environment.
Macs are not immune. They are not affected in any way by Windows malware, but they are not immune to threats. The only malware threats in the wild that can affect current Mac OS X are those which can be avoided by prudent action on the part of the user.
But threats change.
Yes, they do change. If the situation changes and a virus is introduced in the wild that affects Mac OS X, it will make news headlines and anyone paying attention will be alerted. Until that time, no AV software can detect a threat that does not yet exist.
But we all communicate with the Windows world.
Not every Mac user shares files with Windows users. You can communicate with Windows users without sharing files that could pose a threat.
Please consider taking one for the team and getting some sort of AV.
Interesting you should choose that phrase:
1. take one for the team
The act of someone willingly making a sacrafice for the benefit of others.
The only ones who would benefit by Mac users making the sacrifice of system performance in running AV software are Windows users who don't run AV software. Even then, it would only protect them from infected files you might send them. It would not protect them from files sent from other computers, websites, emails, IMs, etc., which pose a far greater threat than any Mac.
If Windows users are properly protected, they have no need for Mac users to run AV, since they're protected from threats, no matter where they come from. If you want to do this, that's your choice, but I have no desire to take steps to try to protect any Windows users who don't care enough to protect themselves.
VenusianSky
Nov 3, 01:28 PM
I may get one if I happen to come upon a gift card, or if they show up on ebay at a cheaper price.